111–120 of 208 posts
>In the 1930s and 40s smoking was cool back then. it was a social thing to do. you can see that in old Hollywood movies.
Why not 1850s? )) I am sure even in the 80s and 90s there were plenty of smokers in the movies
Future possible headlines: When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Doctors to Push Opiates When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Psychiatrists to Push Amphetamines
Are you really convinced that, from a medical perspective, those are on the same playing field as tobacco?
psychiatry in general is a pretty ridiculous field, at least as practiced here in the US. just yesterday I had my every-three-months checkup where I basically tell my psychiatrist everything is still going good, so can I have three more months' prescriptions of the thing you got me dependent on when I was a teenager, please. I was making some small talk about my life as per usual, talking about how work has been a bit stressful but that I've noticed I've become much better at handling work-related anxiety, compared to in the past, and she asked if I wanted to try any kind of prescription to help with it. it seems like the whole job is basically listening to people with issues and prescribing them pills to attempt to fix the problem. if a prescribed pill doesn't do anything after a certain amount of time, or has negative unintended effects, then oh shit stop taking it, let's try something else instead... another pill, of course, not any kind of counseling or literally any other kind of treatment at all, just more pills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah who knows what unequivocal advice we could be getting from experts right now that will be thoroughly debunked 70 years from now. (Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on)
Quoted post unavailable.
For instance, the Japanese seem to eat tons of the stuff in various forms all the time but they seem to lead healthy lives.
I don't have any skin in the game, just curious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember hearing somewhere that even one cigarette will paralyze your alveoli for 24 hours. This would, I assume, make you more susceptible to contagions since foreign particles will make contact with your blood for longer period. If this were true, then even one cig a day would be a real problem, especially in Covid-times.
There isn't evidence to suggest cigarette smokers are more likely to catch covid
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/sep/27/smokers-much...
Future possible headlines: When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Doctors to Push Opiates When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Psychiatrists to Push Amphetamines
Are you really convinced that, from a medical perspective, those are on the same playing field as tobacco?
> Colleen McBride, director of the cancer prevention, detection and control program at Duke University Medical Center... says there is a growing body of evidence that nicotine actually relieves some symptoms of Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, and appears to help those with severe depression focus.
https://today.duke.edu/2001/08/mm_medicaluses.html
The question is, to what extent are current medical uses of such substances actually necessary, i.e. to what extent has it all been about getting those sales numbers up?
The Sackler family pushed opioids onto middle America in a rather spectacular fashion. In any functioning society - including with a death penalty - they’d be contending with the harshest possible penalty. Just not in America.
It's a bit funny that some commenters relate this to vaccines. I also see a similarity, but maybe in a slightly different way. The tobacco industry paid doctors to become outliers and promoted them to imply expert consensus and push their product. People not very fond of vaccines also promote outliers attempting to imply some form of consensus or at least scientific validity. Quite a few of them also have products or…
That is a bit of an upside down view of the power structure in society. Pharmaceutical companies are literally making hundreds of billions of dollars off of their products. These companies are not exactly innocent. They have very little morals and are generally okay with mass suffering as long as their profits are increasing (look at the opioid epidemic as an example).
If anything, I think it is much more likely that the reverse is happening. The scientists, doctors, etc. are designing studies in a way to paint a more favorable view of the products that they are looking at. They are cherry picking data to show that they are good while ignoring any data to the contrary. It looks a lot more like they are in the pocket of Big Pharma to me.
In addition, there is a social stigma where if you take an unpopular view here, you will likely be seen as a “conspiracy theorist”, or face the possibility of losing your job, friends, family members.
Most of the people against Big Pharma promote living a healthy lifestyle, taking supplements, going outside, getting sunlight, eating well, exercising, etc. It is not like they are trying to sell you some expensive products.
When governments all around the world are providing billions of taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies who have legal indemnity and can’t be sued if people have adverse reactions to their products, and those same governments are forcing their citizens to take the products (often against their will) in order to be allowed to participate in society, it is probably time to start questioning who the “good guys” really are here.
Really making good use of that global network we got goin' here, history.com.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you cite some sources please?
More recent paper I found says we dont really know yet what happens https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2019.00142...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Question: How do we reconcile "soy is poison" with the fact that some cultures include massive amounts of soy in their diet with little known detriment? For instance, the Japanese seem to eat tons of the stuff in various forms all the time but they seem to lead healthy lives. I don't have any skin in the game, just curious.
In China for example, tofu is one of the cheapest possible protein sources (think in terms of a massive pallet of it sold for five dollars) but people are generally aware that it is poisonous in some weird ways that won't kill you. Males are generally urged not to consume it.
This could be a knowledge of just the upper class, though. An unspoken suggestion to leave the tofu and soy for the poor.
