Science is only political because scientists have to continuously convince politicians reality exists.
It's frustrating that something like climate change is even a political discussion at all. Don't Look Up captured that frustration really well.
Convincing people your interpretation of reality exists is literally all that politics is.
Unfortunately, despite being correct, science is also an interpretation of reality.
Convincing people your interpretation of reality exists is literally all that politics is.
What? No. No, no, you naive fool... many politicians, if not most, don't believe most of what they're selling, and don't give a flying fuck about it.
They'll sell whatever line the party they're working for wants them to sell, and they'd just as happily sell the opposition party's line if it paid better and they could switch without being called a turncoat.
Also, it's not about convincing people about specific beliefs; most people are mostly already convinced of their worldviews and if they change them it won't be because of some politician. It's about convincing them, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the politician shares those beliefs, and will impose them on people who don't if they vote for them.
despite being correct, science is also an interpretation of reality.
Again, no. Science (except for mathematics, but that's it's own thing) doesn't and shouldn't ever claim to be correct.
It's the most accurate approximation we have so far of how nature works, but it's constantly trying to achieve better approximations, and will happily throw away the old ones when it finds a better one.
It also should always make very clear that it's an approximation or a description, not an interpretation. Science should always be objective, never subjective, and interpretations are by definition subjective.
" it is unequivocal that exposure to glyphosate produces important alterations in the structure and function of the nervous system of humans, rodents, fish, and invertebrates."
Glyphosate has also been linked to gluten intolerance: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3945755/
Maybe at some point, all the “gluten free” products will switch to “glyphosate free”. Until then, I’ve been buying imported flour from Italy, where its use is significantly more regulated than here in the US, although not entirely banned.
Sometimes I have this weird theory that RFK Jr is really like a Dr. Zoidberg type alien in a skin suit. He just kind of guesses at how human anatomy works because he isn't human himself and isn't professional enough to get a real education on the subject.
"I took the liberty of fertilizing your caviar"
-- RFK jr
At least Zoidberg means well, RFK Jr. has more in common with the brain slugs or the gas station egg salad sandwiches
If it's his brain worms speaking, that would explain a lot.
It’s hard to say what’s more farfetched, that he is a Zoidbergian alien, or that The Kennedys were just raised that far from any level of anything resembling actual human reality?
doesn't harm organic tissue
Which is totally why Bayer has settled their lawsuit for several billions of dollars over claims that it causes lymphoma.
Edit: also, plants are organic tissue.
Also, the stomach's microbiome isn't plants...
Bacteria is not in the kingdom plantae.
Your stomach micro biome is plants.
That’s interesting. I wonder where the sunlight gets in to my stomach for all those plants to photosynthesize.
Funny that in Spanish it's called "flora intestinal", not "fauna intestinal". Always though that it's a but of a misnomer.
Intestinal flora is a common phrase in English, too. Or "gut flora". It's one of those old 19th century scientific phrases which has stuck around.
Like this, err, gentleman (who apparently wants to drag us back to that past) we used to believe gut bacteria to be plant-based. Science caught up, but the term has had sticking power. It seems to be a favorite of marketers of probiotic supplements.
"Microbiota" or just the straightforward "gut bacteria" would be more accurate and modern. But of course, everyone except for this guy already knows that.
Awfully big words, for someone who doesn't believe in germ theory.
holup, what? This guy is working on Victorian era medical knowledge? Is his idol Robert Liston??
Theodoric of York.
You know, medicine is not an exact science, but we are learning all the time. Why, just fifty years ago, they thought a disease like your daughter’s was caused by demonic possession or witchcraft. But nowadays we know that Isabelle is suffering from an imbalance of bodily humors, perhaps caused by a toad or a small dwarf living in her stomach.
Your stomach microbiome is plants
Which is why I spend a solid 3 hours a day facing the sun with my mouth held wide open. Gotta let my tummy plants photosynthesize somehow.
You say that as a joke but I'm pretty sure this clown is also one of the quacks who regularly talked about the "health benefits" of butthole tanning.
What I think he's trying to say is that Glyphosate affects the shikimate pathway, which is a biological pathway in plants. This doesn't exist in human cells, but it does exist in our gut microbiota.
We also know now that Glyphosate is a glycine analogue and can displace glycine anywhere in protein synthesis, with unknown effects. It's also likely an endocrine disrupter.
One with frontotemporal dementia that has rapidly shrinking brain, the other one with half a brain eaten by the worm... in what fucking timeline do we live... feels like Rick and Morty episode... fuck. me.
As if denying millions of Americans access to proper healthcare wasn't enough, they appointed an anti-science, anti-vaxx idiot as if to make sure even more harm would be inflicted on them.
RFK has never been about science.
He was a paid antivax advocate, for money, now he's a paid glyphosate advocate, again for money.
Ofc the digestive flora is plants. Man the level of stupidity. Just as dumb as the orange dumbass talking about asylum seekers being release from mental asylums... What a time to be alive.
Despite the world flora, the digestive system is largely populated by bacteria, not plants
So does it go after organic tissue or not, because last time I checked I'm pretty certain that plants are organic. No one has plants in their stomach either. What a prat.
Everything is political, and there has never been a time that proves that better than now.
I can't tell if this is supposed to be for or against glyphosate?
Depends who is making money.
Of course science is political. Knowledge is power and all power systems are political.
But ignoring philosophy, Science is a charity. By in large they must beg for their money. You don't suppose that the people providing the money have any influence?
And I'm not talking about junk science, biased studies, or even fraud. A perfectly run study may still be political simply because it was chosen for funding over something else.
I remember that when Roundup first came out, glyphosate was being held up as a brilliant example of herbicide design since it inhibits a vital metabolic pathway in plants that animals don't have. They even claimed that the surfactants in Roundup were more harmful than the glyphosate itself. I guess that claim didn't hold up too well.
WTF
Sounds legit. Where do I sign up for my glyphosate injections?
This isnt related solely to Glyphosate, but in Germany Parkinson is being recognised as a "condition caused by working co editions" for farmers and Thier exposure to herbicides (etc.) in general
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
