For instance I'd love to see examples of that repackaging of health care knowledge of which you speak so that I can study than and, if I find them useful, learn from them. I'd like to know more about your proposed platform, which now sounds a lot more like a black box.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle
Again
@AHSM_org launched a month ago. We have a mission and vision that’s focused on helping health professionals use social media and do it responsibly. Like other medical societies we participate in, this will take years to build and yes is very much still evolving1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Fair enough, but you cited Gen Z repackaging of healthcare information as though it already existed. I assumed that meant you knew of examples because that's what it sounded like. Are you saying it doesn't yet?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Like on YouTube
@thestrivetofit@DavidHindin@MamaDoctorJones@ZDoggMD@Violin_MD On IG@drrupawong@ncrawfordmd@BillLevineMD@mike_natter@drdanchoi@DrLeslieKim @RKmd all distinct approaches among thousands of examples2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @AustinChiangMD @gorskon and
Agree with Austin.
@gorskon, with much respect I think you may be underestimating the impact of the power of multiple voices to resonate. That’s what drowning out means.3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DavidHindin @AustinChiangMD and
I'm not. Just ask
@MarkHoofnagle.) It doesn’t work very well against misinformation and disinformation. It had other uses, but not that one.1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @DavidHindin and
This is, in it’s own way, a hilarious proof of the problem. Multiple experts keep telling you this is false, this isn’t how it works, even linking evidence, and look! It doesn’t change their belief! What am I not surprised? Because that’s what the evidence shows.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @gorskon and
Even scientifically-literate folks, people who are trying to communicate science are resistant to the facts! It’s hilarious. Human heuristics are not rational. The belief in the information deficit theory and “informed debate” will not die, they are as fixed as religion.
2 replies 2 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @DavidHindin and
Yep. We even know that just disconfirming facts can actually harden belief in misinformation. (Humans are very good at motivated reasoning, particularly the more intelligent and educated ones.) Where Dr. Chiang does better is in realizing how stories matter more.
3 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
Humans also need shorthand and personalization. Here's the example I like to cite: Andrew Wakefield. When Andrew Wakefield was struck off and then revealed to have committed scientific fraud, he became a shorthand dismissal for antivax views: Oh, the main antivaxer is a fraud.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
Do I like that this is essentially an ad hominem? Would I rather that facts, evidence, and reason would sway fence sitters more? Of course I would. But you get a lot farther briefly showing how Andrew Wakefield is a disgraced fraud than in laying out the science for hours.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
That's just an unfortunate fact of human psychology. Stories and people matter more than facts and science. That's one reason why I deconstruct alternative cancer cure testimonials and why I do posts like this one.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2019/06/05/katie-britton-jordan-vegan-diets/ …
0 replies 3 retweets 7 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.