Of course! Eating something is another way of one organism saying to another “I am hungry.”. It also affirms to that plant or animal many positives like “You are good enough.”, ala Stuart Smalley.
2 Likes
I remember the first time I read that article I went “…What the fuck??”
Now years later I still read it and go “What the fuck??” I think Shugart said it well ‘I’ve been listening for hours on end and I don’t understand a single goddamn thing he’s said’
He starts off mostly ok, talking about needing to treat the whole person and their mentality/backstory and then…wham, straight into left field!
man…
ok so I’ll start by saying, as at least a few of you guys know. I lean left. Pretty far left actually.
And I’m 100 % on board with agreeing with the conservative folk on here on this one. This article is so bad. I don’t really know where to start, and I’m not sure how to avoid the response from Zeppelin of ‘you’re just a sheeple wake up!!!’ But I’m gonna try anyway.
So first off, I think it’s ridiculous to say that the media doesn’t address problems with healthcare. I see this discussed on programs I watch fairly regularly. It’s not like some deep dark secret that the media is covering up. We all know there are major flaws in our health care system, particular as far as costs are concerned. So the initial proposition that guides the direction of this article is pretty wrong-headed. And even the author fudges on the point by saying ‘there are VIRTUALLY no nationally broadcast analyses of the healthcare problems’. He’s admitting that it does indeed get talked about, but characterizes it in such a fashion that it looks like he’s saying it doesn’t get addressed at all.
Aside from this, comparing health care problems, and the way the media addresses them, to EVENTS that occur on our American timeline, is a poor comparison. When these events happen, the media covers them, and because they are stories people WANT to see covered, they get covered in excess. That has nothing to do with a ‘bought media’. It’s just how news works. The word ‘new’ is in news, lol. News is about the new things that happen in our world.
The problems stated in this article about healthcare are decades old. It would make zero sense to cover these as hot-button topics. You can’t just rehash the same arguments on both sides over and over again for all of eternity. These things largely SHOULDN’T be addressed by news programs outside of the situations when there are bills before congress, and there is actually something NEW to report. So yea, it makes sense to limit coverage to the political aspects, because that’s where healthcare change has to come from.
So the author of the article says all of this, and for some inexplicable reason, immediately jumps to ITS BECAUSE OF DIRECT ADVERTISING OF DRUGS TO CUSTOMERS. Wait… what now? I don’t see how the bullet points listed after this claim are proof of anything. They also barely qualify as stories on their own. I could imagine seeing a 60 minutes-type special on this overall issue. But none of this is news. Take bullet point 3 for instance. I want you to actually consider how this bullet point should have been presented on a major news channel. How would this even be addressed? It’s like a 1-minute story at most. ‘This company is charging a bunch of money for something you can get cheaper somewhere else, and some doctors don’t even know it!!! AHHHHHHH!!!’
And of course, the author knocks the ball out of the park with his closing statement that we dont need doctors or medicine, without a shred of evidence to support the claim. Because no such evidence exists. If you actually believe that’s true, I really don’t have common ground to have a discussion with you.
3 Likes
Resistance is futile, man. If you look up backfire effect (i.e. when people are given evidence against their beliefs, but reject the evidence and believe even more strongly) in the dictionary, Zeppelin’s picture would be right there…
2 Likes
Obviously you’re just a shill for the corporate propoganda machine.
2 Likes
that oatmeal post is golden.
and thanks usmccds423. I know you got my back 
#shill4lyfe
2 Likes
How far left we talking?
What irritates me so much about ‘articles’ like this one, is the fact that there is SOOOOOO much wrong with healthcare in America. There are a lot of really important things we can talk about. And we can also talk about the problems of main stream media over the past 5-10 years, which became glaringly obvious during the election season. Articles like this detract from the real conversations we should be having, and replace them with insupportable conspiracy theories that encourage people to actually shut down there brains in favor of believing that nothing is good, and anything that a lot of people believe should not be trusted. It’s just frustrating.
3 Likes
Just teasing Flip. Couldn’t help it.
1 Like
Very good point about all of the conversations that can be had vs. the one this guy is creating.
And to follow up on the belief statement- But this guy an MD, Should be believed, because he has the inside skinny and He’s one of the very few good ones that will tell the truth.
Right!
3 Likes
In my opinion it’s a badge of honor to earn that reaponse, aince it indicates you have a functioning cerebrum unlike our stoner friend there.
We lean probably very strongly to opposite sides of the spectrum but we can totally agree on this. Out of a ton of important things we can have a discussion about (/debate/argument/whatever) Zeppelin is in the basement.
One of my friends from graduate school works at CDC as an infectious disease epidemiologist, meaning that he gets the privilege of talking about vaccines a lot. He gets called a “shill” by Zeppelin types almost every day.
I bet that’s fun… 
Then you’re not reading.
Routinely? When and how many times have I made this minor gramer mistake?
Wow you have totally demolished his evidence.
So are you saying that Dr. Davis has no credibility with his peers? Or just that he has been discredited? The side effects of drugs are different from person to person but it is more than a little caveat.
I’m saying that many of his ideas/things he pushes have been discredited, therefore leading me to believe that he does probably lack credibility with his peers because he continues to push things that have been de-bunked.
There is no need to demolish evidence when the premise is false. And so transparently false.
This here one that you handed us this time is all about the lolz.