Is “public health” guided by a code of ethics? Do they manufacture fear, utilizing a ‘greater good‘ behavioral “science” theory as form of social control? Is adding ‘we can all agree’ to
narrate manipulate public opinions changing health outcomes for the public at large?
Have expectations vs reality concerning what’s ‘best for you’ reared their ugly head(s)? Over time – trust, and the morality factor public health thrives on – had to come to light, eventually.
An Ethical Dilemma
Lets see if I have this right: #Science is science. Junk science isn’t science. Correlation isn’t science, pseudoscience isn’t ‘science’. Science-based isn’t science, behavioral science is pseudoscience, “trust the science” means there was no science, depending on someone’s interpretation, and eventually, presentation with a long silent wink of encouraged speculation.
Surely they all have a ‘code of ethics’ in their respective groups, but what is the standard? The definition of ‘research misconduct’ from the U.S. Office of Research Integrity is vague at best, as I point to:
(d) Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
Differences of opinion??? Huh. Think about that. If they ‘police themselves’, but “Hey, Bill, I appreciate your concern, but – we’ve always done it this way” is the norm, then what differentiates the norm?
Do we trust them? Even they don’t even think we do.
Theoretical rhetoric, narratives, and public opinion
Yep, you read that right. “Theoretical rhetoric“.
Last week I noticed trust in Truth Initiative, and their narratives, has fallen. Dramatically. I’m unable to pinpoint how (or when) it happened, or for how long, but I can point to a specific moment I noticed the general public has turned on Truth Initiative. (So have I, here, and here.) Don’t get me started on them terrorizing the
juvenile delinquents children™.
I’m not unhappy about this revelation, but I’ll try not to gloat.
Definition of truth: the quality or state of being true.
I don’t pay attention to Truth Manipulative’s Facebook posts any more. I used to search them out like a crazed madman playing “whack-a-mole”. I would see the occasional familiar face on a post, but didn’t recognize anyone in this “Truth” >sponsored< post and Facebook thread. These people didn’t mention synthetic nicotine in their comments, they didn’t even mention vaping. Yet, trust seemed sparse all along the watchtower of their non-profit political front group threads.
Jim said “Keep the government out of people’s personal decisions.”
Andy said “How about if you just let people make decisions about what they want to consume for themselves?”
Ray said “Leave people alone, who made you the morality police.”
Speaking of Truth Manipulative, I cannot ruin it for you, but here’s an excerpt from Marc Gunther at Filter Mag:
“We’re not talking misinformation. We’re talking disinformation. This is willful misrepresentation of facts. It’s mind-blowing.” ~ Sally Satel (@slsatel)
My preface: The not-so-intricate connections between orgs, pseudo, sociopolitical “science” – silencing #science… and is far more important than what you’ve read thus far:
Speaking of ethics
While drafting this blog, it seems there are some distracted tobacco control “experts” recently feeling as if they’re being intimidated, and “it disrupts their work“.
The University of Bath released this 7/19/2022:
Bold and italics are my emphasis in the quote:
“Over two-fifths of participants reported either experiencing one or more of these more covert intimidatory tactics directly or were aware that another member of the tobacco control community had been intimidated”
Tobacco control math: 23 participants. Two-fifths. Sounds scary.
A survey – imagine – showing “Twenty-three participants from five WHO regions” had “experienced intimidation. The most frequently reported forms of intimidation were discreditation on social or traditional media“.
(BMJ version is here)
In typical form, ‘we’re being bullied’ from the bullies, and – in classic tobacco control generalization, suddenly an anecdotal self-reporting survey is absolute. And reliable? But vapers testimonies are not? Huh.
I say, after all these years – To see the public lose trust in the ivory tower that is “public health” in any form, stand UP and explain their disdain is a welcome sight and sound. It’s not about time to start calling them out, it’s long overdue.
Pardon my skepticism, this should turn out well under their own scrutiny, then manipulation of the findings….
So, speaking of loss of trust and scrutiny:
A Monster Thread:
Getting back to previously mentioned “tobacco control math”, I noticed this thread on Twitter, showing the opinionization™, ®, © and twisting of ‘science’, data, and extrapolation using innuendo. In any form. HIGHLY recommended to read this, and follow Chelsea Troy.
Last But Not Least
You can listen to Patrick, Cameron, and I here:
Thanks to Five Pawns
for sponsoring this blog.
I join Patrick on Smoke Free Radio on Friday nights
You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook
You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter
Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome at the bottom this blog. Let me know your thoughts.
There is definitely more to come.
Keep ON #Vaping On.
Above Image source.