Conspiracy Nuts: 5G Causes Covid? 🤔

So I did a bad thing, kittehz.

I posted a video in the Facebook group, explaining why and how we tend to fall for pseudoscience and thems Interwebs conspiracies.

It was a really interesting little production, using the “5G causes covid” madness as an example of how some science talk can sway someone to “believe” that hypothesis. And why it makes sense to, and how we may protect ourselves from falling into these things.

I was thinking, hey look, here is a bit of a roadmap on how to evaluate ideas, when you see something and really left wondering if it could possibly be true, even though it’s far fetched.

Sort of like endmyopia.

Oh boy, Jakey was wrong about that.

See the thread:

One of the things I try to (not) do in general, is bring in whatever personal beliefs I hold, be it politics or general hedonism, or just how somebody may chose to live their life. Jakey the “eye guru”, just talking about myopia. Not making anyone have to make choices about this destination based on any other things besides just, this is how you fix your eyeballs.

Not the easiest thing sometimes, but hey. This isn’t my personal soapbox for whatever stuff that may define my view of reality.

Which may also include the conspiracy fans. Among my own close personal circle of friends, there are at least one or two who love all this stuff, from Alex Jones to whatever gets thrown around as most far fetched ideas. While they make me a bit crazy sometimes, I just accept it as part of what they enjoy, and doesn’t really affect our friendships.

So maybe … putting out content related to evaluating Internet ideas rationally, also not part of endmyopia? Realistically somebody can believe that vaccines are a terrible idea and still improve their eyesight. Who am I to push my agendas, however possibly rational? Maybe rational isn’t my place either.

Thoughts welcome here. Partially I want to say, myopia isn’t just your eyeballs. It’s shortsighted to pollute your brain space with ideas that have you all paranoid of everything, being unable to distinguish between “real” issues (because yes, a lot of modern retail medicine is symptom treatment), and more far fetched ideas that may not be actionable other than keeping you anxious and at odds with most people around you. Like burning 5G towers because some “doctor” said there is no virus and covid is because, 5G. :triumph:

Who knows. I try to stay out of it. But then it pains me anyway, as I’m here advocating looking at myopia NOT as pseudoscience (as presented by retail optometry), but actual biology and hypotheses that you may be able to verify.



People are quite naive to start with. We dont know everything about everything, but we want to, then the people who is creative enough also have the ability to persuade others into believing something. Its crazy actually, how we all fall for pseudo-science on a daily basis. It seems that it has to do with psychology and how easily manipulated we are with big news that gets thrown out.

People believe anything that can feed their imagination of what could be. Since most often there isnt a justifiable or scientific explanation to something, someone create that pseudo-science explanation and we are mind blown by the idea. We want to believe. Its like how Trump made a joke that we should inject disinfectants to kill the virus. There is absolutely and will never be a scientific explanation for this, but since a leader presented this idea, people are crazy enough to believe. Some people have that ability to influence a population that obtains more population into the science and the idea blow up.
I see how the video can contradict your approach, but in your case there is some science that you preach (lens induced myopia and you also have results) unlike other methods.
real science is lengthy and confusing, the conspiracies and hypothesis on the other hand can provide us with some scientific belief as to why and how something happened. What it comes down to is , a supporting belief with a good influences. Like how people are believing that the virus was created in a lab without direct scientific evidence. In the end, people can believe whatever they want, (as long as its safe ofcourse) since it fuels our creative imagination of the possibilities and since we want answers

1 Like

EM was pretty much destined to attract loonies, as any alternate health thing does. Nobody on the Facebook thread directly says they think 5G towers cause it, but there’s a lot of debate around whether the lockdowns are justified, which is more reasonable and couldn’t immediately designate someone as a loony. Countries with poorer lockdowns seem to be doing worse from what I can tell. I can’t say I agree with the deplatforming of anyone.

As for EM not trying to be rational or pushing that stuff a little bit, I’d say go for it. If you agree with obvious stuff that the mainstream agrees with (vaccines basically), you get to alienate the loonies and normal people see you as agreeing with the ‘other normal stuff people agree with’. Makes EM look less like a cult following nonsense.


But that is the main thing and difference. What you advocate has a very solid foundation both in science and in physiology. Axial elongation, NITM, Lens induced Myopia, the development of the eyeball and eyesight from when we are born to normal vision are all called upon by you.

I’m not a fan of strong EMF(s). I think they are a risk to our health because of the free radicals and cell damage they can induce. But that’s the stuff about EMFs and 5g that we know. Linking that with Corona is just ridiculous. Provide some solid physiology and/or science to back it all up and then we can talk.

