Jump to content

The internet is a clusterfuck of inconsistency


Kellie Gator
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been saying this for years and I say this again; I don't know how people can NOT be skeptic of everything they read on the internet when there's so many contradictory claims, so many "facts" and so much "proof". I can "prove" that the holocaust was committed by gays for fuck's sake.

And today that whole stuff hit me right in the face, because I let my guard down. Basically, what I felt was a credible source said how awesome coconut oil is and how good it is for your body. So I bought some coconut oil to try it out. But then I check Wikipedia that says a FUCKTON OF PUBLIC HEALTH ORGANIZATION SAID COCONUT OIL WAS LITERALLY HITLER and I'm like... what the fuck? Was I fooled? Do both sides of the argument have a point? Is the truth in the middle? Because I thought that a pair of fitness guys who regularly work together with Jamie fuckin' Oliver would know this shit but here they are promoting something that health organizations worldwide say is bad for you. I don't fuckin' get it.

And yet, SEVERAL of the first google results have lists with shit like "10 reasons why coconut oil is good for you" or whatever and I'm like... fuck you, internet, it can't be one way or another.

I could also make something political about the dangers of this misinformation era we live in but I'll settle on coconut oil for now.

Basically, fuck you internet and fuck you google. How am I supposed to know what's fact or what's fiction? It's because of you I'm terrified of believing anything on the internet 100%.

HACK THE PLANET

Edited by Kellie Gator
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested in the coconut oil, what's great/terrible about it?

Good: from what I hear the fat goes elsewhere than regular fats you cook with, I think it doesn't go to the liver. This is the guy who made me buy the stuff:

Bad: Much higher risk for heart disease because of all the saturated fats (80% or so), apparently.

I dunno the science behind this sadly so I'm not sure how correct the fitness dude is... I should know this, though. I got a B in biology. :[

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trusting wikipedia as a credible source. There's your first problem ;þ

If you're looking for credible sources concerning medicine n other health related things avoid any site that's ".com" and stick to ".edu" or ".gov." Also try to look for peer reviewed academic journals for your sources. Avoid articles reporting facts as a secondary or tertiary source as they tend to be sensationalist and inaccurate to garner more views.

It amazes me how few people seem to know how to find credible sources online. Do they no longer teach this in school?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trusting wikipedia as a credible source. There's your first problem ;þ

If you're looking for credible sources concerning medicine n other health related things avoid any site that's ".com" and stick to ".edu" or ".gov." Also try to look for peer reviewed academic journals for your sources. Avoid articles reporting facts as a secondary or tertiary source as they tend to be sensationalist and inaccurate to garner more views.

It amazes me how few people seem to know how to find credible sources online. Do they no longer teach this in school?

Wikipedia wasn't the "credible source" I cited and I was more concerned about how the Wiki article referred to the World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration, American Heart Association, British National Health Service, among others. Aren't they pretty credible?

But I did just find a document online that says coconut oil is okay for frying which I would mostly use it for.

the interbutts are so confusing, FUCK,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia wasn't the "credible source" I cited and I was more concerned about how the Wiki article referred to the World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration, American Heart Association, British National Health Service, among others. Aren't they pretty credible?

But I did just find a document online that says coconut oil is okay for frying which I would mostly use it for.

the interbutts are so confusing, FUCK,

But did you follow up on those sources and read their original articles that were being sited? Problem with Wikipedia is anyone can edit it and can cut/paste w/e they want to cherry pick their points.

Nope. I don't even remember when they did.

Finding credible sources was one of the first things I was taught in both my English courses and in the entry level biology classes for my major. Pity if they aren't doing this everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trusting wikipedia as a credible source. There's your first problem ;þ

Wikipedia isn't really as bad as people think it is. Of course, it's no peer reviewed study, but I think it's pretty reliable for most things. It's commonly thought that just because anyone can edit it, it's easily full of lies. But it's constantly under review by the most anal people you could ever find, so things get reverted pretty quickly. There's also discussions on articles debating whether information is accurate or relevant. It's not always great, but it's a lot better than random sites you find on Google.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing to keep in mind about googling any kind of "super food" is that 95% of results are from blatant shills. Any kind of "diet secrets blog" or something like that is a dead giveaway.

