>>> But as a default position MSM is simply not trustworthy and there are countless examples of that out there.
>OK, I'll stipulate that.
>Then why do you look at it at all?

Can only speak for myself, but there are certain triggers or filters I employ, like is the emphasis more on a human or moral side vs. my give me raw numbers, perhaps speculate about side effects tiliting those # or my more cynical "follow the money".

I realize that the information is already preselected and tilted, I hope to get an estimate where such tilting was done and why such stories are brought to foreground to fudge other aspects. World is too large to fall back to "I only believe what my own eyes have seen in nature/the wild" and for some things (like virus spikes, DNA sequences, red shift...) my eyes simply are not good enough ;-)