Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

tracingwoodgrains.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 192 posts

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#131

Post by programmarchy »

jjeaff wrote: post #126
gruez wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Anyone who has a baseline knowledge of medicine would call it a dewormer Right, but in all the contexts I've heard it, it's not just a "dewormer", it's a "horse dewormer". That's technically true, but it's also FDA approved for human consumption. Making fun of people for consuming "horse dewormer" is like making fun of people for consuming "horse tranquilizer" for their depression[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…

Except many of the people being made fun of are calling poison control because they are literally overdosing on horse dewormer. Literally apple flavored dewormer paste for horses.

Are you referring to the Rolling Stone article which then spread through cable news? That story was retracted because it was totally bogus.

There’s more to the ivermectin story than having anti-parasitic properties, even though that’s how it became famous. It also appears to have anti-viral properties [1]. And there have been 60+ studies showing its efficacy [2]. Just because it has anti-parasitic properties doesn't mean it couldn't also block biological pathways in viral infections as well.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016635422...

[2] https://ivmmeta.com

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#132

Post by programmarchy »

coryrc wrote: post #93
msrenee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horse paste? It's not you specifically, but you're not the first person I've seen recently who has referred to it and didn't appear to understand what the substance is. Someone I know called it a "horse tranquilizer" in a conversation the other day. It's Ivermectin. It's a dewormer. It shows some promise, but more research is needed into its efficacy. Anyone who has a baseline knowledge of medicine would call it a de…

https://711web.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/The-study-foun... It's got a picture of a horse and PASTE in a big font. But, yes, like sibling post, it's used derisively for people who won't get a free vaccine known to reduce death 10x+ but will get random shit radio hosts tell them to try.

The human formulation comes in tablets [1].

Anyway, there's no reason ivermectin couldn't be used to treat breakthrough cases in people who have taken the vaccine as well. So it's something that could help everyone.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=ivermectin+tablets

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#133

Post by nradov »

robbrown451 wrote: post #112
msrenee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horse paste? It's not you specifically, but you're not the first person I've seen recently who has referred to it and didn't appear to understand what the substance is. Someone I know called it a "horse tranquilizer" in a conversation the other day. It's Ivermectin. It's a dewormer. It shows some promise, but more research is needed into its efficacy. Anyone who has a baseline knowledge of medicine would call it a de…

You say it shows some promise. Do you have a credible citation? Because I've followed it closely, and nothing out there indicates it shows promise, and a lot shows it doesn't. I'll agree that it is misleading to call it horse paste, but if you call it a de-wormer, that doesn't sound a lot better to me. It's not an anti-viral, and the only "promise" it has shown is equivalent to the promise shown by a handgun fired at…

This study is small but shows some promise. It's at least worth further research.

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/6/989

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#134

Post by rualca »

thebooktocome wrote: post #90
msrenee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horse paste? It's not you specifically, but you're not the first person I've seen recently who has referred to it and didn't appear to understand what the substance is. Someone I know called it a "horse tranquilizer" in a conversation the other day. It's Ivermectin. It's a dewormer. It shows some promise, but more research is needed into its efficacy. Anyone who has a baseline knowledge of medicine would call it a de…

Horse paste is an intentionally derogatory term for it. It's not meant to be scientifically accurate.

> Horse paste is an intentionally derogatory term for it. It's not meant to be scientifically accurate.

"Horse dewormer" is as accurate as it can possibly be. It is also used extensively as a cow dewormer and pet dewormer. People are going to veterinarian and pet shops to buy paste sold to deworm horses and cows to take it themselves. They are not taking drugs produced for human consumption. They are going with the animal products designed and sold to give to animals.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/more-people-are-pois...

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#135

Post by TraceWoodgrains »

RheingoldRiver wrote: post #104
TraceWoodgrains wrote: post #29

Oh hey, cool to see my article here. If anyone has questions or wants further details on anything, I'm happy to stick around this thread for a bit. I've paid altogether too much attention to this saga; glad it's going to some use.

Hi! Not at all related to the content at all, but here's an article about accessibility and link display text that I send to anyone and everyone I see not following the standards: https://usability.yale.edu/web-accessibility/articles/links tl;dr: don't have display texts like "here" or "this" or "this comment" etc, it's bad for people who use screenreaders, and super easy to fix, but almost no one knows about this is…

Reasonable advice; I'll see about applying it in the future. Cheers!

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#137

Post by ZeroGravitas »

I feel like trolls are a bit too self-congratulatory.

They're always talking about how many people they've fooled and the numbers, objectively are not very high.

"I fooled the underpaid person who writes clickbait headlines to attract eyeballs to adverts by doing their job for them" isn't really the great triumph it is often made out to be.

It's like 'revealing' the mermaid you donated to PT Barnum's museum was a fish and a monkey sewed together. He knows and doesn't care.

If people come to see it, he profits, if they don't, well it was worth a go.

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#138

Post by lenkite »

lr4444lr wrote: post #36
RedHobbit wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the frustrating thing isn't it, "fake news" became popularized in the last few years and 'professional journalists' who can't even be bothered to fact check anything are really proving it right. Which is a shame since a free unbiased press is healthy for a society.

I'm with you until your last line. An "unbiased" press I think was a pretty unusual and brief development in the mid 20th century. I have no problem with a partisan press that wears its heart on its sleeve and states its objectives in the masthead: I'm perfectly capable of reading critically, and noting what's omitted as much as what's covered, and I'll know which alternative periodical to seek out for the other side…

It's fine if they are completely biased. That's OK. It is not fine if they run "fact-checkers" and then de-claim anything contrary to what they propagandize as "misinformation" / "raycist" / "nazi". Then they use these fact-checkers to get people banned/doxxed.

Even when their fact-checkers are utterly wrong, they will just update stating "needs more context".

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#139

Post by rat87 »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #82
quantified wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes hard to tell, especially after all these years of Trump. Is “the election was stolen” satire? The difference between satire and reality is in the intent of the author, harder and harder to detect as people read less and less of it

I completely agree -- hell, I still can't work out if "Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election" was satire or if people actually believed it.

I mean the majority of public evidence strongly points towards Trump colluding with Putin regardless of whether Russias efforts changed a close election

Re: Trolls convinced journalists they were “abortion bounty hunters”

#140

Post by rat87 »

iammisc wrote: post #130
alasdair_ wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is on videotape literally asking for Russia to hack things for him.

Joe Biden is literally on videotape saying he threatened the Ukrainian government to not receive aid if they didn't fire their prosecutor investigating his son's company. When trump accused him of it, trump was impeached for his predecessors crimes. But yeah let's talk about what's literally on videotape

Talk about a non sequitur.

Biden is on tape talking about he passed along the message that Ultimate had to fire a corrupt prosecutor who was refusing to investigate companies including Burisima the company whose board Hunter Biden was on.

VP Biden was merely the messanger Getting rid of the corrupt Shokin was supported by the rest of the Obama administration, the State Department, the EU, and many Republicans.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/republican-senators-pushed-for...

Trump was impeached for trying to pressure the Ukrainian president into making up bullshit investigation of Biden to tarnish his name. For trying to abuse American aid money to blackmail a friendly foreign leader

Post reply on HN