unlike many public health authorities, grujicd is forming a hypothesis and showing a method to attempt to prove said hypothesis. If you don't like it, you can s

unlike many public health authorities, grujicd is forming a hypothesis and showing a method to attempt to prove said hypothesis. If you don't like it, you can suggest your own. In this way, a reader can deduce what they believe is the closest truth available rather than it be shouted down at them. The fact that grujicd did not interpret Gibraltar data accurately is, I believe in this case, not a mark against them but a testament to how well they formulated their argument that flaws can be evaluated easily. public health authorities on the other hand will begrudgingly hand over data after months of outcry, as well as change testing criteria and engage in many other methods of purposeful/accidental obfuscation, making their arguments hard to decipher.