Hacker News Reader

I understand the viewpoint; but what about a pragmatic peaceful solution: let the persons in need organize and spread the knowledge. We probably could setup an open statistical sufferers sharing platform to avoid rumor/placebo effects without resorting to trust a big industry.

View on HN

Why can't we let people have freedom, but instead propose forcing sick people to mount a lobbying effort?

What do you mean ?

> let the persons in need organize and spread the knowledge

That's lobbying. In todays world, lobbying is a dispicable act, at least if you are into science or if you like stuff that has been proven by scientific measures. In today's world, lobbying VETOes science.

Hummm, lobbying implies influencing Law to me.

Spreading knowledge isn't blocking science if done with scientists and people with conflicts if interests (unlike grabbing public projects or impeding legal change in your favor).

Yeah, I didn't intend a value judgment on lobbying in general, so much as to highlight how unfair/unreasonable it is to put that obligation on sick people. Why can't we fix what's obvious? Any of us could end up sick in the future.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com