Infowars and Goop sell the same exact pseudoscientific "wellness" products
qz.com
qz.com
We've focused on the individual so much in American society that people have a real hard time viewing their individual situations as anything other than a personal failure and something they alone must correct, so we wind up with this kind of wacky bullshit instead of, like, labor laws and healthcare.
People ARE individuals, on a physical level too. Modern medicine is notoriously bad at addressing this, and until the technology catches up the only alternative to people trying things on their own is state-mandated trials on vulnerable groups.
It doesn't matter if the topic is far beyond them, what matters is that they have an answer and that answer reinforces their biases. Reality is the enemy.
Isn't that what everyone does, regardless of distance or direction?
> They don't want to be subject to authority, they want to be be the unquestioned authority.
So where do the people who question authority fit into this neat dichotomy?
After all, why should young healthy people spend so much time thinking about rejecting mainstream medicine?
You also should never trust any court, in particular, the Supreme Court. A court has no special access to facts, yet it operates with complete authority, as if it's process was entirely without error. They are a compromise that only makes sense when all other civil remedies have been exhausted because there is no mechanism to guarantee an improved outcome from their involvement.
Which highlights the basic point here, any institution of appreciable size and without competition cannot possibly remain uncorrupted by it. It's essentially impossible to build any government institution that is worthy of "trust."
There are facts out there that can otherwise be kept private until subpoenad by court order, is that not special access to facts?
Locking people down at home for over 2 years. Damaging an entire generation of young children in the process.
Destroying the economy in the process. Inflationary policies which lead to recessions and stagflation globally from which we still haven't recovered (and probably won't for the next 5-10 years).
Spreading mass fear and hysteria based on little empirical (and often contradictory) evidence.
Obliterating global travel and commerce.
Forced global-scale campaigns on live, involuntary human experimentation. Get the jab or stay locked up. Get the app or forget about going to work today.
Forcing people to wear thin pieces of cloth over their faces for no reason.
Silencing any critique and punishing any forms of noncompliance with heavy fines and incarceration (Djokovic is a threat to national security and public health).
Normalizing "asking difficult questions" as something only "conspiracy theorists" would do.
Installing anti-democratic laws and mechanisms which subvert the individual's right to free speech, gathering, movement, and control over their own body.
Bullshit and twisted statistics arbitrarily used as excuse for random decisions.
This list is far from complete...
No wonder no one trusts the government anymore.
Many people who are far from the levers of power would disagree strongly with your above portrayal. It's an issue that divides people more than an issue where the masses were hoodwinked by an elite with ulterior motives.
There might not have been a reason to make everyone stay home, but if the only way you can get people to take a quickly evolving situation seriously is to over correct, then that is the tool you have to use.
By making the same rules apply to everyone and having such extreme responses it reduced the ability for the majority to say "yeah, its bad but it doesn't apply to me". By making everyone wear masks, it was the only way to get the people who really needed to wear the masks to do so.
The policies were extreme because the situation was extreme. People now have the hindsight, but I have lost at least 3 family members and 5 neighbors due to covid and the secondary effects. 4 of those died of ordinarily treatable causes (heat attack, pneumonia, etc), but the health system wasn't able to provide them the treatment needed because of Covid was overwhelming them.
Belief in democracy requires that you assume that most people are acting in good faith. Perfectly intelligent people have sensible, non-malicious reasons to come to conclusions that are opposite of yours.
The entire fiat economy is anti-scientific fiat decree of the political elite.
You want to eat? Oh sorry you do y have any of this hallucination called “money”.
If you want to go full edge-lord over socialized belief in anti-scientific BS, you got a whole lot of personal emotions to work through; like how no physics puts it on others to grow your food or be your airplane pilot. DIY rather than co-opt others agency.
Oh what’s that? Society isn’t built on textbook interpretation of physics? It’s built on diffusion of power through the many to keep some rando having too much?
The rest of us aren’t here to serve you either. Grow up, one of billions.
Of course experts aren't respected. They've demanded it.
Our enzyme-rich, activated, and dehydrated cashews are a mineral-dense protein. Pure, alkaline water awakens the nuts' dormant properties, increasing digestibility and micronutrient, vitamin, and enzyme count. These raw, activated, bio-available nuts are a low-glycemic source of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids.
