The Argument handles the utterly shameful portrayal of stimulant medication in the output. Needs to have a very good detailed section but isn’t as strong as others sadly so will take a bit longer.
<aside> ✍️ The output blatantly violates Sections 3.3.22 - 3.3.23 Production Techniques and Sections 5.3.41 - 5.3.44 Representation of drugs. The editing, choice of commentary, “powerful drug” term and score throughout as well as unproportionally infrequent mention of stimulants being a recommended medication combined are failing in delivering important context, nuance and balance, resulting in negative perception, accusations of drug seeking and harm, violating Section 1.2. The output also failed to mention the titration process, which is a robust safeguard against adverse side effects and biologically incompatible or dangerous medicine.
</aside>
<aside> 🚧 TODO
</aside>
TODO
TODO: try to, when summarising, credit the main contributing thoughts (where possible, some aren’t identifiable / not direct quotes but rather Mikes’ mind-melt after reading the subreddit for hours)