Get help, but not with Better Help! They suck ass. Please never do this again.

This is the internet ... Too little too late bro 😁 But, i am not bothered personally ... BetterHelp, Fuems, lomi, all BS ads and scams. 🤷‍♂

With all due respect man the data sharing is not the only issue with BetterHelp. There have been other cases about unqualified people pretending to be trained therapists and hurting the vulnerable I know you mean well but this sponsor was a bad idea imo (Side note: Why was their a settlement in the first place if they didn't ever sell data you're wording kinda mischaraterizes this situation.

shelling out is kinda sad

Mental health is no joke. And neither is disclosing personal information of vulnerable people. If I did that in my work I would be fired and prosecuted.

I had to listen to that line 4 times before I could convince myself that I wasn't hallucinating.

I was like "did he mean that? Did he mean 60 years ago and fumbled the year?" Then he mentioned 1964 and… that actually was 60 years ago at current so I think he just made a mistake that hurt a lot of us personally.

that one hit hard XD

Kyle is in the future and manage to upload this in 2024🤯

As soon I heard 60 years ago with 2000 ..... XD

oh, I think he knows. he must know.

I was just about to comment the same thing.

Didn't betterhelp fix their internal issues and became a more respectable Company a while ago?

What did they do/are they doing?

Worth considering that he may be locked into a contract with them. They've sponsored him for a while now, since way before the latest scandal, and there have been a series of videos lately sponsored by them. He probably agreed to do so many ads for them and is contractually obligated to fulfill that agreement. Maybe when things are more settled he'll be able to get out of the contract, or just fulfill it and move on. I'm just speculating of course, and Kyle seems generally disinclined to talk about the business side of his channel at all, so we might not ever know for sure.

Their exploitation of that coaching status is extra infuriating because it smears both therapists and legitimate coaches. I benefitted from a year visiting an ADHD coach, but they never claimed to be anything other than what they were, and were super up front about it not being the same as therapy. No one who is hiding what their service really is will provide you with worthwhile services. Even your drug dealer doesn’t pretend not to be one to you. Don’t trust coaches posing as therapists.

Yeah, I'm seriously surprised so many youtubers are still accepting their sponsorships- especially Kyle Hill, since he of all people should be aware of general bad practice, considering the kind of things he covers.

@@SyureK13many youtubers and other "influencers" will accept any sponsorship at all as long as it pays nicely. 99% of youtube "sponsorships" are scams and other forms of fraud!

@@jwenting I'm well aware and I'm careful of who I support because of that. Especially sponsors such as BetterHelp, HelloFresh, and LegacyTitles or whatever that buy a piece of land to be called lady or lord thing is called. I'm not foaming at the mouth to research every since company, but I do my due diligence to make sure what I'm supporting isn't garbage or won't steal my info.

and giving people's data to facebook

It would be awesome to have companies that don't prioritize profit by cutting corners over providing quality care that could provide sponsorship money.

yeah please don't accept better help sponsorships they are corporate bullshit

@@T.E.S.S. Who give their data to anyone who pay for it i think

fair point, it wasn't just facebork @@arran4285

Calm down

@@kylehill I’m calm, pick better sponsors.

@Azeria OK

@@kylehill you should know better

Interesting to talk about fraud but then promote Betterhelp who violated Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act for releasing consumer data. 🤔 Thoughts Kyle Hill?

if literally a year ago is "just" then yes. Though, that customer data consists of a damn survey the customer fills out so...

@@vyor8837doesn’t matter, they’re a medical company and are rightfully held to a damned high standard

@@vyor8837 1) It hasn't even been a year yet. 2) That's not a very long time for a $7.8 million dollar settlement as the result of years of litigation, no.

A settlement is not an admittance of guilt. And every company does this, including every healthcare company.

@@ghostratsarah ...no, every company does not do this.

They also have a history of connecting LGBT+ patients to "corrective therapists."

Considering he is so pro science its really disappointing he would promote such a terrible and harmful company

Also, just this last week, were exposed for selling patients’ data in direct contradiction of their own privacy policy. Stay away.