As well as a product for sale at infowars that makes fun of Alex Jones "making us fat, sick, and stupid" (an Animal House gloss).Of course, but that's sort of the crux of the supplement business - take any substance that has any study that shows potential benefit, pump it up as the secret magic substance and peddle it with no real oversight.
> "The desirable nutritional changes that occur during sprouting are mainly due to the breakdown of complex compounds into a more simple form, transformation into essential constituents and breakdown of nutritionally undesirable constituents. This is a reason why sprouts are also called pre-digested foods."[12]
This implies that digestion does the same thing already and saves you a step?
Neither found an effect.
Simply soaking whole nuts doesn't appear to do anything.
Regardless, I'm going to continue enjoying my store brand whole cashews and leave Alex's shriveled nuts soaked in pH-balanced super-water to someone else.
> "The desirable nutritional changes that occur during sprouting are mainly due to the breakdown of complex compounds into a more simple form, transformation into essential constituents and breakdown of nutritionally undesirable constituents. This is a reason why sprouts are also called pre-digested foods."[12] "The metabolic activity of resting seeds increases as soon as they are hydrated during soaking. Complex biochemical changes occur during hydration and subsequent sprouting. The reserve chemical constituents, such as protein, starch and lipids, are broken down by enzymes into simple compounds that are used to make new compounds." "Sprouting grains causes increased activities of hydrolytic enzymes, improvements in the contents of total proteins, fat, certain essential amino acids, total sugars, B-group vitamins, and a decrease in dry matter, starch and anti-nutrients. The increased contents of protein, fat, fibre and total ash are only apparent and attributable to the disappearance of starch. However, improvements in amino acid composition, B-group vitamins, sugars, protein and starch digestibilities, and decrease in phytates and protease inhibitors are the metabolic effects of the sprouting process."
The above picture is apparently not satire, but entirely genuine.
And activated…like charcoal?
I don't know how many people buy them, but a banana seems an easy snack.
I'm expressing skepticism about the assumption that food deserts are such a big problem because I've always looked for and found ways to get decent food. The specific example I had in mind with my original comment was from a place I used to live where I would see a guy who bought microwave lunch and a giant cup of soda at a 7-11 every day, even though there was a small grocery store with some fresh produce, a good selection of packaged foods, and large hand-made tasty sandwiches at the same price as the guy's 7-11 lunch literally across the street on the opposite corner.
-- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28566095/
"Initiatives to build supermarkets in low-income areas with relatively poor access to large food retailers (“food deserts”) have been implemented at all levels of government, although evaluative studies have not found these projects to improve diet or weight status for shoppers"
-- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899338/
"Living in a food desert census tract was not significantly associated with BMI"
-- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615612/
"Using a prospective controlled quasi-experimental design we evaluate the impact on Body Mass Index, fruit and vegetable intake and perceptions of food access, of increasing neighborhood supermarket provision in one community in Philadelphia. This increase in provision was one part of the wider public-private Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative. The intervention moderately increased perceptions of food access, but did not lead to changes in fruit and vegetable intake or BMI."
-- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4201352/
"We found no evidence that the absolute or relative accessibility of supermarkets, fast food restaurants, or mass merchandisers were associated with individual BMI change"
Also, even when suburbans have decent access to fresh food, it’s often not favored because trips to the supermarket are an ordeal that only happens every ~2 weeks and fresh food doesn’t fare as well on longer timespans like that. Fresh diets work best for those who can walk to their grocer.
Meanwhile sugary cereals like Heritage Flakes, and honey loaded granolas are what we think is healthy.
The decision to open new stores is mostly based on "number of daytime wallets in the area," which itself is mostly tied to the other existing businesses in the area. For example, for one major grocery chain, they wouldn't even consider it until we had 50,000 daytime wallets. For a commonly known gigantic home improvement chain, they wanted 100,000. It doesn't matter how badly people in the area want it. It just comes pretty mathematically with growth.
If you already have a grocery store that doesn't carry fresh produce, you can (sometimes) improve things by speaking with the store management, but beyond that you're pretty much out of luck unless you are willing to open your own store.
By decent I mean decent for a dollar store. They have apples and oranges and cabbage and lettuce etc, no beets or leeks or fresh cilantro.