Just check forums and specialized areas like some diet subreddit or something.

Wikipedia isn't really as bad as people think it is. Of course, it's no peer reviewed study, but I think it's pretty reliable for most things. It's commonly thought that just because anyone can edit it, it's easily full of lies. But it's constantly under review by the most anal people you could ever find, so things get reverted pretty quickly. There's also discussions on articles debating whether information is accurate or relevant. It's not always great, but it's a lot better than random sites you find on Google.

Just click the source it cites. Bam, you've won Wikipedia.

Edited by PastryOfApathy
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia isn't really as bad as people think it is. Of course, it's no peer reviewed study, but I think it's pretty reliable for most things. It's commonly thought that just because anyone can edit it, it's easily full of lies. But it's constantly under review by the most anal people you could ever find, so things get reverted pretty quickly. There's also discussions on articles debating whether information is accurate or relevant. It's not always great, but it's a lot better than random sites you find on Google.

Yeah, it's not bad.

Just don't use it for history, politics, or some aspects of biology.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

people might say it's a joke, but i rely on major news organizations and a very select few others that i trust before i consider anything to be credible.

take them all, and see what remains consistent. there are outlets for media left, right and center. the common denominator is usually your best bet.

cbc, bbc, abc, cnn, ft, bt, bnn, rt, fox, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc... consistency is the only place you're going to find anything near legitimate.

to be perfectly honest, the news network that i find to be the most consistent is the BBC, but they have major discrepancies like any other.

the shit shit that pops up online about some supposed 'study' and all these other characteristics, take it all with a grain of rice. until you can literally refer to the information that has been published and endorsed by people that actually matter in that field of study, it's worth nothing.

reporters and so-called 'investigators' make a living, and a good living citing real shit these days, but they are liable to present some bullshit opinion on what is actually legitimate.

there's a million places to hear news from, listen to every one of them and form YOUR opinion, not what they figure you should assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia wasn't the "credible source" I cited and I was more concerned about how the Wiki article referred to the World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration, American Heart Association, British National Health Service, among others. Aren't they pretty credible?

But I did just find a document online that says coconut oil is okay for frying which I would mostly use it for.

the interbutts are so confusing, FUCK,

What the organizations said is that the high level of saturated fat in coconut oil means regular consumption of it increases the level of cholesterol in your body.

This puts you at risk for certain cardiovascular diseases, so they're just saying not to go overboard.

Beyond this, I took a gander and most of the sites supporting coconut oil as some kind of miracle substance tend to mention Dr. Oz and Bruce Fife. Both of these men have been known to push some quack science for money.

Also, coconut oil contains pretty much the same kinds of fatty acids as most other cooking oils. They are present in different amounts, but there is not much difference when you eat properly.

Edited by MalletFace
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who?

I've talked about him before, but the TL;DR version of it is that he's basically a modern-day snake oil salesmen with dubious credentials who makes a living feeding off the insecurities of middle-aged women. Typically by shilling "super foods" which will make you lose weight, cure cancer, pay you mortgage and make you forget how terrible your life is.

Also he has/had a talk show in the US which is just an hour of dubious medical advice and the word 'vagina', that and he's on the cover of at least one magazine every week. I'm not even joking I literally kept track of the magazines we got at work and he was always, without fail been on one of them.

Edited by PastryOfApathy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, he's an actual doctor. He's just a heart surgeon. Trusting him for nutritional supplement advice? That's like going to a dentist to get work done on a hemorrhoid.

Credentials are good. He's acting out way the fuck outside of the jurisprudence of his field.

To be honest I'm actually kind of surprised, except I'm not. I mean you have to be a smart motherfucker to get through medical school and you do gotta be pretty fucking smart to take a con like this this far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I'm actually kind of surprised, except I'm not. I mean you have to be a smart motherfucker to get through medical school and you do gotta be pretty fucking smart to take a con like this this far.

Sadly, a lot of times people think a smart person is also a good person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...