BringMeTheDiscoKing

Dead or alive

  • 22 Posts
  • 377 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 16th, 2023
  • BringMeTheDiscoKingtoTechnology@lemmy.world•The Terrible Costs of a Phone-Based ChildhoodEnglish
    1·
    9 months ago

    I don’t normally reply like this but i’m not wasting time on composition.

    I think you are forgetting that correlation does not imply causation.

    Really? Then I think you didn’t read or understand my previous reply.

    or is it dangerous, misleading, and unscientific to say things that can’t be proven as if it’s fact?

    What is dangerous, misleading and unscientific about alerting parents as soon as possible that screen time has been linked to atypical sensory processing, the most popularly known examples by a country mile being ADHD and autism? Have other studies shown screen time to be beneficial to young children? Who are you shilling for, Sesame Street? lol

    I would argue that it’s unethical not to inform parents using terminology that they are familiar with, even if it is not going to be accurate in each case.

    As someone who has worked and continues to work with several doctors in a medical research environment

    I was wondering when the appeal to authority would come. Your assurance, as an internet rando, is meaningless. You oughta know that already.

    “Reading between the lines” in research has led to countless people being injured and killed

    Except pop-sci magazines aren’t research.

    And finally, you’re statements about research bias and the crap about Wakefield, Kennedy and troglodyte Rogan is false equivalence and obvious baiting. See sentence above. Unlike the situation you describe, you haven’t called into question this research, only the article.

    I guess we’ll know eventually if we should’ve been warning people away from screen time for young kids a lot more forcefully.

  • BringMeTheDiscoKingtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Peak technologyEnglish
    5·
    9 months ago

    I will happily upvote anything that rags on HP printers, I don’t care how low effort it is. In fact, I would hate to think someone spent actual effort on anything HP related.

    HP printers have been kicking puppies and insulting your mother for well over 20 years. Wait, they haven’t? Well, after a certain point a company has burned so much good will by making marginal printers, less-than marginal drivers and artificially differentiating inks and toners to such a degree it’s hard to see it as anything other than profiteering… pant pant …that nobody cares if it’s unfair or inaccurate.

    Don’t buy HP. Think of the puppies. Think of your mother, for God’s sake!

  • BringMeTheDiscoKingtoTechnology@lemmy.world•The Terrible Costs of a Phone-Based ChildhoodEnglish
    1·
    9 months ago

    I mean, if you think that they aren’t talking about ADHD and autism there, after reading the article and the study, well okay then.

    The paper comes as close to saying ‘direct link’ as these papers ever do. It’s quite difficult to prove a direct link and there are consequences for using that language inaccurately, when you’re publishing in a respected journal (at least there is supposed to be)

    Pop-sci articles are usually going to try to hook readers with their headlines. Not being beholden to the same standards, they are free to read between the lines, as it were. One could say that because it’s not held to the same standard, it’s BS but there’s a lot of substance there to refute. It not an op-ed piece.

    Its an important article that shouldn’t be ignored (there are other sources if you don’t like that author,) and if people want more details, they can get to the JAMA investigation from the link provided at the end.