3 ms·
The rebuttal is irrelevant/non sequitur, which is different from being false.
by KMag 5y ago
The rebuttal is irrelevant/non sequitur, which is different from being false.
- creddit 5y agoExcept it's not irrelevant even. The central claim is encapsulated in the first sentence: > Because of the way they are constructed, Randomized Control Trials will never show any benefit for any antiviral against COVID-19 By noting that there are indeed RCTs that show effective treatments for COVID-19 (fluvoxamine and monoclonal antibodies), it renders the entire point false. The semantic argument about what constitutes an "antiviral" is meaningless as the OP themselves plays fast and loose with this by establishing that HCQ and Ivermectin (primarily used as antiparasitics) as antivirals.