I understand that he needs money for the show but for a man of science it is weird that he looks past the sketchy stuff they do.

that came to light 4 years ago @@silverXnoise

It is crazy how neo prohibitionists have worked their way in to medicine and therapy. I once told a doctor that 2 or 3 nights a week I would drink a screwdriver before bed because it helped me get to sleep. He called me an alcoholic and prescribed vitamin B because "obviously I had a vitamin deficiency due to my excessive drinking".

@@1978garfieldDid the Vitamin B help? Or did you quit drinking? If you said 3 screwdrivers a week, the Doctor simply knew that means 3 screwdrivers 7 times a week. Only alcoholics drink screwdrivers, dude.

Better Help is positioned to serve a customer base that has fundamental assumptions about what counselors do and their function in the client's incremental improvement.

All betterhelp does is connect you to licensed physicians, so that’s an issue of your states medical licensing board.

@@thatguyanderson no it doesent lmao

This is interesting to hear. A good friend of mine told me he was using their services not long ago to actually get qualified help, and it worked. I gotta ask him if he has since noticed an increase in spam and the likes.

​@@Kr0noZit's more about their privacy policies. They don't adhere to hipaa, they are sketchy with money etc.

Nobody cares

​@@Sammysapphirayou don't care, others do, and the people who Care's opinions are more helpful and useful than yours

@@Sammysapphira you should care though, data privacy, especially those to do with mental health and so on, as well as Workers rights and employers treating their employee's like humans is something everyone should care about.

Okay, better help clearly seems to be a bad company, but nothing you described has anything whatsoever to do with scientific misconduct, so where’s the irony exactly?

​@@z-beeblebroxscientific misconduct -------------promoting unqualified fraudulent psychologists to people and flogging their sensitive data to the highest bidder. Seems like a relatively clear link to me?

Where is the proof. Nobody has provided any to me.

isnt he locked into a contract with them

No I'm pretty sure that is not how it works. Even if it was, these things have been broken before and he is still essentially scamming his audience

@@arizonagreenbeeno such thing as being “locked in a contract” for a scam. If you know something is a scam you don’t have to honor the contract

@@dathunderman4the company isn’t officially a “scam” you can’t just break contracts if you think they’re a scam 😂 stop crying no one cares

@@crepeenjoyer you can, actually. I’m literally a law student my guy. You don’t have to honor a contract if you have a reasonable belief it’s illegal, and no court would hold up a contract that requires the promisee to do something illegal. Now, you may have the burden to show that it was a scam if it gets challenged in court, and “reasonable belief” is an objective standard, it’s not just any subjective belief, and there has to be an actual solid basis for your belief. Contracts aren’t this magical force you have to honor it no matter what. Contracts are consistently voided if requiring performance would be unconscionable, or for public policy reasons. You can’t contractually agree to do something illegal, so a contract for a scam doesn’t have to be honored. Furthermore, I never said the company was a scam, or that you can void a contract if you have any subjective thought it was a scam. I was just correcting the person who replied, who was under the impression that you are locked into a contract no matter what. I was addressing that as a general premise, not to the specific scenarios here. Idk shit about this company and I have no idea if this was a scam, and I never said any contract can void if you simply think it’s a scam, that’s just poor reading comprehension on your part. But please, correct me some more, and teach me about contract law, since you know so much it seems.

Remember that it's illegal in most countries for doctors to do the same Stay away from mental health apps, kids, see a doctor (sorry Americans...)

How extreme is their data collection? I know there's a lot of controversy around them, honestly haven't really looked into it, but are they selling private patient info? If so that's fucked and seems like a blatant breach of confidentiality, but I'm not familiar with their contracts or policies.

Also don't forget how insane their service is.. One of their "Licensed Therapists" was caught just reading off of the top google searches

​@l3dcobra120 it's really not *that* much worse than any other company that's quietly selling our info (all of 'em).

