Skip to content
Back to skills

Debunk Script Writer

ASecurity

> **This skill has been merged into `youtube-script-master`.** > Location: `/.claude/skills/youtube-script-master/SKILL.md` > Please use the unified skill for all YouTube script writing, including debunk content. ---

  • 5 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added June 5, 2026
researchrustgoreact

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned June 5, 2026

npx -y skills add drshailesh88/integrated_content_OS --skill debunk-script-writer --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Debunk Script Writer?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Debunk Script Writer
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/drshailesh88-debunk-script-writer/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/drshailesh88-debunk-script-writer)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
# DEPRECATED - Use youtube-script-master instead

> **This skill has been merged into `youtube-script-master`.**
> Location: `/.claude/skills/youtube-script-master/SKILL.md`
> Please use the unified skill for all YouTube script writing, including debunk content.

---

# Skill: Debunk Script Writer

## Metadata
- **Name**: debunk-script-writer
- **Version**: 1.1
- **Status**: DEPRECATED - merged into youtube-script-master
- **Purpose**: Write evidence-based correction videos that address patient misinformation without humiliation
- **Token Budget**: High (use with Opus for nuanced tone)
- **Inherits From**: `youtube-script-hinglish` (for Hinglish rules, voice, transitions)

---

## Relationship to youtube-script-hinglish

This skill **extends** the base youtube-script-hinglish skill. It inherits:
- Hinglish word choice matrix (70% Hindi, 30% English technical)
- Voice DNA and transitions
- Basic script quality standards
- Engagement beat patterns

It **adds** specialized capabilities for:
- Steelman-then-correct methodology
- Tone calibration for sensitive corrections
- Narrative-specific hooks and structures
- Evidence citation protocol for debunking

**When to use which:**
| Scenario | Use |
|----------|-----|
| Explaining a concept (What is ApoB?) | youtube-script-hinglish |
| Lifestyle advice (Walking vs Gym) | youtube-script-hinglish |
| Patient stories/cases | youtube-script-hinglish |
| Correcting a popular myth | **debunk-script-writer** |
| Responding to Berg/Ekberg/SAAOL | **debunk-script-writer** |
| "YouTube says X, is it true?" | **debunk-script-writer** |

---

## The Core Philosophy

**"Be the cardiologist who speaks their language without surrendering rigor."**

Patients arrive having watched 50+ hours of Dr. Eric Berg, SAAOL, and fasting evangelists. They have absorbed:
- LDL skepticism
- Statin fear
- Insulin-as-sole-cause framing
- Fasting-cures-everything belief
- Supplements-over-medications preference

Your job is NOT to mock, dismiss, or humiliate. Your job is to:
1. Acknowledge what they got RIGHT
2. Gently show where the wheels come off
3. Provide the nuanced truth with evidence
4. Give them a new, more accurate mental model

---

## When to Use This Skill

Invoke this skill when:
- Creating "response to" videos addressing popular misinformation
- Writing myth-busting content about cardiology topics
- Correcting beliefs seeded by high-influence channels
- Addressing common patient concerns about statins, LDL, fasting, etc.

---

## Required Context

Before using:
1. Know which narrative you're correcting (from narrative_monitor.py output)
2. Know which channel(s) promoted this narrative
3. Have specific claims to address (not vague generalizations)
4. Have evidence ready (studies, guidelines, clinical experience)

---

## Debunk Formats

### Format A: Direct Response (Use sparingly, for high-stakes misinformation)

**When to use:** Only for dangerous misinformation from high-influence channels.

**Structure:**
```
[HOOK] - The claim that needs correcting
[STEELMAN] - What they got RIGHT, give credit
[PIVOT] - "Lekin yahan problem hai..."
[EVIDENCE] - What studies actually show
[NUANCE] - The complete picture
[TAKEAWAY] - What to actually do
```

**Example title:** "Cardiologist Reacts: What Dr. Eric Berg Gets Wrong About LDL"

**Tone rules:**
- Never use "destroy," "debunk," "expose" language
- Always acknowledge partial truths
- Be respectful even in disagreement
- Your authority comes from evidence, not ridicule

---

### Format B: Gentle Correction (Default format)

**When to use:** Most misinformation that doesn't require naming sources.

**Structure:**
```
[HOOK] - "Aapne yeh suna hoga..." (you've probably heard this)
[VALIDATE] - Why this belief makes sense / is appealing
[COMPLICATE] - "Lekin story itni simple nahi hai..."
[EVIDENCE] - Walk through what we actually know
[CONTEXT] - Indian-specific considerations
[ACTIONABLE] - What to do with this information
```

