>>11197580>listening to the experts and not being a contrarian pseud is generally a good ideaI think at this point we're pretty much in agreement. In general, I think its usually good if were all on the same page, and I wont get into the "autistic" details, but there are, incidentally, several game theoretic reasons why this might be the case when were talking about the scientific method.
My main concern isn't even with "maverick" or "renegade" scientists who prove the "status quo" was wrong all along, or any pop-culture notions like that. I'm mainlu just thinking about people new to the topic, stuff like that. For instance, I eat a fuckton of fish and I don't reallu know much about the science of physiology or nutrition. I had heard some shit from laymen, etc. anout mercury in fish and vaccines, so I looked onto the issue. Admittedly, I never got super deep into the academic literature or anything like that, but I dod read enough to get an answer. It turns out trace mercury is basically completely safe and your body will actually expel it over the course of a few weeks. I can't rember the exact numbers, but basically you'd have to eat a few dozen milligrams of pure mercury everday for it to have a noyiceable affect. And that could only occur if you allowed it to accumulated, so unless your literally getting shots litteraly everyday or injecting visible quantities of pure mercury, it wont really cause harm. From my perspective, that means I can eat fish on a regular basis without concern. Interestingly the person who pointed me in the right direction was a biology professor I had a few years ago. Of course most people aren't willing or capable of investigating these topics themselves, and wouldn't even know how to differentiate between a reliable academic source and literal tabloids, but there are almost always exceptions.
