5 ms·

Let's follow the money. Said "scientific study" is funded by Wellcome. An arm of WHO, unelected crisis manufacturer supreme. On wellcome's site: "Reducing mea

by hfsp 6y ago

Let's follow the money. Said "scientific study" is funded by Wellcome. An arm of WHO, unelected crisis manufacturer supreme. On wellcome's site: "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority." Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome.

boldslogan 6y ago
Can you link to the part of Wellcome being against meat consumption? They look like a charity about vaccination or such? I couldn't find anything here about meat consumption: https://wellcome.org/about-us https://wellcome.org/about-us
- nathanasmith 6y ago
  The page on the site with the specific quote by GP is here: https://wellcome.org/grant-funding/people-and-projects/grants-awarded/reducing-meat-intake-mitigate-climate-change-and https://wellcome.org/grant-funding/people-and-projects/grant... You may already realize this but if you type site:wellcome.org "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority." into Google you'll find it.
  - boldslogan 6y ago
    thanks, didn't know that.
La1n 6y ago
>This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust, Our Planet Our Health (Livestock, Environment and People - LEAP) [grant number 205212/Z/16/Z]; Cancer Research UK [grant numbers C8211/A19170 and C8211/A29017]; and the UK Medical Research Council [grant number MR/M012190/1]. AP-C is supported by a Cancer Research UK Population Research Fellowship [grant number C60192/A28516] and by the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF UK), as part of the WCRF International grant programme [grant number 2019/1953]. And cancer research. But you didn't bring that up. edit: Also not "An arm of WHO", they partner with them cause priorities (public health) are aligned.
qayxc 6y ago
I don't get the unhealthy obsession with "unelected" in some people. A proper -mediocracy- meritocracy (i.e. it's actual skills and qualification that counts) is preferable over any kind of popularity contest. That's not to say the WHO in particular works by this standard, I just find it very irritating if people insist on every position or institution - especially very specialised ones - being subject to elections. That just doesn't make sense and can have horrifying consequences (see [1] for an example). There are positions (in my example: medical examiners), that simply cannot be adequately filled by laypeople and amateurs. That's not how a complex society works. It's not the middle ages anymore and most professions and many official positions require training, experience, and qualifications. That's why I don't get the obsession with everyone needing to be "elected" (and by that I assume you mean by the general public, because WHO positions in particular are in fact awarded by elections). [1] https://youtu.be/hnoMsftQPY8?t=277 https://youtu.be/hnoMsftQPY8?t=277
- GongOfFour 6y ago
  > A proper mediocracy While I think mediocracy is more accurate, I think you meant "meritocracy".
  - qayxc 6y ago
    Indeed I did - thanks for the correction!
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- hfsp 6y ago
  You imbecile. Don't straw man me. No one is talking about qualifications. Did you elect these bureaucrats? Did you consent to whatever it is they claim to be doing? Did your parents or grandparents? I certainly did not and neither did my family. Unlike monarchies, WHO and the like have NO skin in the game. If monarchs f it up, it is their and their family's life on the line. In democracies there are elections. If these idiots are wrong, there is no recourse. You can have fun being a feudal serf on the dystopian estate of pan-global class of bureaucrats. "You will own nothing. And you will be happy." -World Economic Forum This the type of BS you are egging on.

by hfsp 6y ago

boldslogan 6y ago

Can you link to the part of Wellcome being against meat consumption? They look like a charity about vaccination or such? I couldn't find anything here about meat consumption: https://wellcome.org/about-us https://wellcome.org/about-us

nathanasmith 6y ago
The page on the site with the specific quote by GP is here: https://wellcome.org/grant-funding/people-and-projects/grants-awarded/reducing-meat-intake-mitigate-climate-change-and https://wellcome.org/grant-funding/people-and-projects/grant... You may already realize this but if you type site:wellcome.org "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority." into Google you'll find it.
- boldslogan 6y ago
  thanks, didn't know that.

La1n 6y ago

>This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust, Our Planet Our Health (Livestock, Environment and People - LEAP) [grant number 205212/Z/16/Z]; Cancer Research UK [grant numbers C8211/A19170 and C8211/A29017]; and the UK Medical Research Council [grant number MR/M012190/1]. AP-C is supported by a Cancer Research UK Population Research Fellowship [grant number C60192/A28516] and by the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF UK), as part of the WCRF International grant programme [grant number 2019/1953]. And cancer research. But you didn't bring that up. edit: Also not "An arm of WHO", they partner with them cause priorities (public health) are aligned.

qayxc 6y ago

I don't get the unhealthy obsession with "unelected" in some people. A proper -mediocracy- meritocracy (i.e. it's actual skills and qualification that counts) is preferable over any kind of popularity contest. That's not to say the WHO in particular works by this standard, I just find it very irritating if people insist on every position or institution - especially very specialised ones - being subject to elections. That just doesn't make sense and can have horrifying consequences (see [1] for an example). There are positions (in my example: medical examiners), that simply cannot be adequately filled by laypeople and amateurs. That's not how a complex society works. It's not the middle ages anymore and most professions and many official positions require training, experience, and qualifications. That's why I don't get the obsession with everyone needing to be "elected" (and by that I assume you mean by the general public, because WHO positions in particular are in fact awarded by elections). [1] https://youtu.be/hnoMsftQPY8?t=277 https://youtu.be/hnoMsftQPY8?t=277

GongOfFour 6y ago
> A proper mediocracy While I think mediocracy is more accurate, I think you meant "meritocracy".
- qayxc 6y ago
  Indeed I did - thanks for the correction!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hfsp 6y ago
You imbecile. Don't straw man me. No one is talking about qualifications. Did you elect these bureaucrats? Did you consent to whatever it is they claim to be doing? Did your parents or grandparents? I certainly did not and neither did my family. Unlike monarchies, WHO and the like have NO skin in the game. If monarchs f it up, it is their and their family's life on the line. In democracies there are elections. If these idiots are wrong, there is no recourse. You can have fun being a feudal serf on the dystopian estate of pan-global class of bureaucrats. "You will own nothing. And you will be happy." -World Economic Forum This the type of BS you are egging on.