Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

So it’s “virtue signaling” that a goal for a blog that you hope to turn into a book should be factually correct?


So yes, I have this crazy idea that it’s a “virtue” to present facts when it comes to stuff like insulin.

How much “usefulness” are you “getting done” by spreading scientifically proven false information?

Which fact did you "prove" false, please? Be specific.

“allow fat people to eat more sugar without slaughtering horses and pigs”

- there is gestational diabetes that has nothing to do with weight

- also certain diseases, medications, surgeries, and infections can cause diabetes.

- type 1 diabetes also has a genetic component.

Uhhh, that was a joke, bro. Yes I am aware of the etiology of diabetes.

But ultimately: my point is factual and stands -the main result of using biotech to treat diabetes is to allow more fat people to make themselves sick without killing more pigs and horses. Which is how diabetics were treated in the old days; with pig and horse insulin.

So it was “a joke”, factually incorrect, but you still defend it and say that by pointing out that you were factually incorrect, it prevented you from “getting anything useful done” and that it was “regressive”.

And if you are aware of the “etiology of diabetes” how was it useful to spread a falsehood?

You asked which fact was proved false - here it is.

Would the book you want to write also be full of factually incorrect “jokes”?

As I said: there is nothing factually incorrect in my statement, and it's not my fault you can't parse humor.

How is it not factually incorrect that diabetes - and thus the need for insulin - is not always caused by overeating, is factually incorrect?

That was not even remotely my statement. Why are you persisting in this?

“Making insulin in toilet water is a neat trick, but all that really does is allow fat people to eat more sugar without slaughtering horses and pigs.”

Great; I'm glad we're all on the same page now! Please tell me how this is a statement on or misunderstanding of the etiology of diabetes? Or is your argument "I am offended by Locklin's jokes?"

Really? The “etiology of diabetes” is not about just “fat people”.

Would it also be a "joke" to say autism is caused by vaccines just because some ignorant people think that?

Scott, from the perspective of some hitherto unwired second or third world country (ie Indian Kashmir) it’s probably a lot bigger deal than some OECD country ca. 1979

Is the point about insulin not a fact?

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact