The APA Meeting: A Photo-Essay(slatestarcodex.com) |
The APA Meeting: A Photo-Essay(slatestarcodex.com) |
If it survives on the front page, we should make a bingo card for the thread; for instance, I should score a point the first time an HN user psychoanalyzes another user over the Internet on it.
I'm not saying the post is bad (I'm not a fan of this blog, but whatever; I'm a fan of lots of things you probably hate, too). But there's a difference between a bad blog post and a bad HN submission and this, to me, seems like an archetypical example of that.
* A spicy take
* A subject almost no likely commenters have any expertise on
* A subject that lots of likely commenters have their own spicy takes on
* Invocation of "wokeness"
* Perennial HN punching bag target (here: pharma; could just as easily be something else)
Again these don't make the post itself bad. I'm not saying it is. I'm saying: grapes are great! But don't feed them to your dog.
I mean that's how internet comments work on virtually any largish web site ever. I don't think submissions should be based on the commentary they might attract.
To be sure, I think it should be the first time someone estimates someone's political party based on psych comments, a reversal of the usual trope.
>I asked the Lucemyra® representative why I might prescribe Lucemyra® instead of clonidine for opiate withdrawal. She said it was because Lucemyra® is FDA-approved for this indication, and clonidine isn’t. This is the same old story as Rozerem® vs. melatonin, Lovaza® vs. fish oil, and Spravato® vs. ketamine. ...
Yes, the long-term effects of taking ketamine frequently are not well understood. In my opinion a patient with TRD should be allowed to take this risk provided that they have tried several other drugs.
Drugs should be prescribed on a clinical basis, full stop. Attempting to advertise your medication on any other basis should be a criminal offense. We as a society need to draw a bright moral line to stop this type of behavior. Though I laughed at Scott making light of it, this stuff isn't funny. This is a life and death issue.
You want to jail people who advertise medication on the basis of price?
I mean, everyone needs food. It's life and death. Clearly more important even than psychiatric drugs.
In any case, shilling with free ice cream or a giant house of cards does not communicate this information.
Specifically product discovery should be switched to a non-profit quango. The people currently engaged in the advertising industry should be paid to promote positive shit whilst their business wind down over a decade.
It's either that or these preponderance of woke talks and problematizing anything and everything is a prime example of the Shirky Principle in action.
> Second, psychiatry has always been the slave of the latest political fad. It is just scientific enough to be worth capturing, but not scientific enough to resist capture.
What salient difference could they mean between "A bad post" and "A bad HN submission", aside from them simply not having a coherent train of thought?
Turning off comments kind of defeats the purpose of the site, to my mind. It's no fun when moderately voted links that generate no discussion park on the front page for extended periods of time as already happens.