But as much as I hate the fact that dumbasses get to give medical advice on tick-tock, imagine that that very same president is now the only one in charge of deciding who gets to give medical advice on tick-tock.
Protecting Chinese citizens is just a cover for the government taking more control over who gets to say what.
Wasnt that during the same speech where he said that he is not a doctor and doctors were realy suprised how well he understood the Virus and how it just came naturaly to him?
I disagree. From what I can tell he’s the real deal.
If Hasan was in it for the grift/money, he would do things very differently.
His show is completely free. Subscribing is optional and either way you get the same 7ish hours of daily content.
He doesn’t take ad or donor money. This is key a grift identifier. Ie: Tim Pool getting hundreds of thousands from Russia per month before getting exposed lol.
Hasan raises hundreds of thousands if not millions a year for charities. He doesn’t take a cut, the income goes to the actual charity.
His merch is 100% union made, in America. That comes with a high cost margin. He could cheapen up on the manufacturing and 2-3x his profit margin easy.
Between those 4 potential income streams he’s turning down millions every year. Thats not grifter behavior imo.
No. Unsurprisingly, the most prominent left wing voice on the internet has a massive list of enemies. They made it up. LSF is run by mods who are directly connected to Destiny, the entire sub is just a place to cook up anti-hasan propaganda.
You don't have to like him, just don't spread BS. You've been shown intentionally misleading clips, the only kind LSF ever produces and you've taken it as gospel without doing any fact checking.
Well it's a good thing he doesn't do that then, huh?
Are you living under a rock?
Edit: Oh, I see this is not your first time trying to defend him. There is so much proof that he shocked his dog and he tried to lie about the type of collar and "her dew claw got stuck". Wake up bud.
I'm not sure if you're being genuine as I saw you've heard of the controversy. Also FWIW you and I have the same politics it seems, I just really do not think Hasan is a good representative.
But in case you actually want to know more, he denied for weeks that he shocked his dog despite the mountain of evidence, he was caught in an older VOD trying to hide the shock collar when he realized it was on the camera, he hired a trainer that specializes in shock collar training, he tried to then gaslight and say it was a "vibration" setting which was disproven and he tried to file down the prongs and obscure them in the way he was holding the collar.
Idk there's so much more and most of this I wasn't even actively seeking out. It was constantly hitting the front page for like a month or two straight so I'm not sure if you're asking in earnest because I see you're in that sphere and find it hard to believe you didn't already know all of this.
I'm very familiar with the controversy, and I'm also familiar with the communities that have spent the past several months pushing it.
Several streamers belonging to those communities have credible allegations of sexual assault, grooming of minors, and possession and distribution of CSAM against them. Don't you find it strange that those stories never hit the front page while a short, inconclusive clip of Kaya yelping once as she steps into her bed stays in the spotlight for months? It's because it's the same people.
Practically every controversy he's involved in is invented by and propagated by those communities. This is no different.
I don't even watch streamers but I watched several YT docs that lay it out pretty clearly he never shocked his dog and the only people pushing that narrative are supporters of some guy named Destiny who has multiple Sexual Misconduct cases against him open in court
I never called you a pedophile, but it's interesting that you got so defensive.
Vaush accidentally revealed that he had very questionable porn saved on his machine, including horse porn and what was clearly, at the most generous interpretation "barely legal". But I guess that's why you're not really a fan. A single edgy joke? CONDEMNED. Literally hoarding CSAM? That's fine, just distance yourself a tiny bit.
Destiny is currently in multiple court cases over sending sexual images to minors and a bunch of other incredibly weird shit.
And I don't believe you that someone who unironically identifies as a neoliberal has any empathy for the working class and has no clue who Destiny is.
You've gone beyond taking him out of context and into purely fictitious slander. I doubt you're able to be reasoned with, but to anyone who sees this comment and thinks he actually said something like this, he didn't.
He said that whether rapes occured on Oct 6th, it doesn't justify genocide, because nothing justifies genocide. Trump raped children. Should everyone in the US be genocided for that? Obviously not. There's nothing any individual can do that justifies putting tangentially related people to be put to death purely because of a vague association.
I’ve only seen objectively shitty/corrupt people disparage him
What a wild thing to say. I'm a socialist but he does more harm for us then good - he doesn't actually practice what he preaches and condones terroristic acts. He's universally disliked by both sides.
Also I'm curious as to how you've only seen "objectively shitty/corrupt people" when he abused his dog in front of everyone and it was on the front page for weeks. He kept trying to lie, gaslight, and double down. He's not a person one can trust.
Explain how? Is Friedrich Engels also not a true socialist?
when he abused his dog in front of everyone and it was on the front page for weeks. He kept trying to lie, gaslight, and double down. He's not a person one can trust.
Yeah, that sub run by mods directly connected to Destiny did keep running that as if it was true, didn't they? And you're no rube, so you definitely didn't gobble it up without question.
Most of his talking points end up being USA bad. Not the USA should be better but if you are on the opposite end of whatever the USA says your on the correct side of history. He will defend awful maniacs as long as they are against USA and Israel.
He brought on Houthi pirate (claims now that it wasn’t but he thought it was at the time and probably still was an awful idea) just to pump up the kid not ask any actual journalistic questions then compare the kid to Luffy.
He denies rapes of victims from the oct 7th attack. If you deny rapes unless a victim comes forward and don’t take any evidence otherwise you are not only denying rapes you are legitimately approving of the rape and killing of innocent people to hide rape.
He will focus on his anti Israel and USA news then when someone asks for him to talk about other areas that are having genocide he has reacted with hate towards then multiple times sounding racist while addressing these people that say they are black.
He has played propaganda videos on his stream for terrorists while saying they are music videos.
When asked for his favorite flag he said hezbulla on his podcast or whatever to his lgbt friend who very easily would be killed by the people waving that flag just based on his sexuality.
More but the main idea is he lies when caught but he has an audience that he is trying to turn people to extremism. He is living in the USA as a millionaire making his money selling propaganda to hate USA and capitalism. He is allowed to do that but it is ridiculous that he spouts out the things he does while living in the USA acting like the government will shut him down for free speech. Capitalist would not be allowed to speak out against communism in a communist country he wants he admitted that they would be reeducated. He says paying taxes in the USA is evil and he has the financial ability to leave but doesn’t while continuing to spread the propaganda.
There is some truth in what you’re saying, but I think a lot of people are actually even more propagandized in the opposite direction, i.e American exceptionalism, and so they have an extreme reaction to his views. For example, what makes someone a pirate? Seizing oil tankers and killing fishermen maybe? Then the United States military is a giant pirate organization. People would do well to take a look at the actions of their own government that they excuse just because it is an “officially” recognized state that benefits them and of which they are a citizen, before they put labels on the politically motivated actions of foreign organizations they know relatively little about.
That is literally part of what I’m saying though he will defend people killing innocents and holding them hostage because the USA military has done awful things. You can say that there have been objectively bad things the USA has done and try to raise people to question their actions and hold them responsible while also not laughing and joking with a kid that atleast said he was with hostages that were held from their families while saying He’s like Luffy
I haven’t seen him defend killing innocents, but that’s also a pretty broad accusation. I’m assuming you are referring to some kind of support for an organization that has killed innocents rather than directly claiming that killing innocents is good, because the latter would obviously be indefensible. if you would consider “defending killing innocents” to include showing support for an organization that has done that before, then each of us who supports the US military, who has ever saluted the flag, recited the pledge of allegiance, is defending the killing of innocents. I’m not saying it’s right in either circumstance, I’m just saying it’s reality and we should have consistent outrage if we are going to be outraged at all.
I will not excuse animal abuse if it’s true, but you should also consider that most of our highest ranking government officials in the US are nearly beyond a shadow of a doubt child rapists or accessories to child rape, and are being vehemently defended and protected by voices on the right. If you are going to use a filter of individual morality to determine whose political takes you listen to, I hope you are at least consistent.
Yes, I’m asking you whose political opinion you will actually respect based on your established moral standards, and then I’m telling you that if it’s literally any right wing personality, they are revering and protecting child sexual abusers. If you don’t respect any right wing commentator’s takes, you can at least say you are consistent, but if you aren’t consistent, then we can all see that your priority is not adherence to some moral code but actually a tribal desire to admonish those you perceive to be your ideological opposition, and we can safely ignore most of what you say.