**Example title:** "Kya LDL Really Matters? The Full Truth"

**Tone rules:**
- Never name specific channels unless absolutely necessary
- Frame as "common misconceptions" not "lies"
- Validate the underlying concern (fear of medications, desire for natural solutions)
- Show you understand why they believed this

---

### Format C: Evidence Synthesis (For complex, nuanced topics)

**When to use:** When the truth is genuinely complex and both "sides" have partial truths.

**Structure:**
```
[HOOK] - The debate/controversy
[SIDES] - What each side claims
[EVIDENCE WALK] - Study by study breakdown
[SYNTHESIS] - What the totality of evidence suggests
[CLINICAL REALITY] - What I see in practice
[FRAMEWORK] - How to think about this
```

**Example title:** "The LDL Controversy: 50 Studies Reviewed"

---

### Format D: Indian Context Correction

**When to use:** When Western advice doesn't translate to Indian population.

**Structure:**
```
[HOOK] - Popular advice that doesn't work for Indians
[GLOBAL vs LOCAL] - Why generic advice fails
[INDIAN DATA] - Studies on Indian populations
[RISK FACTORS] - India-specific considerations
[ADAPTED ADVICE] - What Indians should actually do
```

**Example title:** "Why American Heart Advice Doesn't Work for Indians"

---

## Steelman-Then-Correct Protocol

This is the most important technique. Before criticizing ANY belief, you MUST:

### Step 1: Find the Kernel of Truth
Every popular health belief contains something true or appealing. Find it.

| Belief | Kernel of Truth |
|--------|-----------------|
| "LDL doesn't matter" | LDL alone isn't the full picture; particle count, inflammation matter |
| "Statins are poison" | Statins do have side effects; not everyone needs them |
| "Fasting cures everything" | Fasting has metabolic benefits; caloric restriction helps |
| "Insulin is the real problem" | Insulin resistance IS important; metabolic health matters |
| "Seed oils cause heart disease" | Diet quality matters; ultra-processed foods are problematic |

### Step 2: Acknowledge It Explicitly

**Wrong approach:**
> "Yeh log galat hain. LDL clearly causes heart disease."

**Right approach:**
> "Yeh belief kahan se aayi? Actually, ek valid point hai. LDL alone se poori picture nahi milti. ApoB, particle count, inflammation - sab matter karta hai. Lekin iska matlab yeh nahi ki LDL matter hi nahi karta..."

### Step 3: Show the Logical Error

Common logical errors to expose:
- **Oversimplification**: "It's not that simple..."
- **Cherry-picking studies**: "Jab hum ALL studies dekhte hain..."
- **Correlation vs causation**: "Yeh saath-saath hota hai, iska matlab yeh nahi ki..."
- **Anecdote vs evidence**: "Kuch logon ka experience aisa hai, but population level pe..."
- **False dichotomy**: "Yeh either-or nahi hai..."

---

## Evidence Citation Protocol

### For Studies
> "2023 mein European Heart Journal mein ek meta-analysis aayi - 200 studies, 20 lakh logon pe. Finding? [specific finding]..."

### For Guidelines
> "ESC guidelines - Europe ke top cardiologists - recommend karte hain ki [specific recommendation]. Kyun? Because evidence shows..."

### For Clinical Experience
> "Mere practice mein pichhle 15 saal mein, maine [X] cases dekhe hain jahan [observation]..."

### For Opposing Evidence
> "Ab kuch log kehte hain ki [study name] ne opposite dikhaaya. Sahi baat hai. Lekin us study mein [limitation]..."

---

## Hinglish Hooks for Debunk Content

### For LDL Skepticism
- "YouTube pe dekha ki LDL kharab nahi hai? Ek cardiologist ki sachai suniye..."
- "High LDL but 'I feel fine' - yeh kyun khatarnak soch hai..."
- "LDL myth ya reality? 50 studies dekhne ke baad mera jawab..."

### For Statin Fear
- "Statin se darr lagta hai? Main aapka darr samajhta hoon. Ab evidence dekhte hain..."
- "Statin ke side effects - kitna real, kitna exaggerated..."
- "Maine statin leni chahiye ya nahi? Honest answer..."

### For Insulin Primacy
- "Sirf insulin fix karo, sab theek? Kaash itna simple hota..."
- "Insulin resistance important hai - but story yahan khatam nahi hoti..."
- "Cholesterol vs Insulin - yeh ladai fake hai. Real picture alag hai..."

### For Fasting Absolutism
- "Fasting se heart disease reverse? Kuch sach hai, kuch myth..."
- "Autophagy ka magic ya marketing? Evidence check karte hain..."
- "Fasting achha hai - but kiske liye? Yeh important hai..."