You *do* realize that this is the norm for most companies that are even tangientally related to tech, right? Like, it's scummy and abhorrent, but it's annoying seeing people here act as though BetterHelp is somehow unique in doing it. If all of these people making "virtue signal about being anti-BetterHelp" *truly* cared as much as they try to seem like they do, they wouldn't be using *Google* services and they DEFINITELY wouldn't be making comments on a mobile device. None of you here actually cares about companies farming and selling your data -- you wouldn't be here if you did.

And their service isn't good, nor do customers report good therapists, or even qualified ones!

"leaking your data" here means "telling people they use their service"

I would have more respect for Kyle if he advertised those 'better shits' potions or whatever.

@@vyor8837 no, it means selling your data for targeted ads

From what Kyle said they were cleared of wrongdoing for that - it is worth noting that medical confidentiality isn't absolute and certain aspects of your dealings with a healthcare provider can be disclosed under various circumstances (and I'm not just referring to high risk individual information either). This can be done for scummy but legal reasons for certain bits of information under some conditions as well. The much bigger problem would be the multiple other controversies that VH were embroiled in that seem to have escaped Kyle's notice on the basis that they're just slightly less well known than the data sharing issue.

I think we all know who's voice I read this in.

@@Plapraddoofenshmirtz

WhAAAAT survivor is that you?????

For real. Frustrates me that people like Kyle and MentorPilot are taking sponsorships from them again. I could have sworn people knew better now

Mentour Pilot tripled down when I brought it up. He said "I asked them about the 'stories', and they told me it's fine". Plus "I have a whole video crew to support!" @@bru4773

​@@bru4773 relax, monaayyyy

All therapists are like that, unless you can afford to hire a private practitioner. Very few can.

​@@ghostratsarahnot really. Better help is especially scummy since they sold their customers data and didn't vet most of their therapists, which meant that a bunch of people with no qualifications were given access to very vulnerable people.

Why

​@@theunluckycharm9637They're an incredibly scummy company. For reasons that I don't fulky understand, they're not subject to HIPAA, and, despite their terms and conditions stating otherwise, have been found to have sold/are selling patient data. They regularly treat their therapists terribly. And many of their therapists are terrible in turn (everything from not actually being licensed to ghosting patients to giving advice like (to a gambling addict) to keep at it).

​@@theunluckycharm9637they sell peoples sensitive data dont hier credible Therapists

@@theunluckycharm9637 Among other things, they’ve been exposed for giving data about their customers to third parties without said customers’ knowledge or consent, potentially violating the law in the process. There are also extensive allegations that they’ve utterly neglected any sort of vetting process, which meant that people who had fraudulent or nonexistent qualifications were able to pose as licensed therapists, which in turn led to patients being given incorrect advice or being abandoned by the “professionals” assigned to them. Overall, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests they’re an awful company that has no problem ruining its users’ lives for profit while pretending to be there to assist them.

Patient died, condition cured!

They were not found guilty of selling user data.

Hey you could do research on what makes betterhelp any worse than almost every other mental health care provider, or capitalist company in general. I'll give you a hint; there isn't one.

Try to find a company under capitalism that doesn't have a whole army of skeletons in their closet LOL

​@@emoryogglethorp8180God is dead, Capitalism wears his skin in a sick act of mockery, and all we do in response is laugh.

I was very disappointed with this sponsorship too.

​@@emoryogglethorp8180There's plenty of businesses that only have small squadrons of skeletons though, rather than the large platoon of them that BH has

more than one

Yeah. This hits me the same way that Tom Nicholas' video on Verisatium did. I _WANT_ to believe these guys are "the good guys", but reality seems a little less bright.

​@@sebastianahrens2385Not sure about Veritasium as I haven't seen many of his videos lately, but I believe Kyle deserves the benefit of the doubt based on his previous and current conduct. One sponsorship oopsie doesn't automatically make him a "bad guy".

@@nukesrus2663 No, but it signals to me that he either didn't do his due diligence or didn't care. It was similar with Veritasium. The info he provided in a video about the viability of self-driving cars was mostly provided by the very company that sponsored the video, and thus obviously biased in favor of self-driving cars. Not what you would expect from a channel that literally puts truth in their name.

​@@sebastianahrens2385 100% agree with you, and regarding the other, " Veritasium" guy?: he's just a greedy s.bag who likes doubling down every single time when being called out and proven wrong. He's not a scientist at all but he really loves arguing with scientists using his best arguments to support his claims: "trust me bro" His personality has nothing to do with the word "veritas"

probably he was locked in a contract

The history field seems to be going the same way. I always read sources

Dogma is a bitch.

It happens a lot in sports science, especially in papers concerning the creation of the perfect hockey stick.

They're not real scientists then. Equivalent to the researchers hired by cigarette companies to prove their product isn't harmful

I've had this problem with doctors. Before I made personal medical decisions I always take a glance through the NIH databases and see what's out there on my condition / medication. If I see something strange, I'll bring it up to the doctor and ask if I should be concerned - I've more than once caught oversights and interactions with doctors who are willing to hear me out, but so many before dismissed my concerns or even berated me for "thinking I know better." I don't. I know I don't know better than a doctor, that's why I'm *asking a doctor*. 😂 It worries me how many times I've caught something a doctor saying or doing that's outright incorrect or poorly researched, because I'm a rare breed who reads research papers for fun. Most people would just assume the doctor always has the time and resources to know everything about the human body... Which is a bit unfair to expect

Do you have any proof of this?

@@addison_v_ertisement1678I mean theres plenty of people who have talked about this. Just gotta do a couple basic google searches. Also come to my attention today that they're an Israeli company made by someone who is very much not a trustworthy individual. Better Help has also in the past had to pay out over 7 million in court for selling user's private session info to companies like Facebook and Snapchat.

​@@addison_v_ertisement1678 No he doesnt but its worse than what he wrote even. They specifically stated they do not sell user data. They did, got exposed and had to pay 7.8m recently.

He worked in anesthesia, not a soft science.

@@ferretyluv Still good chance that his papers were cited. Also doesn’t answer the question.

Talk about it, i id a lit. review in psychology for my thesis. When i reached the first paper ever written about the subject i realized it had been badly paraphrased and further studies mixed up concepts because they had a word in commen even when they where from different subjects. A mess, but it didn't matter to my teachers, and there were newer publications citings definitions from flawed papers. Edit: word in common*

​@@LordOfAllusionThat's not as big of a deal as it sounds, ideal scientific practice involves a "trust but verify" approach so while errors may have been carried through they shouldn't have any major events downstream unless other authors have also done dirty research (in which case that research should also directly be interrogated).

@@bosstowndynamics5488 You should look up the phenomenon of “idea laundering” in academia. I think Bret Weinstein spoke about it a few years back. Basically a scientist publishes a bogus study, then someone cites that paper, which uses the bogus info as support of their new data, then other papers reference that, then the first author uses the new papers as citations to bolster their new paper, and no one goes through the other levels to the original source to verify the original data that is the foundation. A great example is the “1:4 women will be raped on college campuses” assertion. Turns out that has no scientific basis. It was an excerpt from a Gloria Steinem book from the 70’s, and it was based on a remark made by a New York police officer during a speech at a convention regarding a particular district in New York. There is no data to support this statement, but people still unthinkingly take it as a settled fact.

It was proven in a court of law that they don't sell information.

*HIPAA

*oh my god they don’t?* The more I learn about these guys the worse it gets holy shit

They are certified by HITRUST, though.

Yeah and all used by the medical profession. And they wonder why people are giving up on the doctors,

​@angelachouinard4581 people arent.

No it doesn't. It was proven in a court of law that they don't. Stop promoting misinformation.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678 I don't know what you're referring to. I can't find a single article claiming what you just said. I can however find a dozen other articles otherwise. The FTC fined betterhelp a few million dollars for this exact reason. Why on earth are you saying what you are?

