New Rule Regarding COVID And Misinformation

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | Announcements | New Rule Regarding COVID And Misinformation

Viewing 9 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #451158
      So Far From Heaven
      Keymaster
      • Total Posts: 9,694

      There have been postings lately stating misinformation about unapproved treatments for the mitigation and/or treatment of COVID-19. JackPine Radicals doesn’t want to have these kinds of posts anywhere on the site, including in Creative Speculation. These posts create vitriol on the boards. The admins have decided to enact a new rule regarding all things COVID. Posts containing misleading advice/statements for the mitigation or treatment of COVID will be deleted and the Poster will receive a warning. Here is the new rule:

      No posting misinformation regarding vaccination for and/or the treatment of COVID-19. Post will be removed and the poster warned. Posters that receive two warnings are subject to a two week suspension and posters that then break this rule again after suspension are subject to being banned from JPR.

    • #451163
      Pam2
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 9,393

      Can you define “misinformation”? A lot of us are searching for truth on this topic and don’t trust the “official” sources. Why is that wrong?

       

      • #451170
        NV Wino
        Moderator
        • Total Posts: 8,485

        But we are referring to OBVIOUS misinformation. Our posters are smart. If there is a question about it, look for evidence one way or the other. Question it. Ask other posters if they are familiar with it. Think before you post.

        “As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore.” Barbara Lee
        “Politicians and pro athletes: The only people who still get paid when they lose.” William Rivers Pitt

        • #451174
          Pam2
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 9,393

          @nvwino

          “Misinformation” is loaded word. The mainstream media calls anything they don’t like “misinformation”. (Such as Hunter Biden’s laptop etc.)

          I’ve posted stories about people’s personal experiences with the vaccine that you won’t see on mainstream media. Will that be called “misinformation”?

           

           

          • #451178
            So Far From Heaven
            Keymaster
            • Total Posts: 9,694

            that is truly misleading. This designation isn’t just ours, it is being used in a large number of media outlets such as reddit.

            We are only concerned with posts that use unconfirmed information that may be harmful. One clear indication of whether or not something is reliable is source. A twitter from some unidentified source spouting something is NOT going to fly here. One of the best ways to see what misinformation is in this context is the use of hydroxychloroquine.

            Not only has it been proven a waste of time, it kills in certain circumstances making the fake cure worse than the virus.

          • #451181
            NV Wino
            Moderator
            • Total Posts: 8,485

            We have a smart bunch here. It shouldn’t be hard.

            Anecdotal stories are just that. We all have them.

            “As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore.” Barbara Lee
            “Politicians and pro athletes: The only people who still get paid when they lose.” William Rivers Pitt

      • #451225
        kelly
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 390

        Fauci?

        things are about to get pretzelized pretty quick.

        hard job drawing the line there.

        when censorship is the solution, there is no problem.

    • #451165
      Jim Lane
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 909

      @sffh

      I have a link to a short video clip in which RWNJ pastor Rick Wiles advances a ludicrous conspiracy theory about the vaccines. Some people on JPR would get a chuckle out of it, and no one on JPR would be misled. Is that OK to post?

      Overall, I approve of the new rule.  Thanks for implementing it.

    • #451186
      HassleCat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 7,913

      I consider some of the stuff to be the work of far-out crackpots and pathetic hucksters peddling snake oil elixers, but others think it’s speaking truth to power. I can understand that. We get bombarded with unreliable information from Big Pharma, big gummit, big business, big everything. This makes people think anything disagreeing with the party line must be The Truth. Yes, there is a huge logical fallacy here, and it’s foolish to believe one group of hucksters over another group of hucksters. It also causes people to make extreme accusations about minor points, as in the latest scourging of Fauci for “lying” about funding certain types of virus research. Yes, people are way, way, WAY too emotionally invested in one side or another, and that causes some strange behavior, but it will pass. My preference would be to let it go and hope it levels off.

      • #451189
        So Far From Heaven
        Keymaster
        • Total Posts: 9,694

        Unfortunately, it is going the opposite way.

        Let me ask you something. I assume that Australia and Canada probably don’t have ANY of the hucksters problem you state. They don’t have the big pharma or big anything anywhere close to the scale of ours. Yet they have the same procedures for mitigation and treatment that we do. In fact, Australia has been in virtual lockdown including enforced curfews.

        How come their rates of death are way the fuck less than ours? It ain’t something outside the normal way of doing business here drug wise or procedure wise. Maybe they trust the experts. Eventually they get it right.

