Honestly even putting this nonsense in a headline is negligent.
post
You think this is stupid?
RFK Jr. also thinks cell phones and 5G cause cancer. So get ready for an America with slow cell data and phones you're not allowed to put up to your ear.
I heard him tell a bullshit story about how he has hundreds of clients with grapefruit-sized tumors behind their ears from using cell phones. You know how you see all those people walking around with giant tumors behind their ears? Me neither.
That’s just cause you don’t get invited to the whale juice parties
I can get all the whale juice I want in the ocean anyway.
So get ready for an America with slow cell data and phones you're not allowed to put up to your ear.
Hello EDGE, my old friend...
To be fair, people with tumors behind their ears will likely hide it to avoid assholes staring/taking pictures. I don't see many cancer patients attending chemotherapy either because they are wearing hats/wigs.
Still, shouldn't they get cancer on their hands instead? That's the closest body part to your phone at any time on average, isn't it?
But don't report on those things, because it's irresponsible to do that. It's simply to fill the 24/7 news cycle, not to inform anyone (despite this being a fact checking institute). /s
What is going on in this sub?
You can’t give a platform or a stage to these people. You’re disrespecting your own journalism when you do.
They don't even put the answer in the title, this is peak irresponsible journalism.
Answer is No. This is junk science
Every time I see a question in a news headline, I just answer it with "no." in my head and move on. 90% of the time it's the same answer the article arrives at and the other 10% of the time, I'll see a real headline about it from other sources anyway--with the actual lede in the title.
It might be beneficial for some to understand the "what" and "why" behind the "no," no?
Sure, but why not just lead with a negative assertion instead of implying that there's an open question? The question implies that there is controversy, even when none exists.
Fact Checking RFK Jr's False Claims About Fluoride
Would be a perfectly acceptable headline.
The title poses the claim in question from a neutral standpoint, and presents it's fact checking case in the article. I don't agree with the idea that a controversy is implied simply by doing that, or that there is an open question implied either. That is not apparent to me whatsoever, and I think this is a personal opinion rather than anything concrete. By reading the article, that is confirmed, and the reader also gains a lot of additional information on the matter.
Not American but I feel like at this point I’d get a four year supply of popcorn and try to encourage the dumbest shit I’ve ever seen.
Eg. Hulk Hogan should be head of the EPA. Start a campaign and mock outrage when trump is silent on the matter.
all 42 comments