---

## Tone Calibration

### Never Say:
- "Yeh log galat hain" (These people are wrong)
- "Bakwaas" (Nonsense)
- "Unhe medical degree nahi hai" (They don't have a medical degree)
- "Aap fool ban rahe ho" (You're being fooled)
- "Yeh dangerous misinformation hai" (This is dangerous misinformation)

### Instead Say:
- "Is approach mein ek problem hai" (There's a problem with this approach)
- "Story itni simple nahi hai" (The story isn't that simple)
- "Partial truth hai, but..." (There's partial truth, but...)
- "Main samajhta hoon kyun yeh appealing hai" (I understand why this is appealing)
- "Evidence kuch aur kehti hai" (Evidence says something different)

---

## Script Template: Gentle Correction

```
[HOOK - 0:00]
{Surprising statement that challenges common belief}
"Aapne suna hoga ki {common belief}. Lakhs of people believe this. Aur honestly? Unki baat mein thoda point bhi hai. Lekin poori story alag hai..."

[VALIDATE - 0:30]
{Acknowledge why this belief exists}
"Yeh belief kahan se aayi? {Name source or trend}. Aur dekho, {what they got right}. Yeh sach hai."

[PIVOT - 1:30]
{Introduce the complication}
"Lekin yahan story mein twist hai. {The piece they're missing}. Aur yeh miss karna aapke liye expensive ho sakta hai..."

[EVIDENCE - 2:30]
{Walk through evidence}
"Chalo evidence dekhte hain. {Study 1}. Phir {Study 2}. Aur {meta-analysis or guideline}. Pattern dikh raha hai?"

[NUANCE - 5:30]
{The complete picture}
"Toh sachai kya hai? {Nuanced truth}. Na sirf {extreme A}, na sirf {extreme B}. Reality is..."

[INDIAN CONTEXT - 7:00]
{India-specific considerations}
"Aur specifically Indians ke liye? {India-specific data or risk factors}. Generic advice se kaam nahi chalega..."

[ACTIONABLE - 8:30]
{What to actually do}
"Toh aap kya karein? Simple steps:
1. {Action 1}
2. {Action 2}
3. {Action 3}
Apne doctor se is basis pe baat karein..."

[CLOSE - 9:30]
{Empowering close}
"Ab aapke paas complete picture hai. Na darr, na complacency. Sirf evidence. Apna decision informed lein..."
```

---

## Response Video Template

For direct "Cardiologist Reacts" format:

```
[HOOK - 0:00]
"[Channel name] ki yeh video [X million] logon ne dekhi. Aur [specific claim]. Main as a cardiologist, 15 saal ka experience, aapko batata hoon - kya sahi hai, kya galat..."

[CLIP 1 + REACTION]
"{Show claim}"
"Yahan [name] sahi keh rahe hain ki {partial truth}. Credit where due..."

[CLIP 2 + CORRECTION]
"{Show problematic claim}"
"Ab yahan problem hai. {Why this is incomplete/wrong}. Studies show {evidence}..."

[CLIP 3 + NUANCE]
"{Show oversimplification}"
"Yeh oversimplification hai. Real picture? {Nuanced truth}..."

[SUMMARY]
"Toh kya main keh raha hoon ki [channel] galat hai? Nahi. Main keh raha hoon ki {nuanced position}. Aapka health too important hai for incomplete information..."
```

---

## Quality Checklist

Before finalizing debunk script:

### Steelman Check
- [ ] Did I acknowledge what they got RIGHT?
- [ ] Did I explain why this belief is appealing?
- [ ] Did I avoid strawmanning their position?

### Evidence Check
- [ ] Did I cite specific studies/guidelines?
- [ ] Did I address counter-evidence fairly?
- [ ] Did I show my reasoning, not just conclusions?

### Tone Check
- [ ] Would I be comfortable saying this to a patient's face?
- [ ] Is this educational, not confrontational?
- [ ] Does this build trust or defensiveness?

### Actionable Check
- [ ] Does viewer know what to DO with this information?
- [ ] Is advice realistic for Indian context?
- [ ] Does it empower, not just correct?

---

## Narratives Quick Reference

| Narrative | Steelman | Key Correction |
|-----------|----------|----------------|
| LDL skepticism | LDL alone isn't everything; metabolic health matters | Mendelian randomization proves LDL causality |
| Statin fear | Statins have real side effects; not everyone needs them | For high-risk patients, benefits far outweigh risks |
| Insulin primacy | Insulin resistance is genuinely important | It's one factor among many; LDL still independent |
| Fasting absolutism | Fasting has metabolic benefits | Not magical; doesn't reverse established plaque |
| Seed oil villain | Diet quality matters; ultra-processed bad | Seed oils not uniquely harmful; overall pattern matters |

---

*This skill ensures debunk content corrects with authority but without arrogance.*

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.