Yeah, before we had influencers on the internet, we had celebrity gurus, magazines, etc… In Hungary, interest in home gardening surged after some magazines declared that if some fruits/vegetables rot in a weird way, they must be GMO, thus must cause cancer and have zero vitamins. Some went as far as if some powder of a common food item existed, such as “milk powder”, it meant that said thing was made out of crude oil, and all milk products were fake and vitamin-free.
The moment my stepmother heard meat powder and egg powder existed, I had to move in with them, so once they got their hands on chickens they can let free of “GMO food made out of crude oil”. That part never happened, but at least it helped to sabotage my college education.
The idea that its scientists vs bloggers was created by PR firms. It’s scientists and bloggers vs scientists and bloggers. Both sides have geniuses and idiots.
No, not in the cases of vaccines or climate change. The incredibly overwhelming majority of scientists are on the plainly correct side of both of those, they don’t have to be geniuses for that, just somewhat educated.
Highly educated and credentialed people have complex disagreements on both subjects.
Climate change: that the climate changes and is changing is self-evident, but how it will change and how much of that change is influenced by human activity is a subject of fierce debate.
Vaccines: while nobody thinks that vaccines are never effective, studies consistently show links between high vaccination and chronic health issues, leading to many highly credentialed and educated doctors and researchers arguing that vaccines are a risk factor for SIDs and allergic rhinitis.
Henry Ford Health recently conducted a large study, which they themselves described as near perfect, that showed links to many chronic health conditions, though not autism.
I feel like pointing at “influencers” and putting the blame on them isn’t really correct. They are probably more of a symptom.
Whose fault is it that some random blogger is being treated the same as people who studied something for decades?
E.g. the media owned by the rich or the governments
bought“lobbied” by the rich.A few crazy people will always exist, but currently the “inmates are running the asylum” and they actively promote this garbage. Just look at RFK.
Yeah, before we had influencers on the internet, we had celebrity gurus, magazines, etc… In Hungary, interest in home gardening surged after some magazines declared that if some fruits/vegetables rot in a weird way, they must be GMO, thus must cause cancer and have zero vitamins. Some went as far as if some powder of a common food item existed, such as “milk powder”, it meant that said thing was made out of crude oil, and all milk products were fake and vitamin-free.
The moment my stepmother heard meat powder and egg powder existed, I had to move in with them, so once they got their hands on chickens they can let free of “GMO food made out of crude oil”. That part never happened, but at least it helped to sabotage my college education.
The idea that its scientists vs bloggers was created by PR firms. It’s scientists and bloggers vs scientists and bloggers. Both sides have geniuses and idiots.
No, not in the cases of vaccines or climate change. The incredibly overwhelming majority of scientists are on the plainly correct side of both of those, they don’t have to be geniuses for that, just somewhat educated.
Highly educated and credentialed people have complex disagreements on both subjects.
Climate change: that the climate changes and is changing is self-evident, but how it will change and how much of that change is influenced by human activity is a subject of fierce debate.
Vaccines: while nobody thinks that vaccines are never effective, studies consistently show links between high vaccination and chronic health issues, leading to many highly credentialed and educated doctors and researchers arguing that vaccines are a risk factor for SIDs and allergic rhinitis.
Henry Ford Health recently conducted a large study, which they themselves described as near perfect, that showed links to many chronic health conditions, though not autism.