The mayor's office did also have broader commercial development goals as the strain of growth and traffic was brutalizing the budget. If we could put a grocery store in town, that would be highly appreciated by the people, and also cut a ton of traffic
This is wayyyy too black and white. What is cheap and available is what becomes people's diets and historically folks are extremely creative with the stuff that's around. This is pretty much the entire story of culinary history and likely where all your favorite dishes originated. One of the reasons tea was so unbelievably popular in western Europe was because the staple diets of most folks was stale bread and people needed something to wash it down that didn't taste awful. Cheese follows a supply of milk and a demand to not have it spoil.
So you're right that just having the supply there doesn't work because there's no pressure to actually use any of it. The most economical foods by a wide margin non-perishables. When you get your CSA box you've already paid for the veggies so you're motivated to use them up before they turn but at the grocery store why would you even bother when you have anything else more important to do? If you were just handed a sack of apples you might find a way to use them all but "paying money to do more work" in an environment where every adult in the household works a full-time job, plus having kids or social obligations is quite the ask. Buying those apple bars is a much easier buy than fresh apples because they don't have an timer attached to them, you're guaranteed to extract all the value even when you're busy and not home for a few days.
And this isn't some new phenomenon, "cutting out work for wives and mothers trying to put food on the table every night" is an entire industry. Go look at any food ads from the 20th century.
If all the fresh produce in the grocery store was $0 I bet consumers would choose it overwhelmingly compared to alternatives. So I contend there is a number where fresh produce wins but we're not even close to it. Because you have to save on dollars to make the additional work/risk worth it but right now you don't. And it's one thing to be like "well that's the market for ya" but we already heavily subsidize agriculture it's not that crazy to also subsidize produce at the point of sale both to reduce waste during harvest and to encourage healthier eating.
> And this isn't some new phenomenon, "cutting out work for wives and mothers trying to put food on the table every night" is an entire industry. Go look at any food ads from the 20th century.
Sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean people's diets necessarily had to deteriorate. You get to pick 3 between healthy, convenient, cheap, and tasty, and Americans overwhelmingly chose the last three. This may caused some vicious cycles, but those are downstream affects caused by lack of demand.
If the free market refuses to provide what people want, then we can create our own food and let the execs wonder why they keep loosing market share every year.
Fruit is a tough one though: there are many hidden costs in providing it at scale. The 7 year waiting period is huge; add cost of the land, picking, transport, and spoilage. Fruit are fragile and stay fresh for a very short time.
There’s a reason fruit companies have tiny margins: here are the numbers for Fresh Del Monte: https://valustox.com/FDP
They prioritize things they think will help, to the exclusion of generally healthy and good things (veggies, etc).
I think it’s human nature, although I’m sure good parenting helps.
Although I know some really smart people who spend $100/month in athletic greens and other well advertised snake oil. Pretty much all OTC supplements are bogus or have little effect. Yet smart people buy them. Hoping.
1. Magic pills which cure them
2. Not eating vegetables
So this is not a shock to me at all. Such folks I am sure pin their hopes on things which are more convenient and do not require lifestyle changes.
I’m pretty sure the guys who were gonna pocket all that cash prefer to have paying customers.
False, depending on what you mean by human history. Science on macronutrients was in that category once. Now it's science fact. So we've had some wellness which was borne out as fact for over a century. Human written history doesn't go back far enough for 99% history/100% bullshit to be correct.
Actually, some inklings about vitamins go back even further.
Also, for some of the things they are selling, like Chaga mushrooms or colloidal silver, there is not really a grocery store equivalent that has the same ingredients.
As well as a whole Whole Foods aisle dedicated to supplements and natural substances but can’t carry Aspirin! It irks me that they can’t carry aspirin and basic OTCs you can get at a 7-11.
> It kept happening. All these people who knew for sure that Alex had been a liar back in Rockwall. A lot of them believed that what he says on Infowars might be true. They have a reference for him, like Coach Randy.
It gives some insight into the personalities here.
The segment of the episode in question: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/670/beware-the-jabberwock/a...
Goop? Someone named a "modern lifestyle brand" company Goop? And people are actually buying their shit?
