this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
1453 points (98.8% liked)

Memes

8301 readers
1556 users here now

Post memes here.

A meme is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.

An Internet meme or meme, is a cultural item that is spread via the Internet, often through social media platforms. The name is by the concept of memes proposed by Richard Dawkins in 1972. Internet memes can take various forms, such as images, videos, GIFs, and various other viral sensations.


Laittakaa meemejä tänne.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 110 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (12 children)

Being anti pasteurization is the one that really gets me. Like it's just heating up the milk slightly for a brief period of time. It's really simple and not scary science that's easily misunderstood. Like what about heating up milk is dangerous?

The only thing I've been able to come up with is that it's a conspiracy theory of manufactured panic to send people down the right wing pipeline.

[–] sir_pronoun 39 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I think it's partly leftover dribble from the inane Gaia "theory" that was so strong in hippie circles. Everything natural (like bacteria in milk) is good, and you know, gut bacteria, yogurt, 's all good, right?

Combine that with "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" beliefs that they don't realize come from right wing nuts and you got a perfect diarrhea inducing cocktail that we all get to pay for with our taxes and our nerves.

[–] marcos 18 points 2 months ago

It's interesting to see how a lot of the hippie "natural is good" memes got a new, completely different segment of the population to live on.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago
[–] The_v 19 points 2 months ago (4 children)

My personal theory:

First off, raw milk does taste noticably different than pasteurized and homogenized milk you find at the store.

Pasteurization: heating the milk triggers the unfolding of proteins (Denaturation). This is what kills the bacteria but can also change the flavor of the milk.

Homogenization. This process breaks up the fat into smaller segments so they stay in solution in the milk. The result is a less creamy flavor.

People instinctually associate flavor with nutritional value. They think that better flavored food = better for you. This sort-of works in tomatoes and a few other fruit/vegetables. However taste perception is a complex blend of genetics, environmental conditions, and psychology. So the results are inherently unpredictable and completely unreliable.

The unpasteurized crowd all fall for the 'it tastes better so it must be better". They then make all sorts of excuses to justify their instinct. " Big corporate milk is evil!!" Blah blah blah.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (6 children)

There's a whole subset of idiots that believe that you need to expose yourself to harmful shit to have a strong immune system. (See: all the people licking toilets and crap during lockdown)

There's some credible science to it, in the way that, an immunization is literally putting "harmful" stuff in you to train your immune system. This is known science that I should be able to mostly hand wave around since most people already know this. Immunizations are usually focusing on a key indicator, eg, for COVID, it's the protein on the outside of the vital cell wall (all the spiky bits in the illustrations) or whatever.... I'm no scientist. For other viruses and bacteria, it's a deactivated version of the virus... It's essentially "dead" for all intents and purposes. It just resembles the virus so closely that it effectively trains your immune system to recognize it.

With all that being said, not all bacteria and viruses are something we can develop a natural immunity to, partly because some of them just kill us, partly because there's something that is preventing it. Again I'm not a scientist.

Regardless, these idiots think that by exposing yourself to "natural" viruses and bacteria, you can strengthen your immune system. Bluntly, it's possible to do that, and why the fuck would you want to do it that way? It's literally a randomized version of a science we already have that's tried, tested, and proven effective, called immunizations. With immunizations, you get all the benefits of surviving the horrors of some of the most nasty viruses and bacteria out there, without suffering through what those viruses and bacteria are going to do to you.

The whole thing is stupid.

If anyone argues about "good" bacteria, tell them to eat yogurt. FFS.

[–] Sbauer 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

It’s just unscientific thinking. People think virus and bacteria are the only thing you have to worry about, but lots of the time it’s the bacteria producing toxins as part of their metabolism that’s dangerous to us. In other words, their shit is poison.

One of the reasons we don’t want some groups of bacteria growing on our foodstuff is because they turn stuff literally toxic to us, completely unrelated to immune responses. Same way some molds can be toxic while others are not. It’s not because the fungus starts growing inside your body and has an epic free for all with your immune system. Its byproducts are just toxic. Like some berries or some plants are toxic.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

yeah, mycotoxins (ie: toxic byproducts from fungi/mold decomposing your food stuffs) don't always get broken down during cooking. So, while cooking according to standard food safety specs may have killed the mold, their shit is still everywhere ready to fuck your shit up.

Not to mention that you have to survive an infection before it matters that you immune system learned to detect the infectious agent. Yes, the first inoculation techniques were literally just minor exposure to the infectious agent (eg: grinding smallpox scabs and blowing the resulting powder up the nose -- wtf). While it technically worked, the mortality rate was still pretty damn high, just not quite as high as ya know getting smallpox the normal way, and thus really only used when a serious outbreak was occuring. We've gotten so much better at making vaccination safer and more effective, because we now know so much more about what is actually occuring biologically and know to use attenuated virus or just the benign protein coat alone to achieve results. Why would you ever want to go back to scab-snorting (or toilet licking, apparently, lol)?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There's a whole subset of idiots that believe that you need to expose yourself to harmful shit to have a strong immune system.

And then they are anti-vaccine. ¯\(ツ)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Many, but not all, of the anti -pasteurization people believe that there is an invisible "life force" in the milk that is killed by processing. This is an old idea, but this unfalsifiable and unprovable "life force" thinking undergirds a lot of pseudoscience. People believe in getting energy aligned and unblocked and so on, and believe that drinking milk with mysterious life force is more natural.

[–] whotookkarl 11 points 2 months ago

Some people are just defiant against reason and if someone they don't like told them it's safer or better that will assume the opposite conclusion then look for any terrible reason that agrees with their already accepted conclusion.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

I don't think it's the heating up from milk that gets these people. It's the mandate that it must be done.

Same with masks. They want the FrEeDoM to do whatever the fuck they want, even if it hurts someone else.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 2 months ago

Natural selection is also "going natural"

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Look up an old newspaper from say 100-120 years ago and check out the obituaries.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

SEWARD, Mark – Died at Gooseberry Cove, Trinity Bay, on the 2nd inst. [January 1891], Mark, youngest child of Thomas and Rosanna Seward, aged 4 years. 

SEWARD, Peter – Died on the 10th inst., Peter, second youngest son of Robert and Mary A. Seward, aged 2 years.

SEWARD – Died on the 14th inst., infant child of James and Mary A. Seward.

SEWARD, Richard – Died on the 15th inst., Richard, youngest son of Joseph and Louisa Seward, aged 4 years.

SEWARD, James – Died on the 19th inst., James, second youngest child of James and Mary A. Seward, aged 2 years (Evening Telegram, January 29, 1891)

https://swahsociety.com/records/obituaries/obituaries-1880s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil 32 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Primitive forms of innoculation, antiseptic, and pasteurizing go back centuries if not millennia. The very idea of the small pox vaccine came out of the recognition that cow pox mitigated the risk of contagion. Milk maids were (unwittingly) vaccinating themselves for some time.

And pasteurization is just cooking your food. Hell, the whole reason primitive people started baking bread, roasting meat, and brewing beer came down to the benefits of sterilization.

These aren't even new ideas, per say. They're advances in technique, understanding of consequence, and means of distribution.

[–] someguy3 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

the whole reason primitive people started baking bread, roasting meat,

It's to start the break down of food. We evolved to outsource our digestion to cooking.

Brewing beer is entirely different though.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 9 points 2 months ago (5 children)

It’s to start the break down of food.

That too. But killing parasites in meat and fish is another big benefit.

We evolved to outsource our digestion to cooking.

To a degree. But we also just died more often to infection and disease. Cooking reduced mortality rates, which spurred a larger population, whose members transmitted the knowledge of how and what to cook before eating.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Walk into any old graveyard and notice all the tiny little tombstones of children who died before the age of two. Before vaccines were in use.

Now notice how almost NONE of those tombstones are recent.

[–] Agent641 7 points 2 months ago

Smaller graves fit more efficiently into the cemetary, AND they stimulate the economy via the funeral industry, which Im heavily invested in!

  • Some political ghoul, probably
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Maggoty 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I saw one on Tiktok today, who worked those jobs before immigrants?

Slaves. Slaves worked those jobs. Then former slaves treated like slaves. Then immigrants. Literally right into the 1940s and then Mexican labor was imported.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

As the former slaves' descendants were increasingly shoehorned into the new industrial prison complex

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago

my grandad used to buy fresh milk from a farmer around the corner - until he got salmonella from it and almost died

[–] Sanctus 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Looks like diphtheria is back on the menu boys

[–] NegativeInf 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Malaria has killed a quarter of all humans who ever lived.

[–] Sanctus 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Obviously we need to abandon our tools for fighting disease.

[–] NegativeInf 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Indeed. Only death will cure what ails our society. /s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe 5 points 2 months ago

Make Papa Nurgle proud!

[–] psycho_driver 17 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A world population graph from 1900 til now would be an adequate answer for that question.

[–] daddy32 8 points 2 months ago

No, graph of life expectancy would.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Brkdncr 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

ask any old-timer about polio, and why we don't worry about it as much now.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

Well, maybe not any old-timer...a lot have fallen into that conspiracy black hole

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (3 children)

If you want to be all natural, get off the internet.

Stop eating modern vegetables and fruits.

Return to monke.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No modern grains: find the original wild versions of wheat, corn, and rice and only process and eat those.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

"Going natural" is a shitty euphemism for anti-vax. Call it what it is.

[–] Etterra 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Yeah you know what else is all natural? Air. But guess what you don't inject into your blood?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (14 children)

Right, like uhh you know the average life span for a healthy male used to be 25 years right? Did you think that was for no reason? Smfh.

Did you think 90 years passed and suddenly the life span tripled?

The idiocy

Edit: to make sure some of the responses aren't misunderstanding my point - medicine.

Scientific advances. Technology, research, people knowing how to literally wash their fucking hands added years to the lifespan.

And yes it has tripled in some cases. 18th century France the life expectancy was twenty four years old.

This increase to what we see today is LARGELY due to medical care and sanitation alone.

It's all over the board back then, in fact, because of sanitation. Diseases would.come and go and life expentencies would sink like a tanker because sanitation was non existent.

So yes I exaggerated the time span, obviously, but I wasn't kidding about the tripling part - if a bit vaguely.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

25, that is quite a historical extreme, isn't it?

In the wild, average live span was around 40 to 50 years. There's even studies about the evolutional reasons why we live longer than other primates/why we are the only hominide with grandparents.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Remember the fucking plague? It's making a comeback!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Well that's just lying be omission. Lots of people were disabled or disfigured too.

load more comments
view more: next ›