    • #451190
      MistaP
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,082

      there’s way more heat in the Baldwin thread of either MAGATS SABOTAGED THE GUN AND HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS or HOLLYWEIRD ELITES BLAME THE PERSON ACTUALLY IN CHARGE OF THE GUN
      :shrug:

      • #451192
        So Far From Heaven
        Keymaster
        • Total Posts: 9,694

        Regardless, I live less than 30 miles from the scene of the shooting.

        • #451207
          MistaP
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 3,082

          the Rust thread https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/heres-some-more-info-on-the-rust-film-shooting/

          I only cited it to contrast the issue’s importance to things like Rust: has the misinfo had any actual impact on JPR that’d require such a preannounced informational intervention? has there been some massive influx of “fuck the vaccine I’m just gonna treat it post facto” posters that haven’t had this belief before? why not target ivermectin, which has been much more controverted

          we still have posts based on the *ahem* idiosyncrasies of the Saker or Paul Street, and nobody’s deemed it important enough to say any talk of the Rothschild conspiracy theory or “Trumpenleft” will get the kibosh

          “There have been postings lately stating misinformation”–can we have links?

          does any of the admins involved in this have experience in virology, epidemiology, history of medicine, etc.?

    • #451194
      MackMarkstein
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 363

      Generally it is hard to doubt we are in times of increased censorship in the mass media and YouTube and other social media platforms.

      There is (I think I’m agreeing with the post before mine) a lot of intentional muddying of information regarding what works and what doesn’t on this disease and pandemic.  I mean top-down confusion tactics by the government establishment and corporations.

      Trying to navigate through that, I agree requires some responsibility to provide a source that seems qualified…though that can be a somewhat subjective thing.

      Example of what 2021 is like:  Day in the life of a Covid digger:   I consider Dr. Robert Malone to not be a crackpot…though I don’t automatically accept everything he says or his fans post.  If you Google him the first result may be (for you, as it is for me) an Atlantic article headline proclaiming that he’s a spreader of misinformation;  he doesn’t even (I guess) play a real doctor on TV.   *That* is remarkable; We are in remarkable times, when our search engine that people used to trust (in olden times) dis-introduces people:  says,  ok here’s some Dr. Robert Malone but it’s liable to be false.  Google could change its name to Slander.

      Back to the subject line:  For those who don’t believe in God,   that’s just an expression.  If there is no God then I’m thinking *nobody* has a sufficient knowledge about this disease and epidemic yet

       

    • #451234
      lownslow
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 965

      This is some childish, ill concieved bull hockey. The science on hydro or ivrm is not settled not matter what some here think. So because sffh is misinformed, everyone else has to be? The msm lies constantly, do we not all agree? So basicaly we can only post pro vax, anti early therapeudics info. Ive seen so many great thinkers run off this board. I guess next will be the jury system. Its silly, emotion driven shit like this which will keep jpr tiny and irrelevant

       

       

    • #451235
      lownslow
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 965
    • #451248
      Scott Crowder
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 644

      With iownslow.  So this is a day.

      You are crossing that repugnant line from respecting the opinions of others to thinking only you know and can modrate “The Truth”.

      That is the arrogance that leads to censorship and totalitarianism.

      Back off.

    • #451280
      jbnw
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 6,531

      As I’ve said previously, I’m against propaganda, either for or against something. I trust a Harvard publication more than I trust Fred’s Blog, unless there are good sources I can check.

      I’ve been caught out before, and corrected myself, or had it pointed out.

      Why do you think I quote from the White House web site? It’s because we have been so badly divided over the last few years by professional, and unprofessional (in every sense of the word) propagandists and others, including here, will accept very few sources as reliable.

      I think we can post anything here, as long as it’s well supported. Look at the current ivermectin scandal thread – I wasn’t banned for saying it was anti-ivermectin propaganda, but certainly needed to support my viewpoint.

      • #451287
        So Far From Heaven
        Keymaster
        • Total Posts: 9,694

        Ivermectin is a truly life saving wonder drug.

        Period. Provable. In fact, it has been proven time and again.

        When used as directed for the thing it’s designed for.

        And that AIN’T treatment of COVID.

        When anyone touts the use of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID, that misinformation may cost lives. And is now off limits to be done on JPR.

        • #451298
          MackMarkstein
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 363

          Yes, that means the USA, a country that often I’d wish to deny I’ve heard of.

          The Attorney General of Nebraska has come out with a document forbidding the banning of IVM prescriptions by doctors for Covid, if those individual doctors want to prescribe it for their individual patients.

          That Attorney General did some research and came to his conclusions about whether it is rubbish.  Apparently that was not his conclusion.  He had some medically-fluent helpers.