I think whoever is running the show should just hand the reigns to the Dwarf Fortress guys. At least their bugs are believable.
An actress, in particular, Gwyneth Paltrow.
It also had a Netflix show in 2020.
In short: It is supposed to sound exactly as ridiculous as you think it sounds. The Goop line most famously includes a candle that is marketed as smelling like the creator's vagina. It is supposed to generate outrage among people of your demographic. Like the Kardashians, Gwyneth Paltrow knows exactly what she's doing, which is making money.
I'm not outraged, I'm amused... in a "bless your heart" kind of way.
The matrix would have been fine without that detail.
Hell, we have major corporations called “Google” (baby sound) and “Apple” (I’m so used to the name that it sounds normal, also, I love them. But a fruit? Really?)
Unrelated did anyone see the latest teenage engineering gear at CES?
And this is not trendy niche marketing, these are things that are inconsistent with basic models of biology/chemistry/physics/statistics.
The hero encounters vast numbers of people who robotically say about a Gatorade-like product: "It's got electrolytes!"
He asks them, "Do you even know what electrolytes are?"
They're what plants crave.
you could literally bankrupt these companies in less than a fortnight with single payer healthcare.
This just isn't true. The vast majority of Americans are either covered by pretty decent employer-subsidized healthcare plans OR are poor enough to receive all of their medical care for free.
These companies thrive because many people have a (reasonable) distrust of big pharma.
I agree that single payer healthcare would pry be more efficient, but other than allowing pharma companies to advertise, our system really isn't that bad. We lead in almost every area of medical research, the standard of care is quite high, wait times are low and we have some of the best outcomes in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_Supplement_Health_and_...
If we get specific to the sort of combos like what are sold on Infowars, then yes that's a problem, especially that they can hide behind "proprietary formula" without having to disclose exactly what it is. But the supplement market is way bigger than just that
The whole point of a "supplement" is that it's something you can normally get from diet and foods which are already available. If you create some new thing, under the current system you can't just call it a supplement and sell whatever it is, let alone sell it while making medical claims about it. If I buy a head of broccoli at the grocery store, should that need a label on it that describes health benefits when ingested, and this must be approved by the FDA? Or should it be enough that they're selling "broccoli" and it really is "broccoli"?
Also pretty much every supplement I've ever bought has text on the label like "These statements have not been reviewed/approved by the FDA," so there's a chunk of people
And this is exactly what was meant when it was said supplements are essentially exempt from truth in advertising laws. They can and do regularly make health claims with little to no evidence to back them up.
I dunno, check out the Y axis on this chart the CBC posted: https://media.assettype.com/westernstandard%2Fimport%2Fweste...
Ah, the irrationality of humans strike again.
Not saying these "wellness" treatments are legitimate, but your response has the smell of a beltway elitist pretending to represent the interests of the scammed without understanding their motivations or views.
The only difference is the FDA doesn't have the prerogative to regulate supplement manufacturers whereas in places like the EU counterparts (generally) regulate any product that tries to make medical claims.
You'd certainly rob them of people who have legitimate and treatable complaints. But that does nothing to eliminate the people who think they're smarter than their doctors or don't trust them which ranges from Steve Jobs to ivermectin users. There are always those who view themselves outside the system, don't trust it, or simply don't want to accept their diagnosis and/or treatment.
Anecdotally I have a sister who was biopsied for cancer twenty+ years ago, and the result was negative. She's been telling people she has (not had) cancer ever since. With her it could just be a play for sympathy, but I wouldn't be surprised to see her buying anything that purported to "cure cancer", regardless of what any doctor tells her.
The issue with that explanation is that plenty of Americans who have health insurance still buy lots of that snake oil.
A great number of the ailments that afflict Americans are related to practically inescapable aspects of our built environment: sedentarism, cheap and high sugar/salt processed foods, car-bound living environments. Those things are hard to change, and there is a ton of resistance to change because those things are very comfortable/convenient in the short term.
Science-based medicine itself struggles to treat these environment/lifestyle induced conditions. While single payer healthcare would help, it can't on its own fix the structural problems with how we live.
This, coupled with superstitious and/or pseudo-scientific beliefs and entertainment being part of American culture, results in many people putting stock in shortcut "solutions".
