Corporate Needs You to Find the Differences Between This Picture and This Picture
(media.communities.win)
Comments (24)
sorted by:
Lobotomies were atrocious, but they were more defensible than what is happening today. For one, they were not pushed by a highly politicized lobby, they came spontaneously out of the medical profession in which we should definitely put our blind trust. There also was not recruitment and grooming in schools for lobotomies.
I read an editorial today from last year in the BMJ from a former editor who claimed that it's likely that 20% of published medical studies were never performed in the first place.
They also claimed the rate is much higher (closer to 100%) if the study originates from a handful of specific countries (Japan, Korea, Iran, Turkey, etc).
They claimed it's been happening for 40 years, no one cares, whistleblowers are either ignored or specifically punished and there's almost no mechanisms in place to determine which studies out in the ether are fake.
Somewhat related: a while back I was reading some books on the opioid epidemic in the US. While the Sacklers are rightly blamed for it, they've been scapegoated for it - the fact that they effectively bribed doctors to do 'studies' and to prescribe their so called medicine has been ignored.
In fact, those doctors called critics of opioids who pointed to their danger 'opiophobes'. Sound familiar? It's the exact playbook used today for literally anything.
You cannot criticize anything that makes them money.
When I was in school, the official teaching was that there's no maximum dosage of opioids you can give to a patient.
You could increase the dose until either the pain stops or they stop breathing.
Whichever comes first.
This is why Caveat Emptor applies to all $ transactions, especially buying the services of an MD.
Despite the deference the culture tells us we are to give to MDs and despite the unethical actions of the Oxycontin corporation and its customers, we are ultimately responsible for what we put in our mouths or shoot into our veins.
Doctors have whored for Big Pharma since forever, and there's a reason they refer to the sales reps as "pushers".
While they may have made the old-school perks illegal - things like vacation vouchers and stuff earned on a kind of points system for every prescription written for a particular drug - there's always been ways around any anti-payola laws.
Buying loyalty is the oldest play in the book, and other species do it, too.
Oh, and you also had the sleazy-ass pharmacists, too. Funny how the names I've seen and heard involved seem to originate from a certain subcontinent.
The pharma marketing culture now is a lot less about bribing rank-and-file community doctors and more about buying off and making whores of the "influencer" doctors who write the guidelines and give speeches at the conferences.
The guy that did the study they used to demonize and close down state sanitariums was proven to have blatantly lied on the study and possibly used himself as a study case
Technically, lobotomies actually worked. Turns out killing part of your brain genuinely stops you from being manic and hyperactive.
But the number of surgeries that have cured gender dysphoria... I think the numbers are still out on that.
And yeah, I don't remember lobotomies being offered to kids because the internet told them it would solve all their problems.
Hell, there is evidence that suggest that the surgeries have in many cases actively made the gender dysphoria worse.
Red Pill: That's because the surgeries gave gender dysphoria to people who didn't have it, but were told they did because it was the best way to permanently monetize people with depression as perpetual medical patients.
One of my most controversial takes, that I think is really our society's darkest truth is that most trans people didn't have gender dypshoria, and most gays are heterosexual. Gender Dysphorics and Homosexuals exist, but are probably in the same 0.5% and 1% number that we would see naturally occurring in a non-pathological culture.
Agreed. Surgery fanboys (what a category to have) are seizing upon the vast group of troubled teenagers and, because they're ideologically motivated to do so, trying to con as many of these troubled teenagers as they can that whatever troubled the teenager, the solution is to start cutting, because this is how they reproduce.
Once they have ruined the teenager's body they're in - it's very hard to take a step back at this point, and, with a bit more grooming, all the anger and hatred the teenager feels can be directed outward - at conning the next generation of teenagers into ruining their bodies.
Not contesting that take. I guess the one good thing is that we are kind of starting to see the slide back. Because a lot of normal people are disgusted by the rampant attempts at trans-ing the kids. And a lot of people are starting to realize the whole movement is toxic, which I chalk up as the reason that you are seeing LGBT acceptance rates decline (especially rapidly among young people).
Could you explain your reasoning on this?
I believe their argument is that homosexuality is primarily a social construct, not a biological one. "Gays" would, by this argument, be initially heterosexual, but raised/groomed/cultured/socialized into being gay.
Ironically, also the argument of "one billion genders" people, since obviously one cannot be biologically homosexual if the concept of discrete same genders was so diluted as to be nonexistent.
The gender stuff is so nonsensical to me that I can't help but instantly dismiss every idea/argument that gets attached to it.
From what I've seen, I can at least say that homosexuality is often a fad (I guess that'd count as a social construct). I see it a lot in kids and immature adults. The way it gets flaunted and displayed, that's not how a sexuality presents itself normally.
We could perhaps make a supply/demand argument as well for homosexuality. Low supply of decent females. And a lot of homosexuals strongly desire hetero partners for whatever reason, so that's a high demand from them.
Sort of, but not quite. I'll come back later.
Are you being ironic?
Yes, the current_year meme is blind trust in doctors, and it started at the exact moment Donald Trump mentioned some preliminary results in medical science that Hydroxichloriquine might have some anti-ChiCom-Cough properties, to the horror of Phizer whore Tony Faucci.
Clown world has gone so far that even obvious irony is no longer obvious.
Yes, that was ironic.
What is this? Did Scott "accidentally wrong" Adams edit his own comic?
Only If I am Scott Adams. Checking now.... No, it does not seem I am.
The medical industry makes millions off circumcisions, no wonder they want to expand to new and exciting markets.