Rude and Unsupportive Posts.

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?

rml_16

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.

There are plenty of doctors in the US who would recommend something like this. And if one recommended it to me, I'd find a new doctor.

I had a gyno once who pushed herbal supplements (and sold them). He was a terrible doctor. I pretty only saw his NPs, who were very good.

You can find a study to back up ANYTHING. It's a matter of whether it's a reliable study that's the problem.

Look at what happened with the "doctor" who linked autism so vaccines and all the people who still believe it. It isn't a scientfically sound study, but millions of mothers aren't vaccinating their children because of it.

_TastySnoBalls_

Survival of the fittest I say ... Let them juice/cleanse

lithezebra

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.

Thank you. She was a fantastically gifted woman, had great medical insurance from her work, and had every reason to live. Her family, friends, and her husband wanted her to get conventional treatment, and pursue any alternative treatments that she wanted.

I think that pointing out health frauds IS being supportive of people's health.

ndj1979

in my experience, the detox threads usually get annihilated by most MFP members - myself included - so not sure where you are going with this one..

but I am in...just for the sake of being in..

BrainyBurro

Survival of the fittest I say ... Let them juice/cleanse

i'm sympathetic to that mindset.

this thread isn't really about those practices anyway. i simply used them to illustrate a point. some people who have posted missed that point completely. *shrugs*

you could replace "cleanse" and "detox" in the OP with any of a dozen other quack diet fads and the OP would still work for illustrating my point.

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.

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.

Exactly. When I initially joined this site, BrainyBurro was the first person to add me as a friend and offer any advice and support I needed in a very sincere manner, and he continues to do so. I have never sensed judgment or any type of bossy tone from him.

Achrya

Troll post.

it most certainly is not and your response is both inappropriate and inaccurate.

More trolling.

I feel like the word troll is starting to lose meaning duebto misuse, much like the words 'toxic' 'posion' and 'healthy'.

TX_Rhon

Dr. Oz Watchers.........:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

One thing I have learned. If you do not want someone's honest opinion - don't ask. I am grateful for my MFP friends who have helped me along this journey and have called me out when I needed it. It must suck to be offended by everything!!

Some_Watery_Tart

this is a serious thread BTW.

The boy who cried wolf.

^^This. This is trolling.

No.

It's called a difference of opinion.

No.

It's called insinuation. Insinuation that the OP is lying (re: moral of the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"). Insinuating that a person is lying is considered offensive in many cultures, including that of OP. So, again, I'll say: trolling. Enjoy your project. :flowerforyou:

MireyGal76

Troll post.

it most certainly is not and your response is both inappropriate and inaccurate.

More trolling.

I feel like the word troll is starting to lose meaning duebto misuse, much like the words 'toxic' 'posion' and 'healthy'.

don't forget the word "bully"!