3 ms·
Doctors who recommend these medications aren't recommending them in isolation, but in combination. Check out the AAPS Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment for mo
by silent_cal 5y ago
Doctors who recommend these medications aren't recommending them in isolation, but in combination. Check out the AAPS Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment for more info. You have to ask yourself why doctors aren't treating people with covid until they can't breathe.
- actuallyalys 5y agoAccording to Wikipedia, "the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association that promotes medical disinformation, HIV/AIDS denialism, the abortion-breast cancer hypothesis, vaccine and autism connections, and homosexuality reducing life expectancy."
- silent_cal 5y ago>According to Wikipedia Lol
- actuallyalys 5y agoI mean, the claims on Wikipedia are all cited and line up with what I read in other sources and on its own website.
- silent_cal 5y agoWikipedia has a liberal bias, according to its co-founder Larry Sanger. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you do too.
- kazinator 5y agoIn that context, I strongly suspect, "liberal bias" is just a code word that means "intellectual bias" or at least "non-idiot bias". As in, "we have a non-idiot bias; please think about not contributing here if you suspect you might be an idiot". In that context, it does not mean anything like socialist, let alone Marxist-Leninist. However, those who think so might be discouraged, which is a good thing.
- silent_cal 5y agoBy liberal, I mean a smug, entitled elitist who dismisses those who disagree with him as idiots, without engaging in argument, and subscribes to Official Opinions.
- kazinator 5y agoYou're literally saying that the verifiable, external citations that constitute the rational evidence for the claims of a Wikipedia article should just be dismissed with a "LOL" because the site's co-founder has opined that the site as a whole has a liberal bias.
- silent_cal 5y agoThe user didn't cite any external citations (or verify anything), he cited the first few sentences of the Wikipedia summary. You didn't cite anything either, you just asserted that the article was well sourced, as if you're a god and should be believed automatically. You're "literally" dismissing an association of licensed medical doctors because of a Wikipedia article citation, which is laughable.
- kazinator 5y agoI'm not following this. From the top; which claims in the article are you saying are specifically not true? Based on what not being well-cited? Can you explain why someone should not be able to quote a sentence or two from a Wikipedia article (that anyone can easily find and read in its entirety) or anywhere else without being obliged to duplicate all the citations?
- silent_cal 5y agoSo you can dismiss opinions out of hand because of a "non-idiot bias", and I have to exhaustively dismantle the entire Wikipedia article along with its citations? I'll do that right after you do so with the AAPS, all of its member MDs, and all the research cited in its reports on covid. All I did was laugh at someone citing Wikipedia as if it carried any weight in itself. By the way, the section the user referenced doesn't contain a single external citation.