79
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
79 points (94.4% liked)
Australian News
979 readers
39 users here now
A place to share and discuss news relating to Australia and Australians.
Rules
- Follow the aussie.zone rules
- Keep discussions civil and respectful
- Exclude profanity from post titles
- Exclude excessive profanity from comments
- Satire is allowed, however post titles must be prefixed with
[satire]
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australia
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Banner: ABC
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a documentary, not a scientific paper. Why would they give you source data?
I'd trust the scientist with years of expertise over the denials of every company.
The parallels are eerily similar with the sunscreen fiasco, where all the companies caught with vastly lower SPF factors than they claimed, all denied it, and claimed the Choice testing was wrong or invalid. Then, one by one, they fessed up, and blamed it on suppliers, their own testing and everyone else except themselves.
Guy sounds like an anti vaxer/ home scientist...where's the source data. I want to do my own analysis of it to find the truth they are hiding.
Bloke sounds the opposite to me. This article could have been funded by woolies and SPC for all we know
Probably not Woolies as they were caught passing cage eggs as free range by the article.
Nope, just an engineer who has seen similar methods fail hilariously when the trying to extrapolate from a limited datasets.
When the only data supplied is opaque guarantees from a private company that profits from enticing more interest in their services, they need to state clearly how they came to make those guarantees.
Most articles won't provide a decent level of sources. Then again most articles (journalism) are shit.
I will say decent journalists will answer emails. Depends on volume of articles written and if its a well worded discussion.