Rude and Unsupportive Posts.

msf74

your mind reading skills are not as adept as you believe them to be.

Fair enough.

I think your post didn't do anything to help people who lack knowledge. In fact, it probably made them feel less likely to post and discuss their viewpoints without judgment .

If you have knowledge I also believe you have a responsibility to use it wisely.

jypsyjulia

Honestly, it sounds like you were probably being rude and unsupportive to those who were pursuing juice cleanses or detoxes. You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country. When I lived in Poland, I discovered that detoxing is very popular there. There was a lot of science to support it. And yet in the States there is heaps of science saying that we shouldn't detox? Who's right?

*shrugs*

Moral of this post? Do what feels right to you. If a 3 day cleanse is something you think will help, do it. (I don't think I'd recommend anything longer, but it's been done).

You need to respect other people's decisions and, in turn, they will respect your point of view. But if you come at them as an attack - which this entire thread feels very aggressive - then you're going to be attacked in turn.

somerisagirlsname

folks aren't looking for "advice", they're looking for validation - best course of action is to stay out of the conversation, *.

That sounds like a really good song lyric/rap lyric.

juliemouse83

If you don't want to know someone else's opinion, then don't ask for it on a public forum.

Simple as that.

rml_16

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

jypsyjulia

folks aren't looking for "advice", they're looking for validation - best course of action is to stay out of the conversation, *.

That sounds like a really good song lyric/rap lyric.

Oh my gosh, it does! Haha.

juliemouse83

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

You got to it before I did...

BrainyBurro

i hate to have to explain the point of the OP, especially for those who haven't bothered to read it, but here goes...

this site is full of people with derpy ideas who post about them in the forums. many of these derpy ideas bring out a legion of members who post against them. some may do it to be snarky, but most are doing it because bad information left uncorrected can lead many people astray.

inevitably, this leads to the people posting these derpy ideas to complain that this site is not supportive simply because they have not been met with universal support for their ideas. but why do they think they deserve support for those ideas and that the people arguing against them don't? if this site was nothing but people providing uncritical support for EVERYTHING that is posted, then how valuable would any of that be?

if you tell me that a juice cleanse cures cancer, i'm going to say "no it doesn't". if you then complain that i'm not supporting you, then i should have the right to direct the same criticism back at you, shouldn't i? that's the point of this thread. if i disagree with you (and it's usually your argument, not you as a person), then you should understand that's an inherent hazard of discussions online and in real life, you can't then demand that my opinion by squashed on the grounds that "i'm not being supportive". because i'll turn around and use that exact same argument on you.

and that's why people complaining about not getting support just because they are not being agreed with are misunderstanding what support means.

jypsyjulia

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

rduhlir

Do what works for YOU, period! No debate needed.

So what if what works for you turns out to be extremely dangerous, and your "supportive" friends knew this and supported you anyway? Then next thing you know you are getting dialasis every day? Extreme, yes I know that. But would those friends still be considered supportive? Or would it open your eyes that they really aren't supportive, just naive? That the real support was coming from those who were on the forums trying to warn you and point you in the right direction?

Sabine_Stroehm

I've never said anything rude to you when you've posted concern for someone doing something truly harmful. Just sayin.


when folks mock posters for not doing exactly what they are doing and what they KNOW without a doubt (at least today, at least for them) is the right thing for all, I'll chime in.

There are many paths up the mountain. And rude is demanding there is but one.


finally: if folks sounded the alarm at the truly alarming posts and let the others who've chosen a path try that path, it would be better. Think: low carb. Every time someone asks how to start low carb, the first 5 replies are why would you do low carb, here's a donut.

(I'm not low carb)

rml_16

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

No.

You don't understand the scientfic community.

At all.

Mr_Knight

And off it goes...anyone that tries to help the OP and disagrees is totes a bully, and mean...

If you know that going in, and do it anyway, it is a kind of bullying.

jypsyjulia

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

No.

You don't understand the scientfic community.

At all.

Except I do. Thanks for being so dismissive, though!

Cindyinpg

Do what works for YOU, period! No debate needed.

What if what works for you is dangerous?

Should we take an evolution mentality and just say.. hey, if someone wants to hurt themselves, then let them. Only the strong survive?

