4 ms·

One was trust the experts, the other was we need more proof. Which was anti science?

• spondylosaurus 3y ago
  This is disingenuous for two reasons: (1) where else does proof come from if not from experts in their respective fields? and (2) various forms of crackpot denialism persisted long after proof was (repeatedly) given. People were peddling horse dewormer as a COVID treatment even after multiple studies that demonstrated no benefit.
  • graphe 3y ago
    It's disingenuous to group one group of trust the experts as proof and the other as crackpot. Both groups blindly believed claims that a new treatment or repurposed drug would prevent covid. In neither case did it work. I did the scientific way of not contracting coronavirus: isolation. Neither the dewormer or the mutiple experimental shots were as efficacious.
    • pas 3y ago
      there is a clear cost-benefit hierarchy. isolation is low on this, ivermectin is even lower.