Comments by "Jason Dashney" (@jasondashney) on "Academia is BROKEN! - Stanford President Scandal Explained" video.
-
5
-
4
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dubbyx8490 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmJsCaQTXiE
This is the video, and below was my novel length comment that kept getting longer each time he drove me nuts:
I honestly put people that don't believe in chiropractic care in the same realm as flat earthers. You just said chiropractors are based on superstition?! This phenomenon is so crazy to me. For certain conditions, chiropractic care absolutely completely works and has a verifiable A to B that absolutely can't be ignored, yet somehow is. People who don't believe in chiropractors suffer from all the things the doctor here is talking about. They know of people who chiropractic care didn't help and they use that to base their claims that the entire practice is nonsense. That's as pseudoscience as it gets. That's like saying peanuts aren't healthy because some people are allergic to them. I really really want somebody like this guy to explain to me in great detail why he doesn't believe in it, and more importantly, how to get the same level of back improvement via any other method. He goes on about how it's somebody giving you tender care. That is someone who is very clearly never been to a chiropractor. It's quite jarring and uncomfortable but oh boy does it help if you have the right condition. As someone who has used it over the last 25 years to great effect, it blows my mind. It's so weird. It's like being under an umbrella in the rain and having somebody tell you that the umbrella isn't doing anything, that the rain is still hitting you. It's literally one of the strangest things in the world to me. I only need to visit a chiropractor if I don't treat my body well for an extended period of time. I can stiffen up to the point of pain, then I go to the chiropractor and they can immediately tell exactly where in my back is suffering, and then crack it and then I have much more range of motion and it feels more ergonomically proper, and then I spend the next few weeks making sure I maintain that range of motion. Can somebody please explain to me how an unbelievably direct A to B doesn't exist. I don't go for the feely-feels and I certainly don't go to help my wallet. I go because there's an extraordinarily logical explanation to why the things that were bothering me or helped greatly by having my range of motion entry so the body can function the way it's supposed to. And again, anyone wanting to refute this has to explain to me how to achieve the same results another way. It's like somebody telling you that exercise has zero effect on sleep. And you point out that there are tons of studies that show that vigorous exercise greatly improves sleep outcomes but the person says that's all placebo effect. Prove to me that it was actually exercise that caused it. Then you point to neurochemical things that are demonstrable. Then they say that's all placebo and the placebo effect is also demonstrable. It's an endless cycle. This is exactly how it is with chiropractic care. Also, I often hear people say that once you start it you have to be on it forever and I don't know about anybody else, but it's certainly not true for me. I can go many months or years between visits if I take care of myself. It doesn't screw me up in a way that makes me dependent on it. Quite the opposite in fact. Every single thing I've heard to debunk chiropractic care has been completely wrong. And also, I've never had any chiropractor (I moved a lot so I've had many) tell me it does anything other than it allows my back to move a little more correctly. That's it. I've never heard any other claims made yet everyone debunking it makes wild claims.
Oh man, this just gets worse and worse. He lumps homeopathy in with chiropractic care and then says people "often" pay with their lives. This is completely insane. It's also very telling that he takes something that is extremely replicable and easily verifiable and lumps it in with some thing that is the polar opposite, trying to use the unverifiable parts of homeopathist to insinuate that chiropractic care is the same when it couldn't be farther from the truth, and there are millions of people that can attest to its effectiveness. Also, chiropractors don't "call themselves" doctors, they literally are doctors. They have a doctorate from a medical institution. What what's on display here is so smugly arrogant and crazy it's beyond belief. He worships at the altar of "science" but only the science he likes, despite the fact that people who worship that alter often forget about the reproducibility crisis where a tremendous amount of commonly accepted, peer reviewed studies are unable to be reproduced. It's an absolute epidemic, and of course medical science changes constantly so it's not like we have the answers all figured out so the arrogance on display here is stunning and ironic.
Okay this just gets worse and worse. Bret (and you mispronounced his last name) Weinstein goes into great detail when it comes to the studies of ivermectin, digging down into literature and showing that the trials were set up very specifically to prove the hypothesis, not disprove it. That is the exact antithesis of real science. He doesn't just jump on the bandwagon for ivermectin and refuse to entertain any alternative points of view, he painstakingly breaks down exactly why he makes his claims. You can disagree with him and that's fine, but to try and characterize him as just being a cheerleader for some sort of ideology shows that you are part of the medical establishment ideology. If you are going to attack him, at least do it in a way that's robust as opposed to "yeah he has bias because I said so". Until you attack his actual claims, other than the conclusions, you can't say squat. Attack his reasoning, not his conclusions. The reason you can't do that is because if you disagree with someone's conclusion on the outside, then you can always attack them for that. That's intellectually lazy and dishonest. I've been a subscriber for quite a while now and I don't always agree with you but I usually find you pretty decent, but on this video you go absolutely off the rails in so many different directions that I'm forced to unsubscribe. I wouldn't unsubscribe just based on the chiropractor thing, but you put together a whole string of things in here that absolutely can't be overlooked.
Oh boy, now he's going after keto. It's not the same to your body as calorie restriction. It does burn more fat. Yes you lose weight due to caloric restriction, but a higher percentage of the weight that you lose is fat as opposed to lean muscle. That's an extraordinarily important part of it that he ignores completely. Plus, intermittent fasting also helps you recover from injury faster and all of that because your body can use more of its resources towards that instead of constantly diverting them to the digestive process.
Now he's going after Vitamin D, again missing part of the picture. And he ends it by mocking people who take vitamin D supplements but he ignores very big reason people do: energy. It's very effective at helping people's energy levels who live in Northern latitudes in the winter when they experience almost no direct sunshine contact. It's very effective at this. You can't go after everyone who likes vitamin D but then ignore a large percentage of them who take it for a different reason than you are mocking. Also, I noticed you made fun of Joe Rogan for saying Vitamin D is good for immune system function, but offered no explanation. He said immune system and you didn't debunk that and instead talked about bones and then a bunch of other things other than immune system functions. If he's wrong and it doesn't help with immune system function then say why, but be specific or you're just insulting someone without backing it up. Then you say supplements don't work. Vitamin supplements don't work? None of it is bioavailable? That's a pretty bold claim (and a nonsense one at that). It's not as good as the sun, but the sun isn't always available, sir.
For the record, I'm not on any team. I couldn't give a rats ass who says what. If Adolf Hitler said something that was logical and sound, I wouldn't attack it just because he was Hitler. All I care about is accuracy (and evidence). There is absolutely nobody on earth I agree with 100% of the time, but all I ask is that when somebody is attacked for any reason, that you directly refute the claim. Directly, and with evidence.
Lastly, I notice that not once in a video almost an hour long did you mention big pharma and legislators. You sorta, briefly, kinda sorta touched on it with a drug that turned out to not be that effective but that's as close as you came. You only "followed the money" when it came to influencers. Funny that. If that's not the biggest red flag of all then I don't know what to say. The last 3 years have been incredible at showing us just how wrong the authorities (medical, corporate and political) can be, over and over, yet you didn't talk about that factor even once. I guess that's all I needed to know. You fall into the "my team good, other teams bad" approach. Too bad your video didn't have that section.
1