@@theworddoner They settled the suit.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678 you do realize in claiming I was spreading misinformation, you were in fact spreading your own misinformation? ‘It was proven in court of law that they don’t’ (sell consumer’s health data to marketers) is vastly different from ´they settled the suit’

Prove it.

BobbyBroccoli made a three part series about him, it is a fascinating watch.

Note also Victor Ninov, who falsified evidence that he had discovered elements 116 and 118. Another case is that of Hwang Woo-suk, who was a national celebrity in South Korea until he was exposed for faking experiments on human cloning and illegal harvesting of egg cells., BobbyBroccoli has videos about them too.

It seems I have found the bobbybroccoli watchers corner

@@milliwaysbartender1726 Glad I'm not the only one

@@MtnNerdI’m surprised the Venn diagram isn’t circular

even more disappointing is his reply to someone else pointing that out. He doesn't give a crap. As this vid shows, sciency people aren't automatically ethical

@@flatterkatz this is correct. He had a massively out of pocket reply to someone in a thread. He’s being obtuse.

​@@flatterkatzHe said on his patreon that he already thought over all of the shit BH did compared to the good they do, and the good this sponsorship could help him do.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678 Bad mental health care is objectively worse than no mental health care. Kyle is wrong, and the way he's responded to people about it is beyond pathetic.

​@@addison_v_ertisement1678 this sounds more like an excuse. "I want the money, how can I make this sound good?"

It's called "keeping the lights on."

​@addison_v_ertisement1678 he makes enough off of 2 mill and there are others who would sponsor.

Well The bills ain't gonna pay themselves

He made a statement about it on Discord saying pretty much it's all about the money. Pretty gross actually, considering people will use Better Help because of him and get sh*t "therapy" that they will pay an arm and a leg for.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678keeping the lights on at the expense of Palestinians since better help is an Israeli company sympathetic to Israel

They settled a lawsuit, that is not an admittance. Literally the opposite. Go look into every other healthcare company in the United States, you won't find anyone not doing the same things- unless its an expensive private practice.

@@ghostratsarah ah yes, the bandwagon fallacy. I grew that makes it okay.

​@@BioHunter1990The point is not that it's okay, it's that why should we shame Kyke for sponsoring *this specific one.*

youd be surprised on how many health insurance provided therapy companies sell your data, let alone how many (insert company type) companies sell your data. Any help is better than not talking to anyone at all..let bro get his bag😂

he also mentioned vaccines. some have not been helpful or side effects later. some have had low % of working. so i might start to question him as well.

@@tenin982000 i don’t mean this to sound argumentative, so please don’t take it that way, but better help and VACCINES are completely different. The vast majority of vaccines are helpful to the general public and overall health for the human race, even if there are outlying cases where harm is done. Vaccines also have decades upon decades of research supporting their efficacy. Better help is a company that’s relatively new with a shoddy track record, I don’t see the correlation between the two. I think Kyle genuinely cares about the truth, even if the sponsorship is questionable. He may be locked into a contract, even if he isn’t, I think he’s done far more good for the scientific community than harm, so I personally still trust him.

@@tenin982000which ones?

@@tenin982000 I'd question you more than him

@tenin982000 just say your an antivaxer holy fuck

Right like maybe he’s subliminally backhanding them 😂 who knows. the video is engaging otherwise

Incentive structures need to change. The number incentive for scientific research should always be quality and credibility.

It's not so much a "constant stream of money" as it is "career progression" - that might seem like nitpicking but the key distinction here is that the latter applies pressure to generate positive findings even in cases where there's no conflict of interest, albeit smaller amounts of pressure (contrast with industry funded trials where there's more implicit pressure to produce positive results but it's a bit more obvious where to look to find the effects of that bias).

He didn't fail you. Stop taking this personally.

@addison_v_ertisement1678 It wasn't taken personally? It was a statement, and yes, he did fail us as a researcher, not using his knowledge to filter out the horrible company that betterhelp is

I mean their settlement with the FTC where they agreed to stop selling people's data was less than a year ago, so...

