site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   27865 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 26, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I guess I simply don't understand that the fact that users might accidentally inhale a chemical that is not meant to be inhaled says anything about the viability of designing that or any other substance to be intentionally inhaled or injected. It seems completely irrelevant.

Isn’t a nasal spray intentionally inhaling the product? The nasal cavity itself I consider to be an internal part of the body. And breathing happens. Eye baths are literal organs being disinfected and not just cleaning your skin which is designed as an exterior protective shield.

No,the treatment you linked to is clearly not inhaled. It is meant to eliminate COVID viruses in the nostrils, not in the lungs.

So you don’t breath thru your nose? This is getting pedantic but your insides are going to be exposed to the product by injecting it into your nose.

Are you seriously not aware that there are all sorts of nasal sprays which explicitly instruct the user not to inhale the product? And do you seriously not understand the difference between "a tiny amount of this product might accidentally be inhaled" and "this product is designed to be intentionally inhaled? Because that is what you said: "Isn’t a nasal spray intentionally inhaling the product?" The examples you gave simply are not evidence relevant to whether or not injecting bleach or another antiseptic is or is not a potentially promising COVID intervention.

Well Trump never said inject bleach. I believe you are being too pedantic or protecting blue anon. But regardless intentional digestion of disinfectant is a proven COVID treatment and not some poisoning yourself. That’s what these nasal sprays are doing.

Key is Trump was basically correct and BlueAnon costs lives blocking effective treatments.

Oh FFS, did you even read the study you linked to? 1) It is not an ingestion; and 2) it is not even a treatment. It is a method of reducing transmission.

What are you talking about? It reduces viral load. Lower viral load leads to less severe disease. This is basic virology.

Clearly if it’s in your nose your injecting it too.

I feel like you are being purposefully dishonest.

So yes it reduces transmission - lower viral load means you reduce transmission but lower viral load ALSO reduces case severity.

Serious BlueAnon invasion with you.

The problem is the precision of your language; a nasal spray is not an injection in a medical setting, unless you define "injection" so widely that it ceases to have any useful meaning, and this imprecision is letting you get away with great differences on actual facts of medical treatments.

I know, blue-aligned publications made what was an off-the-cuff statement that was more supposed to generate a mood than be any real advice, by Trump who is notoriously foot-in-mouth and probably had a vague idea that disinfectants is something to wash body parts in and that the lungs were Where Bad Things Happened, some sort of half-formulated thought with a quarter of a clue of what he's saying.

And truth is BlueAnon likely caused excess deaths twisting his words and making the valid treatments seem kooky.

This is even probably true.

But fact remains that Trump proposed doing this:

And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.

So he's talking about injecting disinfectant into the lungs.

That at best is bronchoalveolar lavage with disinfectant instead of saline, and at worst is giving someone a lung stab injury and a pneumothorax with a needle then filling the lung parenchyma or thoracic cavity with disinfectant, neither of which are remotely close to, you know, nasal sprays, and both bad ideas. (I'm not actually sure 1 is even better than 2, now that I think about it.)

That Trump probably didn't actually mean for people to drown themselves I'm quite sympathetic to, and I can even appreciate that he's saying this out of a sense of optimism and approval of modern medicine...but I think it's difficult to deny that - taking what he said literally - the treatment is not a valid medical treatment.

To respond to your other reply, then:

Sure there are degrees of injection.

Not at all. You are miscategorizing medical treatments in a way that benefits your interpretation of Trump's statements.

The point is Trump was referring to a valid medical treatment.

Not at all. By leveraging the above, you're equivocating between a sensible treatment and a silly one.

And truth is BlueAnon likely caused excess deaths twisting his words and making the valid treatments seem kooky.

"Valid treatments seem kooky" aside, whatever blue tribe aggrandisement on this front was probably bad, I agree.

The amount you would get into your bloodstream through a nasal spray is likely much more controlled compared to, you know, IV chlorhexidine. Bloodstream availability is waaaaaay lower. Not really comparable.

I mean, there’s also dermal absorption, right? But I think most of us would be pretty doubtful of the idea that washing our hands is essentially IV soap, and nasal spray is probably significantly closer to washing hands than it is to IV.

Same/similar goes with the eyewash, really.

Sure there are degrees of injection.

The point is Trump was referring to a valid medical treatment.

And truth is BlueAnon likely caused excess deaths twisting his words and making the valid treatments seem kooky.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats