Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Correct. But it was just one side who moronically politicized it to appeal to stupid people. The other side endeavored to stick to facts and prudent health measures to save lives and limit the impact of the disease.
|
Sure, but I was just supporting calgarygeologist's point that health experts continue to warn about the ongoing impacts on society, and asserting a separate observation that politicization of a health issue creates a toxic environment that makes it difficult for people with genuine health concerns to openly discuss or share info about it without being pulled into a political debate.
A reply of "Those morons and their idiot followers started it" fits pretty well with the point that it's hard to engage at all without being drawn into the left/right political conflict.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
It is too bad that genuine sharing of information gets mixed with politicized nonsense. It still makes the usefulness of the data zero. We have far better ways to collate data than sift through social media.
This has been true long before COVID. Look through social media for nonsense about statin drugs. Studies over and over prove their usefulness in extending life and improving health overall, but you'll see endless rants about cancer and joint deterioration which simply aren't true
|
I'm certainly not saying that health guidance/policy should be based off of social media content. It shouldn't be based off of politics either. That would be ridiculous. In cases where there is good research-based medical guidance, people should take it seriously.
That said, usefulness of information also depends upon needs. For someone dealing with immediate health concerns where there is not yet consensus in high-quality and reliable guidance grounded in research, or where the healthcare professionals they have access to are not aware of any such guidance to share with them, the anecdotal experiences of other people dealing with similar issues can be quite useful.