          I will post backup details this evening if there are not severe thunderstorms here (predicted), and will make sure I’m not wrong about the way I remember it.  Am not on the usual computer I post from, at the moment.

           

          • #451320
            So Far From Heaven
            Keymaster
            • Total Posts: 9,694

            It’s utter rightwing nutjob bullshit, but if it’s in the news, then go for it.

            If you post this as an endorsement of using Ivermectin as an agent to either prevent or cure COVID, then it’d probably be removed and you would be warned.

            Why?

            Because that has been proven wrong. In study after study after study. I don’t give a rats ass what this rightwing nutjob claims.

            • #451331
              MackMarkstein
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 363

              I’ll post this in the Covid “room” too if I can verify I know how to do that!

              This is a document from the Attorney General of Nebraska and one impression I have is that he doesn’t want his office to look like fools.  So it seems to me heavily, heavily documented.   And they thought before they wrote or documented.   It discusses studies, refutations of those studies, historically lab study A followed by lab study B.

              Overall I’d deem it the work of somebody careful and not a madman plus his staff.  But I’m sure not all the studies cited contain 100% irrefutable scholarly methods and data collection.

              IVM mini-encyclopedia:  In particular, sections 3A and 3B.  Seems many studies support IVM has measurable good effects against Covid19.  And several studies found it doesn’t.  So, some in JPR will “pays their money and takes their choice.”  I try to look it it all objectively.

              https://ago.nebraska.gov/sites/ago.nebraska.gov/files/docs/opinions/21-017_0.pdf

               

              • #451341
                So Far From Heaven
                Keymaster
                • Total Posts: 9,694

                That’s all it is. one right wing persons opinion. The entire thing revolves around the legal status of doctors prescribing medications for COVID that are not intended for that use, and there are only two of them. The normal bullshit two. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine of course.

                Two huge problems with using this as an endorsement for their use as a treatment for COVID.

                All papers are cherry picked for those supporting the ruling only. Not included are any of the hundreds that show the opposite. Those papers use huge stats and control populations for the most part so they probably have better information.

                That the prescription and their use will not be considered a crime by his office if the drug is prescribed as indicated by the manufacturer. And that means that the drugs should, in theory, not kill the patient even if they aren’t helping them. The manufacturer of Ivermectin does NOT endorse its use for COVID. But if prescribed in the suggested quantities, it shouldn’t kill the patient so the AG doesn’t have to sweat the blowback for his opinion. He is really taking a big chance on the hydro though, That shit kills if things go south with the patient.

                This legal opinion is just that, a legal opinion and has zero to do with anything regarding the efficacy of either drug to combat COVID. It is misleading in that the opinion has excluded all contrary evidence. In fact it isn’t just contrary, it’s OVERWHELMINGLY large and contrary evidence.

                If the red wing dufus head shyster of Nebraska wants to publicize his opinion, that’s his prerogative. To use his opinion as some sort of endorsement of their use, it’s misleading at best. And could be deadly at worst. Hydro is seriously dangerous shit if used improperly.

        • #451308
          HassleCat
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 7,913

          Not sure what you mean by “tout.” I have seen a few posts that come pretty close to saying, “We should abandon the vaccines and all start chugging Ivermectin.” But, however, comma, regardless, most posters know better than to cross that line because (1) it will get them in trouble and (2) they expose themselves as victims of fringe propaganda. The closest they come is to paste links to studies, findings, observations and opinions by “world renowned scientists,” some of whom are well meaning and others of whom are obvious crackpots or hucksters. I hope the moderators are not going to remove all those links, even when somebody posts 15 of them and most are off topic. Obviously, there has to be a limit. If somebody pastes 100 social media links to miscellaneous crap just because they see something they don’t like, and that becomes a habit, action has to be taken. Flooding an thread with spurious responses is a form of censorship, and the perpetrator has no cause to cry “censorship!”

          • #451314
            So Far From Heaven
            Keymaster
            • Total Posts: 9,694

            Here is a problem.

            Member-A posts a link to something that is clearly misinformation regarding the mitigation and/or treatment of COVID, BUT NOTHING ELSE. Nutjob twitter posts come to mind.

            No context.

            No comments.

            Nothing. Just the fucking link.

            That post is history under this rule. And the member gets his/her first warning. Without our understanding of what the poster is doing other than propagating nonsense that may be harmful to others we have to assume that the poster endorses that nonsense.

            We have nothing else to work with because of how they posted it. But it doesn’t end there.

