
Doctors have decades of experience fighting “fake news.” Here’s how they win - jseliger
http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/4/14/15262034/fight-fake-news-doctors-medical-community?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter
======
HillaryBriss
This article is about rhetoric, I think. I believe the article's main bullet
points apply to religious proselytizing too:

* Take time to explain why you believe something — not just what you believe and why your opponent is wrong ("because in his presence i feel the divine", "because scripture tells me so", "because the evidence of her miracles is so solid")

* Make sure your information is reliable and easy to access (give them a free pamphlet/booklet/DVD/copy of your guru's teachings/Holy Bible/etc.)

* Teach them while they’re young (free Sunday School, trip to the holy land, lunch, medical care, balloons, severe beatings, etc)

* Evidence is necessary but not sufficient ("it also takes faith...")

------
chrismealy
So often you see people who are for vaccines (which I am for, massively) and
for GMOs (which I'm only conditionally for) arguing SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE
without actually making an argument. Science can't prove any vaccines or GMO
are safe in general, any more than pharmaceuticals or processed foods in
general could be proven safe. The FDA and CDC carefully monitor vaccines.
Processed foods and GMOs less so or not at all. Merely invoking SCIENCE
doesn't let anybody off the hook.

~~~
adsfqwop
Good attitude, however I'm sorry I'm going to have to invoke a little bit of
cognitive pain for you :-/, and point out that your base assumption is that
the FDA and CDC are benevolent, fully competent, and always operating in the
best interest of the population.

To be fully honest, you also need to consider the case where that may not be
so, and what that would then imply.

