• AmidFuror@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Obviously, I provided no evidence of my contention. Nor did I intend to. But there is plenty of crap published in peer-reviewed journals, and quacks all graduated from medical school.

    I made no good argument at all, so it takes nothing to counter it. But an argument from authority is still a bad counterargument.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      and quacks all graduated from medical school.

      Um what? Have I misunderstood what that term means for my entire life? I would say that the vast majority of “quacks” have no medical expertise whatsoever.

        • AmidFuror@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          You’re both right. A quack is a charlatan and pretender. I’ve seen it applied to legitimate MDs who have “jumped the shark” and started giving bogus medical advice, so I thought that’s what it meant.

          There are in fact MDs who use bogus tests and find Lyme or babesiosis as the cause of unrelated woes in the majority of their patients. Those were who I was referencing.