People Twitter

10303 readers

1233 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

1306

Blood is blue until exposed to oxygen (lemmy.nz)

submitted 10 months ago by Stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

171 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Therefore evidence should always be presented “correctly” to avoid setbacks, and the takeaways are thus functionally identical.

The problem that you're running into here, is that there is no "correct" method to avoid setbacks. It is not possible to have a 100% rate of efficacy when dealing with such a diverse group as the entirety of the human race. Even the study mentions that methods will need to vary depending on who you're talking to, and it's likely that methods will need to be changed or adapted as demographics change or new knowledge is reached.

[–] smoker@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well yeah like I said, of course different people are gonna have different standards. A scientist will look at evidence very differently from a conspiracy nut, and reaching them requires vastly different approaches.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

And even within those demographics, people vary. I used to do palliative care for developmentally disabled adults, and I swear to god, sometimes it was easier to get an intellectually delayed individual with dementia to understand something than their doctor.

Like, I took a client in for heartburn once, except they didn't understand what the doctor meant when he said "heartburn" because they thought he was talking about heart problems and they were adamant that it was stomach related. The damn doctor tried to write it off as a somatic complaint, when the client had a history of reflux disease, because the client insisted they felt food moving up and down their throat and they were adamant it had nothing to do with their heart.

It's turned me into a bit of a wonk when it comes to science communication.