But those other studies didn’t make the news though, did they? The thing about scientists is that they aren’t just scientists, and the impact of their work goes beyond the papers that they publish. If doing something ‘unethical’ is what it takes to get people to wake up, then maybe the publication status is a lesser concern.

Worth noting by the way that instagram is owned by Meta - the very company the post is calling out.

https://xkcd.com/1984/

You mean the one that shot bullets made of ice? That wasn’t real, actually. The CIA made it up to impress/intimidate the Russians.

I think gene theraly is a miracle technology that should absolutely be explored more. The thing is, we’re already at a point where we can do it in adults. So doing it on embyros, which can’t consent, is simply an uncessasary moral hazard.

That said, I think the doctor here sort of has a point, which is that medical research is sometimes so concerned with doing no harm that it allows harm to happen without trying to treat it.

It should work fine in OP’s sentence, but sadly the word’s been ruined… A while back I heard someone over 40 use it as a noun in real life. 🫤

Honestly, it would be a pretty lame T-shirt.

I think there are much more substantial reasons at play here than just “not liking it,” and I think you knew that before you posted. :P

I mean, it kind of is though? It’s a handy sentiment, but if you think about it, good data is just a well-curated collection of anecdotes. 🤷

Sorry, bit of a tangent. 😅

Social media is a double edged sword. It connects but also isolates… informs but also decieves. Entertains, but also cripples.

It’s crazy to think that things were so different even just 15 years ago. Maybe one day we can once again have a wholly positive relationship with this technology. But first, I think, we have to break the addiction.

In other words, I think this is a good start.