this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
1040 points (100.0% liked)
Greentext
6078 readers
960 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This leeching effect is not true. It's a myth spread by alt-health providers.
At this point I just don't believe anything weird anyone has to say about food humanity has eaten for thousands of years unless they can back it up with real studies from real medical journals.
Right?!
Its all just marketing. We die for whatever reason anyways just let me eat in peace!
I just do this with everything that is advertised as something big. The hidden danger of food. Source? What the president of a country said about its own country. Source? Anything not trivial gets treated as misinformation unless proven.
I haven't totally believed this, but I also think its potentially useful to spread anyway. Sure, misinformation is bad, but so is climate change. Which one is worse?
Misinformation is always worse in the long run.
If people find out you knowingly lied about one thing, they'll assume you lied about other things that are more important, regardless of evidence.
Climate change being an excellent example of this where it wasn't so much lies as bad guesses and so many people dismissed it despite the growing evidence.
People still eat their carrots thinking it improves their vision.
I mostly agree with you, but but I haven't seen evidence either way saying it doesn't have this effect.
Just because something hasn't been proven one way or the other doesn't mean you should just believe either of them on a whim.
It's totally okay to hold beliefs tenuously and then not feel attached to them when they're proven wrong.
It happened to me here in this thread. I stated cows milk leeched calcium, but it doesn't, I was misinformed. There's no shame in admitting I was wrong, but it reminds me to be more cautious about assertions of fact in the future.
I don't want to be wrong any longer than I need to be.
Interesting. Got a source?
I think your initial claim of cow’s milk leeching calcium has the burden of proof and so needs a source.
Otherwise, it’s proving a negative (that cow’s milk doesn’t leech calcium).
You're right. After looking it up it seems like I've had some bad intel.
I've corrected my previous post.