If one is holding to the belief that a certain political stance means people are somehow deficient, it just shows that one is vulnerable to propaganda which dehumanizes and blames a group.
Don't hate the person. Call out the stupid.
Actually, don't hate. It makes you stupid. (Again, this is orthogonal to politics!)
Thanks for sharing!
How about not being 100% positive, while also not dehumanizing, devaluing, and hating? Is it too much to ask to just accept everyone as fully human and not something disgusting, even those we happen to disagree with?
It just doesn’t seem to scale well.
Please give us a historical example where "letting your hate flow" led to scalable mass changing people -- That didn't also involve mass death and violence?
I didn’t say that, nor mean it.
And just wow - never in my most pessimistic estimation did I imagine that my post would be interpreted as defending “dehumanizing, devaluing and hate”.
Having lived in different cultures, I have experienced that perfectly acceptable wording of criticism of an idea in one culture was interpreted as a personal attack in another culture.
So the same wording of a critique didn’t “scale” across those cultures.
In a smaller scale setting, there’s a much better chance to hit the right tone for the smaller audience, so the criticism doesn’t come across as hurtful.
> Please give us a historical example where "letting your hate flow" led to scalable mass changing people
I have to admit, I have absolutely no idea how you got from my comment to that sentence?
> This always struck me as funny about the wellness world: how some people would brag about their mainstream credentials (“Trust me,” they’d say, with a straightening of their tie. “I’m a doctor”), while others felt that their legitimacy lay in the fact that they had no credentials. (“Trust me,” they’d say, jamming their thumbs mockingly toward the doctors. “I’m not a doctor.”)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/magazine/big-business-gwy...
I have taken a lot of these in the past, and the label "pseudoscientific" is unwarranted. The "writer" cherrypicks and generalizes data to discount it, but if you want to understand the mechanism of, say, Ashwagandha, you probably should spend a few hours reading research and meta-analyses and not spending 10 minutes on Google to decide if it's "good" or "pseudoscience".
Should these companies not be allowed to advertise and distribute products that might help some and might hurt others? Should tech writers write health articles when they don't know what they're talking about?
That is correct, yes. Pharmacologically active ingredients are medicine. Encouraging someone to take mental health meds without supervision, especially when made who-knows-where with who-knows-what quality control, because they're unregulated, is incredibly irresponsible.
There's a reason you can't buy Zoloft over the counter. Anything else in that space is either:
1. A placebo, in which case, no, companies should not be advertising it and thus keeping people from seeking qualified help, or
2. The real deal, in which case, no, companies should not be advertising it and selling it for unmonitored home use by people with zero education in the field.
You generally have to take psych meds for quite a few days before determine their effect. If you take too little, you risk your mental health. Take too much? Have fun riding out Seratonin Syndrome!
Should hedgefund owned news outlets publish stock news? Should the US government secretary of defence be on the board of Raytheon?
People with power will always abuse their authority to further their cause.
Animal studies in the lab suggest Ashwagandha may be effective for treating cancer, diabetes, and somehow, both reducing fatigue and as a sedative, but these effects have not been thoroughly tested on humans.
The article doesn't use the term psuedoscientific at all. That was OP.
Is it not nascent iodine? If no, then what is it? Oh no, it's nail clippings, isn't it. Gwyneth has tricked me yet again!
Edit: Thanks to everyone who replied--I learned something!
Not to give anyone any ideas....
(To be maximally clear/fair, all three of these concepts were part of healthy scientific discourse at one period of time, but have since faded into obscurity. That said I don't know that "nascent" anything was ever demonstrated to have health benefits, at least in virtue of its purported nascence).
The other supplements are real things with at least some semblance of scientific inquiry, but to quote the article:
> We couldn’t find any reliable scientific information on “nascent iodine.” ... The “nascent” stuff is supposed to have an “electromagnetic charge” that makes it easier to digest. ... iodine in this “charged” form cannot even exist in liquid form, which is how Alex Jones and company distribute it.
Worst is the completely useless powder called Athletic Greens that he pushes left and right.
There must _really_ be big bucks in supplements and lifestyle products like this, as it's coming just as much from very learned Harvard PhD's as Alex Jones.
