this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
602 points (98.5% liked)

Chronic Illness

240 readers
4 users here now

A community/support group for chronically ill people. While anyone is welcome, our number one priority is keeping this a safe space for chronically ill people.

This is a support group, not a place for people to spout their opinions on disability.

Rules

  1. Be excellent to each other

  2. Absolutely no ableism. This includes harmful stereotypes: lazy/freeloaders etc

  3. No quackery. Does an up-to date major review in a big journal or a major government guideline come to the conclusion you’re claiming is fact? No? Then don’t claim it’s fact. This applies to potential treatments and disease mechanisms.

  4. No denialism or minimisation This applies challenges faced by chronically ill people.

  5. No psychosomatising psychosomatisation is a tool used by insurance companies and governments to blame physical illnesses on mental problems, and thereby saving money by not paying benefits. There is no concrete proof psychosomatic or functional disease exists with the vast majority of historical diagnoses turning out to be biomedical illnesses medicine has not discovered yet. Psychosomatics is rooted in misogyny, and consisted up until very recently of blaming women’s health complaints on “hysteria”.

Did your post/comment get removed? Before arguing with moderators consider that the goal of this community is to provide a safe space for people suffering from chronic illness. Moderation may be heavy handed at times. If you don’t like that, find or create another community that prioritises something else.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 28 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Assume far more money is being spend on fire prevention, than what's currently lost in fire

For anyone reading this thinking that this may sound like a good rebuttal: it's a false equivalence.

Fire prevention is a worthwhile expenditure, because things being on fire when they shouldn't is generally very bad. The cost of fire prevention is worth it, especially when lives are at stake.

Benefit cheat-catching is (or at least should be) purely about net savings. What happens though is the costs outweigh the savings making them pointless, as well as hurting those in who accidently get caught in the net too.

Don't fall for specious arguments, folks! A pithy rebutally might sound convincing at first, but don't be afraid to think deeper about it. And don't be afraid to ignore the commenter if you believe they're arguing in bad faith.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The argument for prevention is in that case that if there was no prevention, more people would start cheating, and this is not proven at all either. So your point stands.

The fact that these organisations still no not have lists of medical issues that are incurable and therefore do not need reassessment if proof that the system is designed to fuck with people.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Another point is that the more money the government spends on people the less it will have to spend on Israel's genocide or the Military Indistral Complex in general. If the state is to be used as a tool for fascism then starving the state becomes a way of resisting evil.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Ok but alternatively that money could go to public works programs instead. Money that would’ve been spent on people faking disability could be spent on things like transit that improve the lives of the disabled and everyone else.

You aren’t wrong it’s just that there’s no way the government in question will pay disability over military industrial expenditures