You know, sometimes I think that might be for the best! lol

Some of the OPs of those threads actually change their minds, though, after people post the science and logic stuff. So it's still worth it in the end.

Yes! It's awesome when that happens! And it's not just the OP, there are plenty of new people who do not participate in the forums and use the search function to get answers to their questions. When they see something shot down, (politely or harshly), they may reconsider it and that's a big win.

rduhlir

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

That is why you read all the material given and then make logical choices based on your final evaluations of the studies.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

jypsyjulia

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

That is why you read all the material given and then make logical choices based on your final evaluations of the studies.

Totally agree! The only issue is that what is logical for one person won't be logical for another. The family I lived with in Poland did this cleanse where they stuck something up their butt and literally flushed out their system. I was slightly horrified, haha. She had all of these articles about how it was healthy, but I couldn't jump on the bandwagon. In a way, all of science will always have a bit of subjectivity to it. She also did a cleanse where you don't eat for 5 days and then you only eat soup for the next 5 days and this was a very popular detox method - even my doctor there recommended it, haha.

msf74

i hate to have to explain the point of the OP, especially for those who haven't bothered to read it, but here goes...

this site is full of people with derpy ideas who post about them in the forums. many of these derpy ideas bring out a legion of members who post against them. some may do it to be snarky, but most are doing it because bad information left uncorrected can lead many people astray.

inevitably, this leads to the people posting these derpy ideas to complain that this site is not supportive simply because they have not been met with universal support for their ideas. but why do they think they deserve support for those ideas and that the people arguing against them don't? if this site was nothing but people providing uncritical support for EVERYTHING that is posted, then how valuable would any of that be?

if you tell me that a juice cleanse cures cancer, i'm going to say "no it doesn't". if you then complain that i'm not supporting you, then i should have the right to direct the same criticism back at you, shouldn't i? that's the point of this thread. if i disagree with you (and it's usually your argument, not you as a person), then you should understand that's an inherent hazard of discussions online and in real life, you can't then demand that my opinion by squashed on the grounds that "i'm not being supportive". because i'll turn around and use that exact same argument on you.

and that's why people complaining about not getting support just because they are not being agreed with are misunderstanding what support means.

Well, that was a masterclass in how to win friends and influence people. Pffft, those people with their derpy ideas. How silly they are and lacking in critical thinking abilities. If only they could be like the great and the good of MFP.

Essentially, as far as I can see, your OP was one big whine about people not taking your advice.

Well, I am off for a ride.

Take care.

sarahertzberger

everyone has their own way of weight loss, and you may not agree, and no they may not be presenting true facts but they aren't going to quit posting about what they feel is right, neither are you so, why not be an adult agree to disagree or just not read their posts!! Problem solved

rduhlir

i hate to have to explain the point of the OP, especially for those who haven't bothered to read it, but here goes...

this site is full of people with derpy ideas who post about them in the forums. many of these derpy ideas bring out a legion of members who post against them. some may do it to be snarky, but most are doing it because bad information left uncorrected can lead many people astray.

inevitably, this leads to the people posting these derpy ideas to complain that this site is not supportive simply because they have not been met with universal support for their ideas. but why do they think they deserve support for those ideas and that the people arguing against them don't? if this site was nothing but people providing uncritical support for EVERYTHING that is posted, then how valuable would any of that be?

if you tell me that a juice cleanse cures cancer, i'm going to say "no it doesn't". if you then complain that i'm not supporting you, then i should have the right to direct the same criticism back at you, shouldn't i? that's the point of this thread. if i disagree with you (and it's usually your argument, not you as a person), then you should understand that's an inherent hazard of discussions online and in real life, you can't then demand that my opinion by squashed on the grounds that "i'm not being supportive". because i'll turn around and use that exact same argument on you.

and that's why people complaining about not getting support just because they are not being agreed with are misunderstanding what support means.

I agree...there are a lot of people on here that want blind support, even from people who clearly do not support said methods.