In the Netherlands there a is legal proceeding happening to stop the roll-out of 5g. This group wants more research and science before we expose ourselves to these elevated levels of EM-radiation. They are adamant about their concerns being about the EMFs and as distancing themselves from these Covid-19/5g claims. That’s the way forward, force people to look at the science and make a solid decision based on the facts. EM is the same, the process is clear of how it came to be. So reversal is not a far fetched idea.

The short answers is, we should all keep thinking clearly and be weary of stuff that might be harmful to us. We should not blindly follow what some expert claims, we should investigate to draw some proper and solid conclusions based on information that is supported by facts. And luckily for all of us here following you, your endeavor meets those criteria. :+1:.


I think this is the right approach.

If one wants an exercise in identifying logical fallacies, conspiracy theories are excellent hunting grounds. But so are many arguments that have no hint of conspiracy to them, as I found with the many online discussions I have participated in on MOOCS, and yes, even on this forum. :wink: We are not good at rational thinking - and I do not exclude myself. If you have not yet read it, Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow is an excellent read.

1 Like

Everything “alternative” tends to attract people who are simply love conspiracies. I think many people follow you not because they really want to cure their myopia, but simply because they love to indulge “yeah the mainstream xy is bad” vibe. My QiGong teacher had exactly the same experience as you: he actively refute the 5G - covid conspiracy theories and he is getting a lot of attack because of this. 200 people unfriended him (so far) and he was even called a nazi because of this :sweat_smile: (don’t ask, noone understands the logic there). You have only two options: stay totally at Endmyopia related messages, or just: :man_shrugging:

My opinion is that if you loose followers because they are conspiracy lunatics, you are just in a better place.


Yep, ad hominem is a favourite - how predictable and how boring! :roll_eyes:

1 Like

Yup! Check out all the comments on the FB group talking about Ayurveda, or Bates stuff. I’m also a member of the unofficial EM group on FB which is an open sewer, but it seems the theme is not to improve eyesight but just to go against the mainstream.


I would love to see it. Unfortunately my request to join FB group was rejected 77 times.

Might be because it looked like you were just going to promote /r/ImprovingEyesight :grimacing:

1 Like

Appearances can be deceiving. I only wanted to read it and maybe repost some of it for abovementioned,purposes. I don’t spam anything here, do I?

1 Like

That’s true. No matter what, I just hope you didn’t change your name by deed poll to ‘Bacchus ImprovingEyesight’ :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

1 Like

I simply don’t use FB. I created account to see EM. Would it be different if this account was named Bob. I don’t understand. NottNott isn’t true name either, is it? Maybe it’s some strange brand selling some NottNott glasses that improve your vision. Why is it approved here and not on FB. Maybe i don’t know sth, feel free to enlighten me.

1 Like

You can never please anybody. Which camp would you rather attract to your following, people that do real research and reasoning, or people raging against convention that will try anything? I wouldn’t kick someone off for being a conspiracy nut, but neither would I cater to them.

Humour escapes so many people… or maybe my humour escapes so many people :cold_sweat:

The majority of people are not conspiracy nuts, so by definition the people we should target are the non-conspiracy nut crowd. I can’t stand these people though:

I worship science as an actual deity in the sky, and I love telling those uneducated unscientific masses how stupid they are for daring to believe anything that contradicts our true lord and saviour, science!!

This type of holier than thou person is toxic too. Seems like two sides of the same coin, the ultra scientific people who rub their smartness, ‘facts and logic’ in everyone’s face, and the freedom loving fact-forgetfuls in the conspiracy crowd. The former are typically the ones who pretend their political opinions are actually objective truth as they ‘factcheck’ you this objective article that proves their worldview is right, and they use the phrase ‘correlation does not imply causation’ as a mating call.

However, if there’s one to cater to, it’s definitely the science lovers than the conspiracy crowd, because it’s the more mainstream view and logical view to have. At least the real science lovers, feels like there’s an ocean of so called ‘science people who use facts and logic’ who would dismiss vision improvement because ‘muh optician said it’s genetic’.

What did I just post?


Put your mind into gear before you engage your thumbs

I thought about changing to that name for a moment, but I didn’t know if the person who approves this would appreciate the humor. As I have been already rejected 77 times, I decided maybe not :slight_smile:

Wait…you use humor, too?



If your legal name is Bacchus ImprovingEyesight, then it’s discrimination. Call the police :rage:

Maybe I humour other people with my lack of humour, or maybe that’s giving me too much credit :cold_sweat: