3 ms·
So your argument is that because it works for your disease, it must work for covid. You provide zero evidence that it works at all for covid, zero evidence to c
by mnm1 6y ago
So your argument is that because it works for your disease, it must work for covid. You provide zero evidence that it works at all for covid, zero evidence to counter the studies that show it doesn't. Then you claim some conspiracy that hcq is not being used because trump touted it. And this is supposed to be evidence of what, that society keeps you from sharing your stupid, idiotic opinions that have no basis in reality and can easily be disproved? If that's the case, good. Society is doing its job. You spoke stupidity and were shunned and unwelcomed. That's exactly how free speech is supposed to work when you say something this stupid.
- ColanR 6y ago> So your argument is that because it works for your disease, it must work for covid. That's a strawman if I ever heard one.
- mnm1 6y agoHow is it a strawman? That's literally his argument. He writes: "This is something that is cheap and could save hundreds of thousands of lives." in the context of covid while providing nothing but his anecdotal experience with a different disease. How could I possibly interpret the argument any other way?