Myhaloslipped

i hate to have to explain the point of the OP, especially for those who haven't bothered to read it, but here goes...

this site is full of people with derpy ideas who post about them in the forums. many of these derpy ideas bring out a legion of members who post against them. some may do it to be snarky, but most are doing it because bad information left uncorrected can lead many people astray.

inevitably, this leads to the people posting these derpy ideas to complain that this site is not supportive simply because they have not been met with universal support for their ideas. but why do they think they deserve support for those ideas and that the people arguing against them don't? if this site was nothing but people providing uncritical support for EVERYTHING that is posted, then how valuable would any of that be?

if you tell me that a juice cleanse cures cancer, i'm going to say "no it doesn't". if you then complain that i'm not supporting you, then i should have the right to direct the same criticism back at you, shouldn't i? that's the point of this thread. if i disagree with you (and it's usually your argument, not you as a person), then you should understand that's an inherent hazard of discussions online and in real life, you can't then demand that my opinion by squashed on the grounds that "i'm not being supportive". because i'll turn around and use that exact same argument on you.

and that's why people complaining about not getting support just because they are not being agreed with are misunderstanding what support means.

Exactly! Agreeing with everything someone says is not necessarily support.

rml_16

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

That is why you read all the material given and then make logical choices based on your final evaluations of the studies.

Totally agree! The only issue is that what is logical for one person won't be logical for another. The family I lived with in Poland did this cleanse where they stuck something up their butt and literally flushed out their system. I was slightly horrified, haha. She had all of these articles about how it was healthy, but I couldn't jump on the bandwagon. In a way, all of science will always have a bit of subjectivity to it. She also did a cleanse where you don't eat for 5 days and then you only eat soup for the next 5 days and this was a very popular detox method - even my doctor there recommended it, haha.

Did you happen to look at the sources of those articles or the credentials of the people who conducted whatever studies they cited?

Because I guarantee there is no REAL science that supports that practice. It's quite dangerous, actually.

And the fact you think her articles were not junk science and just "a different opinion from another country" is why I said you don't understand the scientific community.

"Peer-reviewed" generally means not just peers from whatever country the study was conducted in. Scientists all over the world collaborate with each other.

tapirfrog

I had a friend in real life who had breast cancer and a good prognosis, who decided to treat it "naturally," until it didn't go away and it was too late to treat it.

How horrible. I'm so very sorry.

jypsyjulia

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

That is why you read all the material given and then make logical choices based on your final evaluations of the studies.

Totally agree! The only issue is that what is logical for one person won't be logical for another. The family I lived with in Poland did this cleanse where they stuck something up their butt and literally flushed out their system. I was slightly horrified, haha. She had all of these articles about how it was healthy, but I couldn't jump on the bandwagon. In a way, all of science will always have a bit of subjectivity to it. She also did a cleanse where you don't eat for 5 days and then you only eat soup for the next 5 days and this was a very popular detox method - even my doctor there recommended it, haha.

Did you happen to look at the sources of those articles or the credentials of the people who conducted whatever studies they cited?

Because I guarantee there is no REAL science that supports that practice. It's quite dangerous, actually.

And the fact you think her articles were not junk science and just "a different opinion from another country" is why I said you don't understand the scientific community.

"Peer-reviewed" generally means not just peers from whatever country the study was conducted in. Scientists all over the world collaborate with each other.

I actually did not check the sources. I just knew that I definitely didn't want to stick anything up my butt and I didn't want to starve myself for five days, either.

Thanks for explaining what you meant, btw.

What I meant by the differing opinions was about doctors. I should have said doctors instead of scientists, in hindsight. In Poland, heaps of them kept recommending me to detox because I was feeling ill quite frequently. Here, I don't think any doctor would recommend a detox. Not any that I've ever had.

Cindyinpg

everyone has their own way of weight loss, and you may not agree, and no they may not be presenting true facts but they aren't going to quit posting about what they feel is right, neither are you so, why not be an adult agree to disagree or just not read their posts!! Problem solved

Because sometimes what is being presented is often dangerous. Going back to my earlier point, there are other users who do not participate in the forums, reading about these quick fixes some posters come up with. If no other opinions are presented and the OP is supported in their scheme, those readers will assume it is a GOOD idea, when it isn't.

