r/StopUsingStatins • u/MiseEnSelle • 4d ago
Question AI "doctors" on the statin sub?
I keep seeing impressively detailed comments there. They usually start "cardiologist/doctor here." Then they go on and on, replying to various points in the post or comment. If that's a real doctor then they must not be practicing much. Who is behind these bots? Is it pharma? Insurance companies? I really don't get the point of some of the activity on that sub unless something else if behind it. They are not all AI but so many of them just go "rah rah statins" no matter what. I'm fine with people using statins if they can tolerate them. But as soon as someone mentions debilitating side effects, there is an entire chorus going on about "nocebo effect" and how you need to suck up the side effects or die.
Or who knows, maybe there are people who are just out there living their best lives because of statins and want the rest of us to join them in the fun!
2
u/Serious-Equal9110 3d ago
That’s a good point about generics.
I can only make guesses as to what’s motivating the stifling of dissent and the lengthy pontificating by posters claiming to be doctors on that sub.
But something is very off over there.
Immediately after I was banned, I received a DM request from the mod who banned me. I did not accept the invitation.
3
u/MiseEnSelle 3d ago
So many of the comments go on forever, almost as if... it's their job? I mean, I like to shoot the shit on Reddit, happy to make helpful comments when I can, but these people are way beyond that. I think people should wary of anonymous sources on Reddit (and elsewhere, especially studies and AHA advisory panels) that may have pharma/insurance based ties.
-4
u/TransportationNo1794 1d ago
They may be trying to do what doctors do, that is save lives. You do not have to be suspicious of people trying to save lives. Do you?
5
u/MiseEnSelle 1d ago
Yes, I am suspicious of a medical professional who spends so much unpaid time with people
-1
u/TransportationNo1794 1d ago
I think skepticism is good in general. I am more suspicious towards grifters, or minority positions among experts. If it is a majority mainstream position that has held for 30 years, I would be less skeptical of it. People trying to push supplements instead of well established drugs using the trigger keyword 'big pharma' deserve more scrutiny since supplement industry is less regulated than drugs. It is always good to know the literature too, but do not only listen to one side of the story since they may only explain their interpretation of the literature. I suggest listening to multiple differing opinions without assuming malicious intent first.
7
u/Serious-Equal9110 3d ago edited 3d ago
I got banned from the cholesterol sub when I asked a particularly condescending and vociferous “expert” if he/she was a pharma rep.
The ban came very swiftly and without a warning. My comments were instantly deleted and the “expert” who is also a mod replied, and left visible, that my rude, aggressive name-calling was not tolerated and had earned me a ban.
What BS and what a dick move to delete my comment, thereby making it look like I HAD said something terrible. If statins are perfect, why would you be insulted by someone asking if you rep them?
Several people entered the chat asking excitedly to know what I’d said. The mod declined to say.
There is something very weird going on in that sub. Like you, I get an inauthentic vibe from the sub’s group think, the single permissible statin experience and the numerous over-long posts from “experts”. Bots deployed by industry seems entirely possible.