Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by angry_octet | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

angry_octet·

This is worse than pseudo science, it is complete mumbo jumbo, totally misrepesenting and misquoting sources.

To think that the author has been selected as an MIT Science Journalism fellow is truly mind boggling.

https://ksj.mit.edu/dispatches/2017/12/07/this-years-fellows...

I can truly say that I look forward to reading of the author's death from melanoma.

View on HN

While I appreciate the note of contradiction, it would be super helpful to those of us less familiar with the research if you would specify what parts are wrong or pseudoscience. I must admit the article seemed somewhat convincing to me, although my prior was strongly in favor of sunscreen so it hasn’t flipped me all the way to bathing in the noon sun for five hours without any protection.

You're living up to your user name, but I dislike reading someone wishing death on someone else, particularly on HN, from which I expect better. Like the other reply, I would also be interested in a more thoughtful rebuttal rather than this kind of vicious ad-hominem attack.

When you live in a culture that used to worship the sun and many friends and relatives have died and or been scarred by skin cancer, you lose tolerance for people pooh poohing UV exposure. Blatantly misrepresenting advice as he does (saying sun exposure is recommended) is absolutely ghastly.

I rate him just a tad less awful than Andrew Wakefield, the anti-vaxxer.

What qualifies you to pass on such harsh judgement? What research on the topic have you done?

I'd be very interested in having the article debunked, but I can't corroborate the accusation that sources have been "totally misrepresented" and "misquoted". Granted, I've merely given it a cursory glance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com