this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2026
460 points (98.7% liked)
196
6799 readers
3839 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sorry, I'm convinced meta analyses are garbage written by the least capable academics. They create yet another "study" that supports X or Y position without testing anything at all--that outsiders use to further an X or Y agenda. More meta-studies based off other meta-studies! It's mountains of useless bullshit.
How brain-rotted do you have to be to think this says anything? "We reread the articles and they still say the same thing... because... they're written." Maybe we should perform another meta-analysis on the same articles! Third time's the charm!
The underlying papers are of no use at all:
Like holy shit, really? This is your foundation of evidence that CBT works? Just look at the proponents of CBT--it's a magical, effective treatment for everything under the sun! I can't take it seriously, especially when it's pushed as being as effective as medications.
I had some blood work done and it indicated that I would likely have a negative or poor response to an antidepressant I'd been taking for nearly a year. I'd tell the doctors that it does absolutely nothing, but they kept increasing the dose and insisted it would do something positive. It never did. These are the same disinterested, bullshit doctors that would tell you to engage in CBT.
All the therapists would gaslight you into believing it's all your fault: just think your way out of it. Fucking bullshit. Absolute puerile bullshit.
The reality is I suffer from something that has a genetic component to it: crippling depression that runs in the maternal family. No. Talk therapy doesn't do shit. No. CBT doesn't do shit. Appropriate drugs actually work and I'm now in a so much better place after living my whole life with crippling depression, anxiety and panic attacks. I finally feel able to live a normal life. Do you know how much money and time I've wasted on talk-therapists? They're not doctors. They're complete time-wasters. They should be banned as I'm convinced they perpetuate harm.
Even proponents of talk-therapy have that fundamental caveat that absolves them of everything: it could take years before you see any results. It's all con-artists selling snake-oil. Psychology is such a bull shit field.
Meta analysis is actually the best class of scientific evidence. A meta analysis looks at the totality of research on the subject. Because any single study can yield different results, scientists need to do many studies. Certainty in science comes from replication. If repeated studies show the same results, those results become more certain. If a new meta analysis confirms the result of an old meta analysis, it shows the results are likely to be accurate.
The new meta analysis included newer research. That conclusion is saying that the newer studies match the results of the old ones. That's how science works. Nothing can be certain unless its replicable. Most science is like this. Papers are written by scientists for other scientists. Meta analysis from every field are exactly like this.
But any study like these looking for the general case. This analysis is making limited claims with strong certainty. This study is saying that, with a great deal of certainty, CBT has a small to medium effect on most people, but not all of those who get it.
There are many problems in medicine. You have encountered many of them.
Its clear CBT didn't work for you, but that in no way means that the science is wrong, or that meta analysis, as a concept, are bad science.
The drugs that you are taking were studied in exactly the same way. There are analycies and meta analycies on their effects that will sound just as pointlessly reduntant as the one you looked at. That is the process.
How about this?
This is the “Wykes and colleagues (2008)” cited in the first sentence. The only reason your example paragraph sounds like that is because everything it wants to say has indeed already been written.
I agree with a lot of what you say, especially being forced into an "evidence" based system, I was like, who's evidence? Because I can surface studies that show things you don't support work, but anyway.
Ive gotten help from a talk therapist, she saved my life, but according to the healthcare system where I live now, there's no evidence it helps and I can go fuck myself.
That’s why meta-analyses are so important. They look at every attempt at studying said thing and see whether it worked significantly more times than it didn’t, and why people don’t just cite a single study as conclusive evidence.
And what nuance do we lose in between?
Sadly this is all medicine, I lost so much faith in it as soon as it wasn't "extremely obvious problem with extremely obvious solution." For the brain, it's a much worse situation because we understand it so little. It turns into "throw random ideas at it and hope one works" and a lot of people are just lonely or needed lifestyle changes so it "works" for them :/
omg thanks for pointing that out