Currently it's bro science connected to life extension, cold baths, red and blue light gadgets etc. and before that Paleo after an endless chain of products going back to the end of the 19'th century where the bourgeoisie were electrocuting themselves, poisoning themselves or lying in various useless massage machinery.
It appeared that it was hidden on purpose and I was expecting the worst, but after seeing it I would have to disagree with your comment about it being useless. From the list I would compare it to many daily vitamins. Many are deficient in these basic vitamins (why is a separate discussion).
It isn't useless, but maybe it is simply overpriced for what it is? Most notably seems to be missing vitamin D.
In the near future you could take your dna file and upload it to a website and it would tell you what supplement is best for you, but for now as in the past there will be generic multi-vitamins that try to fit everyone. And like in the past some will lean heavily on the marketing side.
Just say you sell vitamin d. Not some ultra esoteric branded product with extreme markups and hints at something it definitely isn't - namely anything to do with "Greens.
And doing this as a "certified science man" is even more ridiculous.
"Seeking max profits always leads to the same point, regardless of where you start."
Goop and Infowars are the same product, just in a different box.
I just have an aversion to highly refined and industrial stuff. Prefer to stick with meat from animals I’ve seen and plants grown by people I trust.
- I will never let my child get vaccinated.
- I don't trust the education system, and homeschool my kids.
- I feel economically insecure and feel like the establishment has left me behind.
- I think the government is lying to us and the Jews are secretly running the world.
- I don't think we should be fighting wars all over the world.
Tell me, do my political views lean far right or far left?
By international standards, far right-wing.
The quick skim I looked at seemed to discuss the word fascism a lot. Perhaps the horseshoe theory is better represented by adding an authoritarian/libertarian axis to the left/right axis: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass
SSDM. Same shit, different medium.
You may be thinking of herbal remedies.
These fall on a spectrum between misleading and outright lies. While “fever” may be seen as an only misleading label (the label doesn’t say that it treats fever in any way, so you could make that argument), there are some outright falsehoods on that box.
“Works naturally with your body” is an outright falsehood. It would have to work, in order to work naturally with your body.
“Medicine” is another outright falsehood.
The shit should be regulated into oblivion.
Your suggestion would be like forcing astrology books to include warnings. I think you have to treat people like adults here, which includes realizing that they are going to do/buy dumb things. Only when those things come at a significant risk is it worth interfering.
Notice how a lot of desserts in the frozen section of your grocery store are labeled “frozen dairy dessert”. That is because those specific desserts are not permitted to be called “ice cream”, just like how oscillococcinum should not be permitted to be called “medicine”.
There’s a balance here, but oscillococcinum is not an edge case. It is pseudoscientific fraud.
I’m glad that this isn’t the Wild West of snake oil salesmen like we had back in the day. People used to really get hurt! I think more of these regulations would improve the situation even more—herbal supplements, for example, should be labeled with the quantity of ingredients more accurately—right now, it can be a bit of a crapshoot due to the variations between vendors or even between different batches from the same vendor.
It shouldn't.
> The government regulates what “12 fl. oz” means when you buy a can of root beer, and regulates exactly how the number of calories should be printed on the wrapper for a chocolate bar.
This is reasonable regulation.
> I’m glad that this isn’t the Wild West of snake oil salesmen like we had back in the day. People used to really get hurt! I think more of these regulations would improve the situation even more—herbal supplements, for example, should be labeled with the quantity of ingredients more accurately—right now, it can be a bit of a crapshoot due to the variations between vendors or even between different batches from the same vendor.
As long as true information and real medicine are available, it won't be "the Wild West of snake oil salesmen". And that should be the focus here, rather than attacking or regulating false information. Meanwhile if people choose to buy shit on InfoWars or venture down the homeopathy aisle at CVS, we should roll our eyes but let them be.
This approach is too callous and cold-hearted for my taste. I can’t stomach it. The real consequences for human life is, I think, too severe to ignore. All I am asking is that the box, sold in stores, be labeled correctly and clearly. The labeling does not have to be perfect, but it should meet some minimum standards.
Still, I guess, there's something fun about feeding conspiracy theorists a conspiracy.
But for Alex Jones' audience that would be exactly the kind of mild, uninteresting connection they would run wild with.
Idiocracy[1], we are living it.