Choice, misinformation, holistic perspective, opinions have been topics I have wanted to put in a blog for a while, however, was never sure how I wanted to approach them. Well it seems the time has shown up and proved to have them all written into one piece, starting on a note that may start as an introduction to them for more in depth perspectives later.
Disclaimer: This blog is going to just represent a very surface level depth that will use possibly controversial topics to explain the points and perspectives. Though I will share my views related to the topic, I will also do my best to show areas being objective. I feel it is important to note from the beginning, that my views may not sit well for everyone, and that's alright. As I will explain in the blog, though I may share and show and advocate my opinion, I do not intentionally mean to push or persuade anyone to take on or change their beliefs. The purpose I am writing this is to shower some grey, respect, appreciation, and share another perspective of living. The website follows the morals of acting as a resource for new perspectives to simply share possibly something not thought of or explained in that way before.
So, lets start with how this came to be - as it gets our topic going. Recently in one of my classes for school we were focusing on a lesson regarding "finding sources," more specifically how to navigate and recognize respectable and reputable sources of information pertaining to the internet. The topic came up of misinformation and we were shown examples of pieces of work that was written solely for entertainment purposes. We were shown different things to look out for when we are searching and checking out websites. We got into the area of 'scholarly' websites and how most would call them reputable, however, even misinformation can get spread on there too. The example used was: the misinformation of an article written on "how vaccines have played a role in why autism rates are higher." Our teacher labeled this as misinformation and it seemed that some of the class agreed.
Here comes the part that will become controversial.
I was not impressed with the labeling, as I am a non-vax and grew up holistic with naturopathic doctors being my primary heath care provider. With my choice, I am also aware of the risks and issues vaccines have presented for certain individuals and thus did not feel the statement to be actually all that misinformed.
The next part will weave a few things together:
Everyone has an opinion. Everyone's opinion is valid. And there are a lot of studies on either side of controversial topics that make it extremely hard to know what one is right or wrong. More important, since everyone is different and everyone requires different things to prosperously live, both sides of controversial topics could be considered accurate. Thus misinformation is merely a rude remark that shows a petty response to not having respect for another opinion just because one might not agree with it.
That is part one of the view.
I know some can argue a lot on this statement and I understand that for some the comment made in the class might very well seem like hog wash and misinformation. However, coming from a background of a holistic lifestyle, I was shown alternative ways to prevent, cure, and maintain a healthy lifestyle, which does have scientific studies to back it up. With that raising and being aware of the effects vaccines can have on the body, it would not surprise me if there was a connection between them and autism. However, I will say I have not researched this, I am making this opinion around other knowledge I know of the topic to make this view.
I also respect that I too have an opinion and have shared it clearly in the above statements, however, to go against part of my statement and take on the argument of 'if everyone's opinions are valid, then I must not believe in misinformation'. And this is where I show I too am still human. There are elements where I believe opinions go so far, and there are pieces of information I might be exposed to where I would call it hog wash and 'how could someone say that is true' and truly I won't continue reading because it is so far from my 'capacity of real' to being considered. And this is what makes our world diverse. Just like the statement "one persons trash is another persons treasure." One persons misinformation is another persons answer they were looking for. As mentioned before, this is only surface level, I could expand more on my opinion and perspective for why I have the opinion, but that will be for another time.
Now to jump into the next statement that was also spoken in class was the concept of articles written to provoke a response from the reader with the examples of how some news stories are aiming to provoke fear in hopes of capturing the attention or a way of persuading certain solutions onto people, while others are used to provide a sense of hope.
Alternative medicine was used as a 'hope' example and spoke of the placebo as a way to invoke people with a sense of hope. I was not very happy to hear this mainly because it was still being used in-tone of heavy opinion against it. I would agree that aspects of it are based on placebo, and others are backed up by science. I'd also argue that placebo and the mind's and body's ability to heal itself is also back up by science and I would ill-ly use the concept of a 'hope initiative' rather it is the realization that our body can be more than just a physical corpse - would be an important perspective to look into. So, though I do agree to some extent that yes placebo plays a role, there is science with it, and there are great benefits from placebo. On another note, I would argue that any form of medicine could be considered a representation of hope, as the concept of all supplements natural or traditional is working to provide a sense of hoping to heal something.
Leading into the next piece, to respect we are all different and we each respond uniquely to different methods of medicine, to say one is misinformation and the other isn't would be disregarding the greater picture of diversity. I feel it is also important to mention that misinformation usually falls on topics that go against a mainstream government endorsed media. It is also usually heavily censored, so for general public to have access to studies done on topics that are contrary to main stream knowledge and opinion is quite hard to come by, unless you know the exact url or book or people in most cases.
I also must mention Covid in this blog as it plays a large role in these concepts I spoke about at the beginning. Starting from the communicter of Covid - mainstream media. It is important to jump back to that concept of how certain news and media outlets are funded by the government and how this can have an influence on what is seen by the general public and what the outlets and reporters will and will not report on - truly is directional intention. I was not taking part in following the mainstream media and instead followed other sources that were not making the general public's view or heard about websites after the fact because they had been censored due to its content expressing the opposing side to the mainstream media's views of Covid and its impact.