            Member-B sees the posting. Member-B gets riled up because they see it as endorsing something that may be harmful or deadly or whatever and they give Member-A a whackjob. Great, now we have two issues going down on the boards. Before you know it members are throwing shit all over the place and at each other. It has already happened here in the topic.

            This rule is to prevent two things directly. Posting misinformation that is detrimental to the mitigation and treatment of COVID directly and to prevent shitpost blowups because of it.

            As noted, there hasn’t been much problem with this BUT the admins know that sooner or later it’s bound to happen. So the new rule.

            Notice that I have a qualifier in this Member-A posting. They may not take the linked stuff seriously themselves, but they don’t state such and we have to assume SOMETHING and it’ll be endorsement of the linked material.

             

        • #451424
          lownslow
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 965
          • #451441
            So Far From Heaven
            Keymaster
            • Total Posts: 9,694

            However, most of these studies had incomplete information and significant methodological limitations, which make it difficult to exclude common causes of bias. 

            So, they don’t exclude it’s use, but they certainly don’t endorse its use. For COVID that is. They don’t even endorse any real further study as far as I read.

            Aspirin might help. Of course taken inappropriately it can lead to bleed out….

            • #451447
              lownslow
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 965

              Yes, not trying to stir things up, but you seems to suggest the science is settled. I tried to refute that with a source you might respect. Peace to you, oh benevolent one

              • #451458
                So Far From Heaven
                Keymaster
                • Total Posts: 9,694

                ever.

                However, in this particular ‘un-settled’ science lies the fact that there is no clear evidence that it will actually be beneficial for COVID infection. So, one has to be careful with the claims that Iver is a way to cure the virus. It isn’t, at least as far as the real studies show.

                I have no problem with discussing the science of Iver. As long as it’s in the context of something being studied, not as something that is giving out the misinformation that it is any way close to be approved for the use in treatment of COVID which could then give some the impression that they can just take the shit and not have to worry about it.

                That isn’t true and it can certainly be devastating. JPR isn’t going to allow that to be part of our boards.

                • #451501
                  HassleCat
                  Participant
                  • Total Posts: 7,913

                  We see the problem writ small here on these discussion boards, but it’s on national display when Senator Ron Johnson holds one of his Olde Tyme Medicine Show hearings and allows crackpots to tell the public that we could 100 percent prevent covid if we gave everybody a big honking dose of Ivermectin. If you believe fervently enough that everything orthodox medicine says and does is always wrong, you could set yourself up to believe that anyone who proposes anything different is always right.

    • #451286
      So Far From Heaven
      Keymaster
      • Total Posts: 9,694

      that’s all you have?

      I’m going to give you a VERY short time to make your post NOT in violation of our rules.

      Now, I’m going to let you figure out just what rule(s) you broke in writing it and posting it because you so clearly are vastly more intelligent than I am.

      And yes, the admins have the right to set rules for discourse on the site.

    • #451300
      Mr. Mickeys Mom
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 6,606

      Do you think you’re better qualified and you should use your (obviously superior) critical thinking skills FOR us?

      I may not personally think anyone, including sffh is better qualified than I am in critical thinking, including whether there is or isn’t empirical evidence on alternative covid-19 treatments, but that’s not the point. The point is, if may not be a CT contest here, but it sure the hell is sffh’s discussion board. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to weigh in on the reported post now.

      Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

    • #451307
      HassleCat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 7,913

      There are many intelligent people here. I bet the average IQ is 120 or so. As we well know, even the most geniusy of geniuses can embrace weird ideas and become so invested in those ideas that they get a little crazy in their efforts to ignore or accept evidence that falls on one side or another. I can see some of that going on here. I do a little of it myself, although I think I have good reasons for doing so. I think. So far, I have not seen any posts that propose the vaccine infects your genitals with alien lizard DNA, but we have edged close to that realm. Certainly, some of the information comes from sources that have proposed such things, such s the RFK Jr. crowd. I think that’s OK, since the vaccines and their accompanying strategy are products of a drug industry and government that spin the hell out of everything. I am not aware of everything that gets posted here, but I have not seen anyone counselling others to avoid the vaccine and drink hydroxychloriquine or Ivermectin. Close. Very close. And no name calling, which is a pleasant surprise because some people are getting kinda weird. That table that purported to show critical thinking vs. blind obedience to authority was probably over the line, but even that’s OK in my book because we should be able to laugh it off. To get back to my point, it’s not a shock to see some crazy shit posted by smart people. I trust the moderators will not abuse their power and remove content simply because they disagree with it. My experience so far on this site justifies my trust.

Viewing 9 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.