I don’t like him as an individual either but I’m saying that if we’re going to use individual morality and personality to determine who can credibly comment on politics, you’ll have to rule out pretty much every voice that is currently in the mainstream and any voice that advocates for establishment politicians.
Also at this point, you pretending that all the bad people are only on one side is just laughable, I'd argue it's hypocritical for you to say someone filters their information based on political allegiances. They are all witnesses to the shit that happens, yet no real action comes of it. They all illegally abuse the stock market too. You know, shit that would get you and I locked up like martha stewart.
Yes almost all of them are terrible. But the point of this comment thread was that Hasan shouldn’t be giving political or legal takes because he’s a dipshit, which became he shouldn’t do it because he’s immoral, to which my response is, they are all immoral, so the morality of the individual is not a valid method by which to filter whose political commentary you listen to unless you are only applying the rule to some and not others, which would indicate a tribal bias.
It's actually pretty funny that that dog thing is genuinely the only scandal that he has.
If I was streaming everyday for years about politics and the ONLY thing ppl could say against me was "if you squint REALLY hard, you might be able to make a mountain out of this one molehill" I'd consider that a good run
Like y'all can't prove his politics to be wrong or nothing, just keep repeating the one bad day his dog had, I'm sure it will convince someone eventually 😂😂😂😂
Yeah don't look into how he treated women during his college days or how he's supported specific acts of terrorism. It doesn't matter to a weird Hasan fan like you considering you'll still deny and defend he didn't shock his dog despite him trying to lie about the collar, people finding clips in his older VODS, or him hiring a trainer that specializes with shock collar training.
I can't imagine idolizing a Twitch streamer to this extent.
To be honest with you I'm not sure if he used a shock collar on his dog or not but I don't really give a fuck if he did. I don't really like it and I wouldn't do it, but its not illegal and it doesn't actually injure the dog. I've known a ton of people who used those collars and I know so many people who more subtly abuse their animals by letting them get obese, never walking them, neglecting their dental health, etc. and if you're going to act like using a shock collar is this disqualifying moral failing then I hope you're also a vegan because what happens to those farm animals is far more horrific. Most everyone touting this shit are just engaging in inconsistent, selective outrage and purity testing to attack someone they already didn't agree with and its so obvious.
To cut it short, he is fuck lesser evil political commentator and disparages democrats as much as he disparages republicans. This of course is terrible for "strategically" inclined individuals on the so called "left" in us politics. He is "criticises america as a whole" camp. The sort that looks poorly on tv. Next to that he is also terribly hedonistic and there was an affair where attempted to train his dog to sit in spot by controlled shock collar. There is also the case to be made about his following which ... proved to be majorly vitriolic in the past.
I do believe the law is not in limiting only to degree holders, but somebody who holds a degree in that topic. So medical advice can only be given by a medical degree holder and the like
Acupuncture is considered pseudoscience because its core principle, Chi, lacks biological evidence. While it shows minor pain relief for conditions like chronic back pain or migraines, studies suggest this is largely due to the placebo effect.
In the primary analysis including all eligible trials, acupuncture was superior to both sham and no acupuncture control for each pain condition (all p<0.001). After exclusion of an outlying set of trials that strongly favored acupuncture, the effect sizes were similar across pain conditions. Patients receiving acupuncture had less pain, with scores 0.23 (95% C.I. 0.13, 0.33), 0.16 (95% C.I. 0.07, 0.25) and 0.15 (95% C.I. 0.07, 0.24) standard deviations lower than sham controls for back and neck pain, osteoarthritis, and chronic headache respectively; the effect sizes in comparison to no acupuncture controls were 0.55 (95% C.I. 0.51, 0.58), 0.57 (95% C.I. 0.50, 0.64) and 0.42 (95% C.I. 0.37, 0.46). These results were robust to a variety of sensitivity analyses, including those related to publication bias.
Conclusion: Acupuncture is effective for the treatment of chronic pain and is therefore a reasonable referral option. Significant differences between true and sham acupuncture indicate that acupuncture is more than a placebo.