sullus

"There exists in society a very special class of persons that I have always referred to as the Believers. These are folks who have chosen to accept a certain religion, philosophy, theory, idea or notion and cling to that belief regardless of any evidence that might, for anyone else, bring it into doubt. They are the ones who encourage and support the fanatics and the frauds of any given age. No amount of evidence, no matter how strong, will bring them any enlightenment. They are the sheep who beg to be fleeced and butchered, and who will battle fiercely to preserve their right to be victimized"

-James Randi

BrainyBurro

i hate to have to explain the point of the OP, especially for those who haven't bothered to read it, but here goes...

this site is full of people with derpy ideas who post about them in the forums. many of these derpy ideas bring out a legion of members who post against them. some may do it to be snarky, but most are doing it because bad information left uncorrected can lead many people astray.

inevitably, this leads to the people posting these derpy ideas to complain that this site is not supportive simply because they have not been met with universal support for their ideas. but why do they think they deserve support for those ideas and that the people arguing against them don't? if this site was nothing but people providing uncritical support for EVERYTHING that is posted, then how valuable would any of that be?

if you tell me that a juice cleanse cures cancer, i'm going to say "no it doesn't". if you then complain that i'm not supporting you, then i should have the right to direct the same criticism back at you, shouldn't i? that's the point of this thread. if i disagree with you (and it's usually your argument, not you as a person), then you should understand that's an inherent hazard of discussions online and in real life, you can't then demand that my opinion by squashed on the grounds that "i'm not being supportive". because i'll turn around and use that exact same argument on you.

and that's why people complaining about not getting support just because they are not being agreed with are misunderstanding what support means.

Well, that was a masterclass in how to win friends and influence people. Pffft, those people with their derpy ideas. How silly they are and lacking in critical thinking abilities. If only they could be like the great and the good of MFP.

Essentially, as far as I can see, your OP was one big whine about people not taking your advice.

Well, I am off for a ride.

Take care.

except it wasn't... i have proffered no such advice in a long time.

i have not recently been in any discussions involving cleanses or detoxes, nor have i gotten into any heated exchanges or disagreements with people supporting those practices. i generally don't care what those people do anymore. for every 1 you help, 100 more you can't help sign up the same day. it's a numbers game, and the Dr. Oz watchers outnumber the rest of us.

juliemouse83

And off it goes...anyone that tries to help the OP and disagrees is totes a bully, and mean...

If you know that going in, and do it anyway, it is a kind of bullying.

I don't follow you. If someone replies to an OP's post with facts that what they are doing is unhealthy, and they aren't rude, or hateful about it, then because they are saying something the OP doesn't want to hear, then they get the bully/meanie card thrown at them by the OP and his or her supporters.

I'm not saying that there isn't a bully out here (it's the Interwebz - there're gonna be bullies), but not every single person that is trying to offer up legit and useful information is trying to throw their weight around and be hateful to someone that wants to try something that may not be so good for them.

I've had some pretty good advice delivered to me and not covered in sparkles and rainbows. It was blunt, but danged if it didn't get my attention (and OMG, it even worked)...and it didn't feel good all the time, but I wouldn't say the poster was rude or mean or a bully...It just wasn't sugar coated.

rduhlir

You can say that they're not grounded in science, but science differs from country to country.

:huh:

It really does. Or rather, I should say that the viewpoint of scientists differ from country to country? Either way, there's heaps of contradictory evidence in ... almost everything.

That is why you read all the material given and then make logical choices based on your final evaluations of the studies.

Totally agree! The only issue is that what is logical for one person won't be logical for another. The family I lived with in Poland did this cleanse where they stuck something up their butt and literally flushed out their system. I was slightly horrified, haha. She had all of these articles about how it was healthy, but I couldn't jump on the bandwagon. In a way, all of science will always have a bit of subjectivity to it. She also did a cleanse where you don't eat for 5 days and then you only eat soup for the next 5 days and this was a very popular detox method - even my doctor there recommended it, haha.

Your doctor recommended it? What about the doctor in the next town over? Or the next country over? Where were those studies conducted and in what manners? Were they case studies? Or were they just some crazy idea that a college student had that a professor decided to go with, and then all of a sudden said it will work...and so people follow because a "scientist" said it was good? Did you research any studies that would have disproven the claims or provided information on harmful effects that the doctor could have convinently left out?