this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Science

3082 readers
35 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

As a chemist scary terms like "forever chemicals" rub me the wrong way. Just speak openly about what the research says.

The vast majority of research gets zero press coverage, regardless of how relevant it may be to the public. Even within science you're rolling the dice whether you'll get any citations 5 years down the line.

The current media machine is only able to sustain headlines that exaggerate or "overhype" the findings of studies anyway. Let alone the amount of research out there that can't be reproduced, or has falsified data, or itself is exaggerated in its significance. In my opinion the only time research should make it to the undiscerning public is when a wealth of studies have been done independently, in agreement with one another.

[–] Francisco@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What would you consider as okay to mention as 'forever chemicals'?

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

None, it's a stupid term. Reminds me of sensationalist buzzwords they like to use on cable news and clickbait headlines.

[–] Francisco@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

You feel free to use expressions and terms as "rub me the wrong way", "buzzwords", and "clickbait". In those cases you are okay with the listener/reader interpreting the implicit meaning over their explicit wording. Why is "forever chemicals" different? Specially in an informal communication setting.

load more comments (4 replies)