4 ms·

I encourage you to investigate the timeline of Hydroxychloroquine. From its scientific support for effective use in the 2003 SARS outbreak. From early tests in

I encourage you to investigate the timeline of Hydroxychloroquine. From its scientific support for effective use in the 2003 SARS outbreak. From early tests in China showing positive results it also worked for SARS-CoV-2 when applied early on to mild cases (not to terribly sick pneumatics as a cure). From Trump stupidly talking about things he has no authority to speak on, carelessly misleading public. From how the media started attacking HCQ afterwards as a proxy for Trump bashing. From how a singly shoddy retracted study with possibly faked data, caused all WHO tests to cancel HCQ trials world-wide (when these very trials were designed to test adverse and positive effects, and not part of the shoddy study). HCQ. Like mask-wearing. Like sensible quarantine methods. Are all incredibly polarized, political, and vague regarding to truths. But any credible research on HCQ shows its effect or potential, still. And even for the vaccines, we see involvement of politics (Trump would definitely have abused a vaccine release to gain votes), and economic incentives of big pharmas and countries GDP/unemployment, to muddy what is factual and helpful, and what is ill-motivated and cause for suspicion.

ProofMe5GIsSafe 6y ago
For instance: I have no proof that there are PR departments of public health organizations and stock-market listed companies who are actively suppressing negative information on vaccines (contents, adverse effects, low-but-sufficient efficiency). I think it is highly likely that there are economic, panic-management or public health incentives to against dangerous, yet partly true, ideas, and that big pharma and CDC could be conspiring to manage and control this information and what opinions I form. That, well-intentioned, Google and Youtube and Facebook and Twitter and WHO and some other elites sat in a secret meeting room, and wrote the playbook on how to deal with people proposing multi-vatimins as a cure, or even as a help for improving immune system. That such people are banned (or even arrested if they have medical authority) for things that in a normal situation people would have a right not to mistreated as such. You have no proof that big pharma does not conspire to suppress half-measures and inconvenient situations (people refusing to mask up until vaccine is released). But what makes you think that? You looked at the history of big pharma, at the history of capitalism, at the history of public health controversies and attempts from the top to manage that and politicize it, and you see nothing of suspicion for extrapolating that to the uncertain future we live in? Or you trust them on their blue eyes or because believing it would make you feel bad?

ProofMe5GIsSafe 6y ago

For instance: I have no proof that there are PR departments of public health organizations and stock-market listed companies who are actively suppressing negative information on vaccines (contents, adverse effects, low-but-sufficient efficiency). I think it is highly likely that there are economic, panic-management or public health incentives to against dangerous, yet partly true, ideas, and that big pharma and CDC could be conspiring to manage and control this information and what opinions I form. That, well-intentioned, Google and Youtube and Facebook and Twitter and WHO and some other elites sat in a secret meeting room, and wrote the playbook on how to deal with people proposing multi-vatimins as a cure, or even as a help for improving immune system. That such people are banned (or even arrested if they have medical authority) for things that in a normal situation people would have a right not to mistreated as such. You have no proof that big pharma does not conspire to suppress half-measures and inconvenient situations (people refusing to mask up until vaccine is released). But what makes you think that? You looked at the history of big pharma, at the history of capitalism, at the history of public health controversies and attempts from the top to manage that and politicize it, and you see nothing of suspicion for extrapolating that to the uncertain future we live in? Or you trust them on their blue eyes or because believing it would make you feel bad?