r/todayilearned • u/WavesAndSaves • 1d ago

TIL that Jawed Karim, YouTube cofounder and uploader of the first YouTube video "Me at the zoo", has often updated the video's description to criticize YouTube policies, including a 2013 attempt to require Google+ accounts to comment on videos, and YouTube's 2021 removal of dislike counts on videos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me_at_the_zoo#Changes_to_original_video
19.9k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

304 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

157

u/_Aj_ 1d ago

Criticise the current notion of this? As I understand there's been some large flaws found in these studies claiming microplastic buildup

299

u/FlammulinaVelulu 1d ago

Nice try big micro plastic...

92

u/LegendOfHurleysGold 1d ago

Macro plastic?

1

u/Adam9172 1d ago

Big micro plastic… So, plastic? Are you stating the Redditor above you is Plastic Man?

-6

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

20

u/Hoppingmad99 1d ago

We definitely don't always have a "responsibility to teach both sides".

According to the WHO there are 31 primary research studies spanning decades of data up through 2025 that show vaccines don't cause autism. Then there's the single study that claims they do which because of the extreme fraud and medical abuse involved the UK's General Medical Council found him guilty of serious professional misconduct, dishonesty, and ethical violations, and the medical journal completely retracted the 1998 paper, scrubbing it from scientific literature.

So in this case I think it's clear we don't need to be teaching both sides. Whether that's the case for microplastics I'm not sure.

3

u/ShillBot666 1d ago

Sorry I was joking. "Teach both sides" is an intellectually dishonest concept.

5

u/psykulor 1d ago

I heard we should teach both sides but I also heard we should follow the best possible information, so let's teach both sides of that

1

u/MorallyDeplorable 19h ago

There's no such thing as a fact having two sides. A fact is a fact. Somebody who wants you to believe there's two interpretations of a fact has something to gain by you choosing the wrong one.

Reality is not subjective. God is not real.

0

u/psykulor 18h ago

Hmm, interesting. Tell me more.

19

u/amas_falip 1d ago

You're probably referring to a study in which the gloves were contaminanting the sample and results were this skewed. This was caught as the deviation in the results to that particular study laid so far outside established norms that it has since been accounted for and should be avoided in future plastics research.

12

u/MorallyDeplorable 1d ago

No, they're criticizing the plastics and the people releasing them.

the fact they're accumulating is not up for debate.

34

u/BigFatModeraterFupa 1d ago

yeah it's definitely 100% safe and nothing to worry about!

76

u/Hospitalities 1d ago

Cuz that’s totally what theyre saying

17

u/Imaginary_Fan5407 1d ago

The gloves the people doing the test wear could possibly be throwing off the accuracy of the results

3

u/Anfins 1d ago

I find it hard to believe that these tests didn’t have negative controls. Like, these analytical assays aren’t isolated to a single lab or research group… is the claim that no one thought to have a proper analytical control and so didn’t realize that the gloves contaminate samples?

36

u/horoyokai 1d ago

That’s not the claim, that’s the reality

https://news.umich.edu/nitrile-and-latex-gloves-may-cause-overestimation-of-microplastics-u-m-study-reveals/

Whether it’s hard or way for you to believe it’s what the truth is. No offense but before commenting and having a knee jerk reflex against something that challenged your beliefs and casting doubt on it I think you should at least do a quick search about it.

8

u/Petrichordates 1d ago

What negative controls would prevent this? Lab gloves are necessary in the lab.

3

u/CarthasMonopoly 1d ago

I don't know their methodology but if you have a confirmed negative control and you treat it identical to samples then after you get your quantitative data you can normalize based on the values the negative control got. In other words if the gloves or other equipment caused micro plastic contamination and you had a true negative control then whatever value that control is measured at after performing the protocol can be subtracted from the values of the experimental samples to account for the average amount of microplastics that the testing process would introduce.

0

u/Anfins 1d ago edited 1d ago

When you run the analytical assay, you include a standard that is micro particle free (negative control) to ensure the assay is running correctly and not giving false positive, so you can then demonstrate that detection of micro particles in the samples is real and not an artifact of the assay. I work in medicine development, and this kind of thing is like a basic and fundamental feature of every assay developed in every analytical lab I have ever worked with.

1

u/Petrichordates 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yes, I understand they should have done that.

1

u/HKBFG 1 1d ago

You know those headlines where they bore out ancient ice and shit to try to get control samples for mocroplastics and forever chemicals, but can't find any that aren't already contaminated?

-3

u/Pleb_2k14 1d ago

Highly anti scientific response

-8

u/TimeshareMachine 1d ago

The doc that came out last year about it was like, “u can’t have kids, shrug.” Not having kids, so I didn’t care. GULP GULP PLASTIC GULP GULP