Giving of non technical non PC related advice in LQ
 

I have a concern about people giving non technical non PC related advice in LQ. I have been watching medical advice being given in various threads that can, and I know this from personal experience, be quite dangerous. I have tried discussing this with individuals and they still persist. My worry is someone will do something and exacerbate any medical issue they may have, or maybe even cause more, because they have taken advice from an internet forum (one that isn't medical related to make it worse).

I'm sorry if this causes an argument but I think it is more important that people actually see someone who is qualified for certain things than take advice over the internet. It is vitally important that things like medical issues are tested for and monitored, unfortunately testing and monitoring cannot be done over a forum where the individuals participating are anonymous. I know we are adults and are supposed to take responsibility for our own actions but who will take responsibility if something goes wrong?

Well, if you are an adult, you take responsibility for yourself. Nobody (that is "adult" in the sense that s/he is able to look after her/himself) should just blindly follow advices read on the internet. Sure you could censor and silence persons that give questionable advices, but what for--you'd just be affecting the results, not the reason, and as such not helping anybody. To be able to speak (write) freely is a very profound right, and it should not be undermined even if there are some gray areas to it (giving it away has always led to problems). Censoring one thing in order to create something better typically leads to broadening of the censorship, and in the end something that few will like.

You can't stop people from making mistakes. If you let them make mistakes, they'll learn (either as persons or as a mankind), but if you try to prevent them from making mistakes, they'll just become careless and make even more mistakes. And since LQ is not a police state, policing the content in this way would in my opinion be an overkill (as long as the conversations stay in the general section). Writing about illegal things is already prohibited, if I'm correct.

Stop that. You have no right to tell other posters what they can and cannot discuss.

Ironically, this thread is doing the very thing it says is bad...

Hi there,

why?

Yes, maybe. And sometimes people also ask for legal advice, or advice on what brand of product they should prefer, advice on social or even sexual matters.

So what? Many people talk about these things with their friends - so why not talk about them in a wider, more public audience? Actually, there are subjects I wouldn't like to discuss even with my closest friends, but rather with someone totally anonymous. Strangers aren't biased, they just know what I tell them, and their reaction can be taken genuine and without prejudice about me as a person.

The people who took a layman's opinion for granted and relied on it. Who else? As you say, we're adults and should be able to make our own decision. Other people's opinions and advice may help us make a decision, but if somebody relies entirely on a stranger's word, he or she sure has bigger problems than that.

[X] Doc CPU

When the advice can have deadly consequences there is a problem. I am willing to stop doing things if it can be shown that there are deadly consequences. Telling people they should do such and such without even having physically check them is against all medical oaths (at least in Australia). People self diagnosing illness has become problematic, it is on the news daily in Australia, and the internet is a huge part of that problem. Why risk someone else's life? That is my concern.

@Dugan, I haven't told anyone what they can or cannot discuss. Show me where I have done this! Discussing health issues is a part of life, giving medical advice when you don't even know the person isn't.

@Prowla, how? What have I said in my OP that gives you that idea? I haven't given any non technical advice in this thread nor have I given any medical advice (apart from the need to see a real doctor). Please show me where in this thread you believe I have done so.

EDIT: I see that a moderator has stepped in in one thread.

Hi there,

it looks to me like you don't distinguish between an advice and an order. Advice is something that can become a factor in making a decision, an order is something that someone else decides for me. Advice is always without obligation. Obliging without reflection isn't a fault of the person who gave the advice.

Just my 2 cents.

[X] Doc CPU

I quoted the part where you mentioned doing so, and wrote my comment below it. Duh.

It's hard to see someone ignoring context like this and not conclude that it's intentional.

Advice given by people who claim medical authority yet will not give evidence and suggest others have no idea so you shouldn't listen to them is supposed to be pretty compelling don't you think?

Where in that quote does it say that I told someone not to say something? It does not, it says I tried discussing it with them and they still persist.

Well you took what I said out of context, what should I conclude from that?

Again my concern is consequences to the person who is in need of medical assistance, not what you think of my post.

Which means that you told them not to do something. If you had "discussed" it in any other way, then you would not have added the "and they still persist".

;)

Oh, you mean that what you deem to be bad advice is not compelling? Wouldn't that mean that it's not likely to cause harm? Maybe you should dial down the self righteousness a bit then?

Dugan at no stage have I, unlike you who started your contribution to this thread by telling me not to do something, told anyone not to do something. I have discussed, unsuccessfully, my reasons for thinking this is a problem.

