> What if SARS-CoV2 leaked from a lab? What if there are long-term effects of mRNA vaccines? What if Ivermectin is a safe and effective prophylaxis against, and

> What if SARS-CoV2 leaked from a lab? What if there are long-term effects of mRNA vaccines? What if Ivermectin is a safe and effective prophylaxis against, and treatment for, COVID-19? So having all three of these things together is a bit of a red flag. But I'd say the distinction is, you can't just make something up and say "what if?" I used to see this a lot with "electromagnetic fields cause x" type stuff. It doesn't get you a credible position in the discussion IMO to just say imagine that something could happen without posing a credible* mechanism for it. *credible may be in the eye of the beholder a bit, but a first principles mechanism based on established science is a start. Citing a study that just shows a statistical relationship, unless it's unequivocal and readily repeated (e.g. harms of smoking) does not really count if you can't explain why something happens.