> A doctor that manipulates you for some purpose that has nothing to do with your health may very well end up losing a license and go to jail. A journalists doing the same just calls it Tuesday.
So your argument is scientists are equivalent to journalists who solely exist to manipulate you?
You are free to stop using a computer, taking medication, and driving a car in that case.
> So your argument is scientists are equivalent to journalists
Erm, what? How is that my argument?
> journalists who solely exist to manipulate you?
I don't say they exist "solely" to manipulate - I say they consider manipulating part of allowable and normal behavior, and this should be corrected. Until this is done, the level of trust we allow to a journalist should be much lower than one allowed to a doctor. Because the doctor is supposed to be on your side, and the journalist is not.
> You are free to stop using a computer, taking medication, and driving a car in that case.
You seem to be answering something completely unrelated to my comment in any way. Please don't do that.
So your argument is scientists are equivalent to journalists who solely exist to manipulate you?
You are free to stop using a computer, taking medication, and driving a car in that case.