Given the subreddit, I don't think there's much in the way of disguise happening.
I don't find the post itself to be political at all though. It's the recount of a doctor's recent experience being physically assaulted after refusing to treat an unvaccinated covid patient with ivermectin and vitamin-c, believing that the former may be actively harmful to their health, and the latter simply ineffective.
The post isn't political. It only seems political because the rejection of modern science is along a political line.
> It's the recount of a doctor's recent experience being physically assaulted after refusing to treat an unvaccinated covid patient with ivermectin and vitamin-c, believing that the former may be actively harmful to their health, and the latter simply ineffective.
If this doctor believes that ivermectin is "harmful", the doctor was so poorly informed that medical fact was mixing up with something he saw on CNN. The assertion about effective dosage being lethal, in particular, was completely fictional -- I don't believe that it works, but the people advocating for it aren't talking about crazy doses.
Ivermectin is a very safe drug. It is given to millions of people a year to prevent parasitic infections. There is a large RCT underway to see if is an effective therapeutic for Covid-19. We should all hope that it works. This incessant political polarization of science has to stop.
Everything in this reads like a low-quality re-hash of click-bait headlines from the last year, several of which were completely debunked.
Except it hasn't been shown yet to be effective against Covid-19 yet. So why would they prescribe it? The irony is you're saying the doctor got it from CNN when antivaxxers have been screaming about ivermectin for months, without any proof it's effective.
>This incessant political polarization of science has to stop.
Lol. In comments to a post about a doctor venting about being assaulted for not giving into conspiracy theorists demands re: treatment, and people say he's making it "political". Anyone can doubt the veracity all they want, there's 1000 more stories just like this.
> Except it hasn't been shown yet to be effective against Covid-19 yet. So why would they prescribe it? The irony is you're saying the doctor got it from CNN when antivaxxers have been screaming about ivermectin for months, without any proof it's effective.
Didn't I write that I don't believe it's effective? I'm not sure who you think you're arguing with, here.
The point is, this person made a specific claim -- that the "effective dose" would be so high as to be fatal. That claim is so laughable and baseless in fact that it calls into question the credibility of the entire story. No informed doctor would say such a thing. We simply don't know what the "effective dose" is (if any), but we know what other people are recommending as effective doses, and these are not toxic.
When "doctors" go on QAnon forums on reddit, and post things that sound like re-mixes of CNN headlines while making egregious mistakes of medicine, at the very least it should make you question their objectivity, if not the credibility of the claim.
The reason to prescribe it is to add another test subject to the study. The fact that there isn't a protocol for people to organize a public study of their own bodies suggests a patriarchal approach to medicine science.
People learn faster when they get to choose their own options.
You don't. You can either proceed to converse taking that they are on faith (and a consistent comment history over time), or not. You're not going to get satisfying confirmation one way or another.
A conversation centered around the identity of the person is much less interesting than a conversation about the contents of their post.
The mention of Q is what makes me think it is fake. My whole family is conservative; I have a German friend who is way out in right field (I love her but she is coo coo for coco pops), and I work with folks who most would consider fringe right. Not a single one of them have ever mentioned Q in a positive manner. As far as I can tell Q is an internet hoax. Yes I know there are people online who say they follow Q, but I just don't know anyone and I only hear about it on the internet.
As someone who has lost friends and family to QAnon, I find your statement ignorant and unhelpful. Your anecdotal experience isn’t even remotely reality. I really really wish it was.
Q is fake, but there’s a whole subset of seemingly rational people who are being sucked into the void of this cult.
The last few years have caused me to be a skeptic. I cannot take anyone at face value any more because the world has become so polarized that it is like people are willing to type anything to make their point stronger. At this point if I do not have intimate knowledge on a subject, and what I do know doesn't match what I am being told, I should be skeptical.
So if you find what I have to say ignorant and unhelpful, so be it. My words are not here for you. If you truly have a life experience with Q then I am sorry to hear that but please understand I cannot blindly accept what you say (As I don't expect you to accept on faith what I say).
So maybe I am in the magic land where the Q never travels, or maybe this whole Q thing is blown out of proportion. I do not know but my ignorant anecdote may make someone else like me ask the same question of why they don't know any Q either.
> So maybe I am in the magic land where the Q never travels
The follow-up is: what is your sociocultural environment? I'm also in the world Q never travel on my mother's side (all conservative, some could be considered liberal by US standards, but right-leaning at least). The far-right conspiracy don't touch them. They are doctors, CEOs (and retired CEOs), insurance VPs. Amongst the younger generation some are also nurses and physiotherapists, or work in marketing. Not one single conspiracy freak. Some weird claims at the beginning of the pandemic, but since one of them worked in the first national Covid "hotspot" and asked us to limit our travel 5 days before any EU government instaured a lockdown, i think any weird reactance was quashed before it could ever change how we acted.
But amongst my friends who never left my rural hometown? We don't have Q out here but this is the same type of far-right/authoritarian ethos. "We are better than the others, but the others have more money/power/education than us. This can only be because of a conspiracy led by [LGBT lobbies/jews/islamists/atlantists (aka pro-Otan/pro-US)] that we need to fight against, else our kind will die".
Conspiracy theories are not reserved to to working class, it is the whole environment that make them emerge. And i'm not saying they are reserved to the right either (hence the "atlantist" talking point), but that their talking points ethos are usually associated to the far-right. Even if far-left figures used the same (Stalin, Mao).
I started a digression on spinoza but that was only muddying the water, so i'm cutting it here.
if you read their comment history, you'll see they're a regular on Q stuff, and the subreddit it's on is QanonCasualties, so it's not weird for them to bring up Q at all.
I think the point the person you’re replying to was making is that belief that there are believers in a QAnon conspiracy theory is actually itself a conspiracy theory. Through that lens r/QanonCasualties is itself a weirdo conspiracy sub.
We can’t know, but a cursory glance at the user’s post history shows that this isn’t some fly-by troll. They’ve been pretty consistent for a long time.
I don't find the post itself to be political at all though. It's the recount of a doctor's recent experience being physically assaulted after refusing to treat an unvaccinated covid patient with ivermectin and vitamin-c, believing that the former may be actively harmful to their health, and the latter simply ineffective.
The post isn't political. It only seems political because the rejection of modern science is along a political line.