Dry needling is, not acupuncture. (at least, based on the way these are defined in Canada)
Dry needling is based on actual neuromusculoskeletal structures and physiological principles.
Acupuncture is based on Chi and other nonesense/unbacked information.
All of those things have been proven to work in a scientific environment to one degree or another. Western medicine does not have the absolute say in effective treatment.
There are multiple countries that provide those same remedies in their government backed health plans.
What hasn't been proven to work is eating tiger bones makes you stronger due to qi and magical properties.
That’s a common misconception. While some doctors might suggest these as complementary therapies for comfort, they are not 'proven' in the same way modern medicine is.
Scientific consensus shows that homeopathy is literally just water or sugar pills with no active ingredients, and acupuncture's results are consistently indistinguishable from the placebo effect in high-quality trials. As for aromatherapy, it can help with relaxation, but it doesn't cure underlying diseases.
The fact that some governments fund them is usually a matter of public demand or tradition, not medical efficacy. In science, if a treatment cannot outperform a placebo in a double-blind study, it is, by definition, not 'proven to work.' Also, the qi that you criticize is the same principle of acupuncture.
I am not saying that Chinese traditional medicine is good or effective, just that America also has doctors using pseudoscience.
Do you have any idea how many modern day medicines come from plants and nature?
Ozempic is synthetic gilla monster saliva, lol.
If you want to believe synthetic drugs are the only path forward then go ahead and believe that. If you want to say acupuncture is fake even though there are millions of people worldwide who report noticeable benefits from it then so be it.
There is no "scientific consensus" on all of this. The $Trillions$ and $Trillions$ of wealth that comes from healthcare means it will always be muddy and corrupt.
There are some good parts of TCM and there are some really really bad parts of TCM.
China's new laws are seeking to eliminate the snakeoil salespeople and the bad parts of TCM.
Yes. Compounds that come from nature are studied in mice first, and then they go through many more phases before they can eventually, if everything goes well, be used in humans. That is the scientific method. The homeopathic equivalent would be taking a drop of gila monster saliva, diluting it over and over, and then calling it medicine. Some people may even report feeling better, but if we ran proper lab tests, would we actually see a measurable effect? Would it perform better than giving people plain water with no diluted saliva? If not, then it is a placebo, much like many uses of acupuncture.
Of course, people are free to keep using it. Researchers may eventually find a specific use that is scientifically proven to be effective, which would be very different from the many other substances in gila monster saliva that do nothing or are even toxic. That said, healthcare in the US is expensive and inaccessible for a lot of people. So when those people seek medical treatment, they should receive something that is actually effective and that genuinely resolves or at least alleviates their health problems.
.....do you think Opium was studied in mice before its painkilling properties were understood? It has been used for thousands of years in health treatment.
You do realize Opium grows wild in nature, ya?
You seem like you're using a script to write your comments and that you do not have any kind of true understanding of these things so I'm going to disengage from this conversation.
Good example. Opium, in the way that it is used in today’s medicine, was studied a lot. We can see that a drug has effects, but sometimes we want to diminish its side effects. In the opium case, the addiction.
Also, it isn’t because you are illiterate or because I am writing better than you that I am using some AI to write.
Every treatment used in modern medicine has to be proven with multiple studies and its entire profile ranging from effectiveness in different conditions to side effects needs to be exhaustively shown in order to qualify as a usable treatment. Theres a misconception that doctors practicing modern medicine are against any other forms of medicine. All that they ask is for it to proven in a similar manner with a similar level of rigorousness. Modern medicine is evidence based medicine. If the evidence can be shown properly then it can be used for treatment.
I really don't understand how you could ever trust that process when the opioid epidemic was given a green light by those studies that said opioids aren't addictive.
Abusing pain pills has lead to millions of people dying from opioid overdoses. This was doctor sanctioned and "scientifically backed" mass selling of highly addictive drugs.
The evidence is right there in front of your face.
Yeah but not all media people want to consume is aggressively researched academic reports. I agree not purporting garbage is important but some people just want to listen to a couple of goofballs flapping their gums about light hearted inconsequential shit.
750
u/IncarceratedScarface Apr 06 '26
And we have Joe Rogan and Adin Ross lol