No I mean, and you know quite well what I mean, that when someone states they have medical knowledge (through courses) and that others don't know what they are talking about they are trying to show they have a compelling argument to follow their advice.

On the other hand I have only been through (never had to study because I have personal experience, I know what it feels like to have certain symptoms and what following said advice would have done to me) a very serious illness. My concern, as I have said before, is possible consequences to the person in need of medical assistance, not what you think of my post. If you have no concern about peoples welfare then so be it, I do have concerns and will voice them.

Hi there,

no, not up to that point.
For me, it takes convincing arguments supported by facts I can prove true doing my own research to take an advice seriously. A simple "You should do ..." or "If I were you, I'd never ...", or even a stronger phrase like "You must ..." is nearly worthless for me if it isn't supported by credible arguments and at least some trace of proof.
Even when I'm getting advice from professionals (whether it's in the medical, technical, legal or cultural domain), I don't accept it unreflected, but insist: Why?

Is it just me, does nobody else have a well-developed scepticism like this?

[X] Doc CPU

It's funny how someone can propose that nobody should give non-technical advice, and yet does it all the time.

Is your block list malfunctioning?

I haven't given advice that could have devastating effects on some ones life.

Members giving non-technical or non-PC related advice on LQ is certainly fine. That said, if you see advice that you legitimately think poses a medical risk (setting aside that no one should be taking medical advice from a Linux forum), please do use the Report button so a mod can evaluate the situation. You should also feel free to post your concerns in that thread.

--jeremy

Thank you Jeremy for your reply. I did raise my concerns in one of the relevant threads. Next time I will just report it and give evidence to support my report.

What about people who seek non technical and even medical advice in LQ ? Not that that is a particularly good idea.

Yeah, they post in General about all sorts of things. I guess we should be forbidden from answering them ... or maybe they should be forbidden from posting them.

Am I to blame if I answer a question to the best of my knowledge and then someone else complains and harasses me as a result ?

I don't think the right issue is being addressed. The real issue is censorship. k3lt01 wishes to censor what people post. And it's not even for a reason. He claims that what other people are saying is dangerous because of his own personal bias and a lack of knowledge in the field.

This is in no way about censorship. You've been around LQ long enough to know how pro-free speech and anti-censorship we are. If a member thinks something being posted is demonstrably dangerous from a medical perspective, it should reported. A mod can then evaluate the post and make a judgment call from there.

--jeremy

I see, and I agree. However, there is a slight problem, in that the moderator would need to have some knowledge in whatever field was being discussed in order to make a judgement call, right ? Or, if not, how would the judgement call be made ?

How about just giving proof of what is claimed and not just from wikipedia? If a person has an expertise then by all means use it but at least use sources that an expert would use. If a mechanic tells someone what to do to fix their car they wouldn't use encyclopedia britanica they would use a workshop manual. Someone with medical expertise should, in my opinion, be able to pull a wide range of medical sites and they should not have to resort to wikipedia 99% of the time.

I will report the post today that started much of this and state that evidence is contained at the end of the thread to support my feelings. I haven't reported it until yet as I have been busy this week.

Information given here should be treated with the same amount of trust as if you had a conversation with a mate in a pub; there is no guarantee that what is given is correct (and that applies to both technical and non-technical contexts).

People here wouldn't take a detailed procedure listed here and implement it straight onto a critical production server - they would first check it out on a test system.

So why on earth would they take medical/legal/emotional/etc. advice in any other way?

Read this thread and then tell me some people do not take things way beyond what is actually written down and then blame others for their own misunderstanding. Read this thread and notice someone with pain went jogging because someone else suggested it. This is not a targeting exercise but these are useful example as to why some things need to be accurate and provided with trustworthy and reliable resources not just wikipedia and/or hearsay.

The second link prompted this thread (the one you are reading these words in), this one, and also this one.

But wait there's more. A quick search in General will provide you with many posts about vaccines, and other medical matters, such as swine flu and gardasil which all end up in heated debates simply because as soon as these things are posted and someone has the guts to question or debate the topic it turns into a fight about who knows more and who has the better proof. If you read the through threads you will see a couple of names that are always involved (I'm not one of them :p ), you will also see (and I think this is hilarious) someone announcing they have had enough and are unsubscribing only to turn back up a couple of pages later to flame the coals. The Swine flu thread had 3 "I'm not coming back again"s before page 15. What is the point? There is either a wealth of knowledge out there or there isn't. Spreading misinformation and fud (the swine flu thread is full of conspiracy theories) is dangerous.

