Comment by thinkingtoilet | Hacker News Reader

Comment by thinkingtoilet | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>but also partially because science is messy

It's because human beings are messy! If you feed a person a peanut, they might think it's tasty. If you feed a different person a peanut that person may die, quickly. If a god damn peanut can illicit that range of responses in a healthy human being, imagine literally anything else. Of course there is corruption because so much money is on the line and humans in aggregate are a selfish bunch. One thing I always like to point out is that people who try to follow the science and the latest guidance aren't the ones speaking in absolutes. I'm aware the CDC or FDA have gotten things wrong in the past and will get things wrong in the future, but it's the best system we have. It's the anti-science people who speak in absolutes but then the second the cancer diagnosis comes in they come running back begging big pharma for treatment, they'll even bankrupt their entire family trying to get that treatment. It can't be both ways. This is why it's hard to take skeptics seriously. Not only do they throw a thousand things out there, and maybe one or two is right, they conveniently ignore the other 998 things they got way wrong, but when push comes to shove, they love big pharma and beg for it's treatments.

I'm inherently sympathetic to skeptics only because I know people that experienced the following: opiate prescription -> addiction -> death.

I think this goes for many Americans.

I always take skeptics seriously, because what is the alternative? We stop asking questions?

It doesn't mean I believe every skeptic over science, but it does mean that I'm willing to ask questions. In so many cases on the topics RFK Jr goes after, there are significant gaps in the questions that science has answered. People want those gaps filled and have for many, many years.

The answer is always more questions and therefore, more science.

Right now, there's an information vacuum and until that vacuum is filled people will continue to speculate. It's human nature, especially when somebody you care about has been affected and nobody can give you answers other than "this is life now".

You’re correct, but what we’re not doing is more science to answer the questions and fill in the gaps. We’re using anecdotes and conjecture, sometimes conspiracy, in place of science.

He's talked constantly about doing more studies though. That's his entire platform.

Talking about doing more research while being part of an administration that’s defunding it makes me extremely skeptical that there will be more research.

https://www.propublica.org/article/rfk-jr-autism-environment...

https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/hhs-trump-kennedy-autism-init...

> Third, NIH today is announcing the recipients of the Autism Data Science Initiative (ADSI), funding 13 projects totaling more than $50 million to transform autism research. ADSI integrates large-scale biological, clinical, and behavioral data with an exposomics approach that examines environmental, nutritional, medical, and social factors alongside genetics.

> Projects employ advanced methods such as machine learning and organoid models, address both children and adults across the lifespan, and establish replication hubs to ensure rigor. Each project includes community engagement to align research with the needs of autistic individuals, families, and clinicians.

> Meanwhile, a ProPublica review of federal data found that more than $40 million in grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health for dozens of autism-related research projects were canceled under Kennedy’s watch. Some had been awarded to universities the administration is now targeting, while others ran afoul of Trump’s “anti-woke” priorities by mentioning gender and other verboten terms. Among them was a grant to Harvard University to use data on nearly half a million Israeli children to evaluate whether men’s exposure to air pollution affects the risk of having a child with autism. (A small number of grants have been recently reinstated.) A survey of researchers conducted by the Autism Science Foundation, which tallied cuts to training grants and the anticipated cuts to future grants over the next few years, estimated that the total loss of funding could be tens of millions more.

https://www.propublica.org/article/rfk-jr-autism-environment...

So they cut funding then put it back for possibly fewer studies, but with new press release?

It’s my understanding that many of the studies were continuing down paths that had already been well research with little benefit.

Talking?

>I always take skeptics seriously, because what is the alternative? We stop asking questions?

This is the crux of my argument. Of course we don't stop asking questions and you know it. It really bothers me when people argue like this in bad faith. What needs to be pointed out is there is a difference between educated people doing research (aka 'askign questions') and people with no experience spouting nonsense. 99.99% of what I hear from "skeptics" is the latter. Millions of Americans now listen to podcasts, comedians, youtubers, and other sources who lack the basic education to even understand a medical study, let alone conduct actual research. Actual science is 'asking questions'. Modern skepticism is 99.99% of the time not actual science.

Don't confuse skeptics with conspiracy theorists.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com