19 ms·
Your argument resembles that of frauds and quacks everywhere. I hope I know less about cancer research than you do -- because I know very little, and you want
by quesera 5y ago
Your argument resembles that of frauds and quacks everywhere.
I hope I know less about cancer research than you do -- because I know very little, and you want us to believe that you know more than that.
However your presentation style will convince no one.
- SemanticStrengh 5y agoNo one can be convinced by a few lines argumentation and the attention span of the average joe does not allow for lengthier argumentation, do you see the problem? Therefore I can only trigger attention/interest as a way for those people to allocate higher attention span in order to then receive real explanations if interested. The actual evidence is here https://touroscholar.touro.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1242&context=sjlcas https://touroscholar.touro.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1... and it has semantic strength
- slenk 5y agoThat is 2 years old at this point. It sounds like mRNA might be more promising now. https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2022/mrna-vaccines-to-treat-cancer https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2022...
- quesera 5y agoI see, so you think you're performing for the uneducated masses. You're deluding yourself. This is fraudulent argumentation. If you have something to say that you want people to pay attention to, you can work up a few sentences plus a few corroborating links. If you have nothing to say, you intimate at great revelation held back by the ignorance of lessers, and tell inquirers to do their own research. If you don't like the categorization you've self-selected into, then you need to select differently. Otherwise, you just appear to be clueless but aspirational, condescending and clearly not worth engaging.