Lets just be clear I have never said people shouldn't be allowed to post what they want. I do not advocate censorship, even though I acknowledge it exists at many levels, but I do believe that people's health is much more important than any individuals right to post some of the things that are contained in threads to do with medicine.

From The Rules: :)

Applies to your body as much as to your PC. If someone is relying out and out on an internet forum for a medical diagnosis/cure then there are bigger issues than maybe getting wrong information. The best medical advice I ever saw on an internet forum was from a guy who said he was a GP. His advice: "get off the forum and go see a real doctor".

I agree with the quoted rule so I ask why is it a problem to counter what we believe to be bad advice?

I agree.

There has been no thread that I can see that the intention of the thread is to rely solely on medical advice on a forum that is apart from those that are deliberately designed to be scare campaigns. One thread the OP asked what type of doctor to see and then proceeded to get a heap of advice on things other than what type of doctor to see. The intention of most other threads is to mount scare campaigns. The programmers thread, which prompted 3 other threads, was just a general chat about health in the IT industry but turned into an I know more than you slinging match. Is this not a problem?

Again I agree but I wouldn't tell people to get off the forum, I doubt Jeremy would approve, but my underlying message has been go and see a real (as in see them in person) doctor. I just think it's nuts to even give advice (without at least expressing a need to personally go and see a doctor or medical practitioner for appropriate testing/diagnosis/monitoring) because the consequences can be disastrous.

Anyway, I have given a diverse range of evidence to support my concerns. They have been rebuffed (go figure) as not being of very good quality (one article directly quotes a high quality medical journal but apparently its not high quality :rolleyes: ) so I'll leave it to the LQ powers that be to deal with and I'll just report with evidence anything else I see that I believe is of concern.

Indeed, that is the best advice for medical issues, and I have ALWAYS given it first, even tho I am not a GP. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong on this.

Challange acce...wait, thats pretty lame now.

From the "Programmers' Health Talk, here (Backpains, neck, ...)" thread, your 1st post-

No mention of going to a doctor at all from you on that thread.

Even when you do put a 'go see a doctor' you dont 'give it first'. From the "What kind of doctor should be sought for the problem of body fatigue?" thread-

I didnt know that H_TeXMeX_H had recivied an infraction for the "Programmers' Health Talk, here (Backpains, neck, ...)" thread, or had started another thread becuase of that infraction. Well, thats the way it goes sometimes.

I'm actually suprised at this whole thread.....airing your dirty lanudy in public, its never seemed to be a good idea to me.

Which is fair enough, but its very hard to get that sort of information given some situations. Not just from the information abotu the possible disease, but also as far as the posting goes.

To use the "Programmers' Health Talk, here (Backpains, neck, ...)" thread as an example, it isnt untill post #58 that Xeratul mentions that they use exercise equipment, and has a fractured rib. That sort of information would have been better put into the 1st post. A person who exersises and has had a broken/fraqctured rib is in a different situation to someone who doesnt exercise and has no broken bones.

Its the same thing as in some techincal posts. I'd guess that every person in this thread has seen technical posts where the OP doesnt provide enough information, or the 'right' information. The only big difference is that people know what 'rm - rf' does, and if someone suggests it maliciously, or from stupidity, that post will be dealt with by moderation very quicky.

If somebody posts take XXXXX, or do YYYYY in response to a ZZZZZZ problem, its far less clear cut as to any possible dangers.

It seems pretty clear to me that this thread has run its course. I'm going to allow a small amount of time for any final feedback or comments, and then close it.

--jeremy

In the Programmer health talk I was not responding to any one particular health issue. My comments were more on how to prevent common, daily pain, that I too have experienced. It's not like someone broke their back and then I go tell them to jog. Be serious now. I know you try your hardest to make demeaning comments on absolutely everything I post, but it is not productive, especially with your attitude. I suppose I could do the same to you, but it's not in my nature, and I don't want to stoop to your level.

Back pain is a medical issue. You gave advice without suggesting that the poster go see a doctor. Q.E.D..

I actually dont try to 'make demeaning comments on absolutely everything you post'. I tend to avoid threads with posts by you in them. Every time I disagree with you H_TeXMeX_H, I get the same sort of treatment- if you acknowledge my post, you either make accusations like that, or an outright dismissal. Normally with no backup.

I'm not calling other peoples posts 'nonsense' with nothing to backup my position.

I have said my piece. I think given the replies that have occurred since my last post it is pretty clear what's going on but I will leave it to you and your teams to work through. Thanks for listening.