He says zuckers clinic was just down for essentially doing conversion therapy and that singal proved that it was based on flawed information. That’s a paraphrase of min 57. He’s linking 2 diff ideas in a misleading way.
-
-
He thinks that’s true if you read the Cut piece. It isn’t just about the settlement. But again this would be getting into the weeds. I understand that you think we should have pushed back harder but I disagree with your assessment that it constitutes wilfully spreading misinfo.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
I’m saying I’m not very informed on this topic and after listening to your show I came away with wrong information, that Jesse claims authority on, until I decided to look it up myself
. As far as willfully goes, you have a slew of actual experts at your beck and call.1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
It sounds like you did what I would expect most people with any interest to do… especially given that Jesse is framed as having a specific position on the topic in a larger debate. I also think you over estimate our power. We have very few people at our beck and call.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @SciencePartisan and
We also are focusing on a specific topic… gurus and online community/conspiracy theorist dynamics. We are not interested in becoming another outlet for culture war political debates. We can’t avoid it but we aren’t planning to actively pursue it. You can find that elsewhere.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
The idea that a field of medicine and doctors are misinformed and current standard of care is dangerously mistreating children is not a conspiracy theory? Perhaps republicans have also made it a culture war issue but I’m not sure how that doesn’t ask fit into the conspiracy realm
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
I mean science based medicine itself argues almost exactly that about integrative/holistic approaches to medicine which are promoted by huge numbers of medical practitioners. But I think Jesse’s argument is not as extreme as you suggest.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @SciencePartisan and
I don’t think he is positing some conspiracy. He’s arguing the research in some of these areas is currently very limited/low quality and that standards of care are not being applied consistently. A lot of that is agreed by people who otherwise hold different views than him.
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @SciencePartisan and
Do you think it's analogous though? For those holistic approaches, evidence may be low quality, but SBM isn't saying that higher quality evidence is being suppressed by the professionals in the field, are they? Jesse does imply this about the trans healthcare.
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @phrygo @C_Kavanagh and
I think he is also very happily unclear on whether he's arguing A) that the wpath affirmative care standards are not applied consistently or B) that affirmative care is the wrong approach anyway.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
He's arguing both, I think.
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.