everyday corruption
i edited a wikipedia article on kefir. Here was what was there originally:
“The alleged health benefits of kefir have recently been popularized in North America, Australia, and the United Kingdom, and kefir can be found in pasteurized form in many stores and supermarkets.“
I added directly after this: “Pasteurization, however, kills off most of the good nutrients in kefir - just as it does to all foods.” (btw, this is part of why homemade kefir has like 50x more good things in it than storebought).
now i noticed that someone sent me a message at some point: “i’m a mod, i removed the line you inserted because it was biased and not neutral”. not neutral? it’s a FACT. if it was simply “not neutral” then you, the mod, should have reworded it instead of deleting it entirely.
however i have noticed for a long time now that the english wiki pages are steadfastly removing or changing any lines that say certain stuff is healthy or unhealthy. instead of “aspartame acts like a poison in your body because it’s blah blah”, they change it to “there is some controversy over whether aspartame is healthy” and leave out WHY it’s unhealthy. they basically change all articles on food or medicine to “there’s no proof that this is more or less healthy or that it actually works” despite that there’s fucking tons of proof.
i remember comparing the english and swedish(?) articles on ADHD and was shocked at how the english article acted like there were no cures and the non-english article basically said “it’s well known that this is a disease resulting from bad diet and a bad home life, fix those and you fix the ADHD”…
there’s only controversy on food in the first place because the USA has a corrupt food research board and can afford to create tons of biased and just plain false research. anyway, stuff like this is why i hate english wikipedia and try to avoid it.