I don’t think the “calm down” comment is actually from Kyle, seems very out of character.

@@Styfalled it is, it's on one of the other comments (the one with a fox-ish pfp)

@@Styfalled Fully in line with him being autistic and all :D

@@Styfalled It is though- when a creator replies to a comment on their own post, it shows their pfp before you click the "replies" button to view replies. I'm on PC, so this is what I see, and no way to fake that beause the account HAS to be the same one that posted the vid for that to show up.

@@SyureK13 no I meant i think it seems like one of his staff (If he has any) would have commented it.

I hope it's a mistake, and he doesn't stick with them.

I had the same thought when he started his sponsor read.

@@3xavior17 don't know much about them, other than seeing them around places on here. Is there a problem?

Can someone please explain the BetterHelp issue? I learned about lawsuit in 2018, but is that it? It has been 6 years with the old CPO fired, and the new guy trying to correct everything. That problem sounds like it has been fixed. So why is there still fire? Or is there something else I don’t know about?

google them and 'FTC' @@catherinebaldwin6580

Hopefully they discover the Lament Configuration by accident, such sights, indeed.

He only did it because it could help him in his ultimate goal. Stop acting like he's a cawordly villain.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678 By taking money, he endorses it, tells his viewers to use the service. Which in turn leads to viewers who need actual help to receive total BS and sham antidepressant ads

Pressure to publish comes down to funding and promotion. Someone that is prolifically published in peer reviewed journals tends to get more funding/more prestigious positions in academia. Grants and funding are limited, as are seats as chairmen/department heads, and the one who is most frequently published tends to be seen as the greater contributor to the field and more deserving of future funding/prestige. It's the scientific equivalent of being encouraged to 'embellish' (bullshit) on your CV/resumé for a better salary/higher position in a company.

I have a question. If you suspected someone of doing this, what should be done? I know of someone "researching" an obscure medical condition. They are the only one researching it that i know of. It's pretty obvious they did it for the funding. Not only is it wrong, but dangerous, as it is causing some bad real world consequences AND is causing alternate research to not happen. It's a situation were no one is bound to notice, and has apparently strong plausible deniability

Yeah, I've heard that called the "publish or perish" pressure.

yes, the bad part is this person also persists. @@MonkeyJedi99

​@@adamfabing8250 If you are certain of any wrong doing, you have prove that they have malicious intention. It is very hard to prove the data is wrong unless there is physical evidence. If you can somehow prove the data is wrong, don't expect them to get punished either. Most people will be given the benefit of doubt as it is possible for them to be wrong instead of intentionally faking data. Being wrong is part of the scientific process, faking something is not.

They did not sell private health information. They were proven not to have done that in a court of law.

@@addison_v_ertisement1678 can you send me the link to the info? Genuinely would love to check it out.

1. There was never any "contract of trust." He never signed anything, or read over any of your vague rules. Stop taking this personally. 2. They were not found guilty of leaking information about therapy visits.

I think you missed the word “implied” in my comment above. As someone who presents themselves as a well researched science educator, there is an implied contract of trust that in exchange for our attention, he provides accurate and trustworthy content, and thus the brands he DIRECTLY endorses are also trustworthy. I think it’s pretty well accepted that Better Help is not a trustworthy brand, and unfortunately he’s aware of that, which brings in to question his broader trustworthiness. I hope that explains it.

DO NOT go to betterhelp

It sounds like the script of a scam... oh right....

I have never understood how paying some one to ask "How are you doing today" and "How did that make you feel?" is supposed to change anything. Maybe if you are super lonely and have no one to talk to it would be nice. If that's the case you may want to think about why you have alienated every single person in your life to the point they wont talk to you anymore. But that's just me.

@@1978garfield bro thinks the brain can't have problems. also, not what therapy is. you're part of the problem.

@1978garfield then again with betterhelp that's all they do... well i would say that, but they instead just bully gay people. they do worse

Always remember that Plankton presumably intentionally programmed his robot wife to be mean to him