These other sources would have been deemed misinformation in this case because they took a complete opposite opinion to the mainstream media despite being backed up by science.
And in fact we have a double up going on as those who followed the non-mainstream - so called 'conspiracy theories of Covid', noticed the holes in the information of the government mainstream and would consider this to be misinformation.
The only difference is the one is funded by the government who not only holds power over visibility but also holds authoritative power that can change lifestyles if not following "the rules." The mandate measures, the holds on banks accounts for those who supported the freedom convoy, and many other forcefully persuading segregating and peer pressuring measures were just some of the reasons why navigating this time with a non-mainstream view was quite difficult. I know very opinionated on the matter.
So, coming back around and sharing my personal view, here is my more objective view.
Depending on the side of belief you come from, you are raised with, and what you choose to be in-tune with will extremely affect what you deem as misinformation. In Covid there were many scientists that worked to prove the ineffectiveness, harmfulness of vaccines, masks, social distancing, etc. While on the other side scientists proving why all those things would be helping prevent or reduce the impact of the virus. Both sides were argued for inaccurate numbers, tests, etc. When it came to the people, there was a mix of anti-covid measures, anti-vax but pro-mask measures, pro-covid measures, pro-vax but not mask. Everyone had a different take on the information and it came down to what you felt was "right for you".
I could explain multiple encounters I had where I had to stand up in my belief despite the peer pressure of the mandates, and had the opportunity to practice being grounded in who I am, as well as practice being open that though I may take a hard opinion on the subject, respecting others opinions though not agreeing with them was just as important. Because that is the glue that holds us together as a community.
Covid did a good job at showcasing segregation, favouritism, and fear propaganda, but it also provided an opporunity for everyone from all backgrounds to realize that the issue isn't necessarily what is trying to be spoken on but rather the action of how it is being presented. I recognize for some Covid was this major virus that killed many people, but for others it also tore a part families for the difference of beliefs in vaccines. For others it was the greatest entertainment of government hypocrisy, for some it was the test of standing true to yourself, for others it was a lesson of what bidding into peer pressure is, but most of all it provided an opportunity to see how we could come together despite the turmoil of the mandates. Finding alternative ways to connect, interact, try new hobbies, relax, change our habits, our lifestyles.
My point being there was this grey zone that had to come between the battle of misinformation. And I felt it was this concept of choice.
And here I will digress more into the topic of choice and then later intertwine it with misinformation to wrap up.
Choice was what was taken away in Covid. That is what we all really didn't appreciate. The mandatory vaccines, masks to enter facilities, restaurants, it was segregation. Anyone can agree at face value it was. Because when you have signs that say "free coffee for those that are vax" that is not showcasing a welcoming environment for all, let alone the not being able to go into the building because of a personal choice of health. The making of personal information as being a means of separating, was in my opinion, very inhumane and did not create a respect for personal choice.
So coming down to it choice is something we can all agree is important, and is independent to each individual and should not need to be made into a public acceptance. And this plays a role into how we live our life. Our choice of what resources we look at, what we choose to put in/on our body should be respected regardless of our personal opinion. I am friends with many people that were pro-main-stream media, I was friends with people that were pro-freedom convoy, I had conversations with everyone in between. And most times we agreed to disagree if we had conflicting opinions. And it didn't matter. We respected that we each choose our own choices and we can still be supportive for each other as it pertains to each other's happiness.
So partially wrapping up, misinformation can be on both sides of the opinion. And to call all alternative medicine misinformation just doesn't respect the lifestyles and people that have had success with its abilities. To call all traditional medicine misinformation also doesn't respect the lifestyles and peoples its helped either.
The key to the next transition, I believe to help eliminate these labels, is being open to both sides and finding the bridge.
With a slight tangent but still on topic. I am not very pro-traditional medicine, but my mom once said that if you broke your arm and needed it to be put back in place, you'd want the traditional medicine to do that because they know how to do that. However, when you are trying to help the healing than that's where we can use the naturopathic. From there it shows respect for both sides of medicine, homeopathic and traditional. If we are open to the benefits of both, recognizing drugs that cause more side affects than possible cures could be substituted with natural remedies that can do the same job for less of the price on your body, we could actually create a care system that goes beyond a divided system.
And though there might be misinformation out there, actually having access to the other view not just the traditional main-stream one, and allowing this non-mainstream view to be easily assessed to the public might actually help the misinterpreted misinformation as we would actually have access to the research to back it up.
Lastly I have always done my best at sharing my opinion while also showing respect that everyone is different. And especially recently and after Covid it became apparent to add these like 'disclaimers' if you will, when talking about an opinion. Recently I have started to notice how annoying it is to hear someone disregard your belief and lifestyle as 'misinformation' just because that isn't what they agree with. I know I have unintentional done this in sharing my opinion before and recently I have really worked on watching how I say my opinion and showing respect to any other view and I feel we all can benefit from becoming more aware of this in our communication.
The key to all this is respecting the opinions of others, recognizing we don't actually have all the information to back up the labels of misinformation on either side, how coming together and recognizing choice will help with building the bridge to creating openness within a community that can actually handle the access of having backed up opinions on both sides, allowing us to make actually educated choices, and that we can help show respect by sharing our opinions with other opinion objective recognition.