4 ms·
(1) I don't think you can have an ad hominem against an idea? (2) I'm not opposed to any ideas in this paper. I think the paper stands on its own merits.
by ants_everywhere 2y ago
(1) I don't think you can have an ad hominem against an idea?
(2) I'm not opposed to any ideas in this paper. I think the paper stands on its own merits.
- llm_trw 2y ago>(1) I don't think you can have an ad hominem against an idea? You've tried your best. >(2) I'm not opposed to any ideas in this paper. I think the paper stands on its own merits. You're just preemptively setting a limit to how much thinking we can do. After all you made a post in this very thread: >>So I guess maybe less "conspiracy theory" and more "recklessly dangerous" or "abandonment of the Hippocratic oath". Which is odd, since medical research has no Hippocratic oath or recklessly dangerous caveats. After all, they were doing gain of function research on coronaviruses in the very city where covid-19 started. Unless geography is now a reckless pseudo science which we must sensor for the good of all.
- ants_everywhere 2y agoI honestly can't follow what you're trying to say. But John Ioannidis is a physician and has served in a number of medical organizations. Even non-medical researchers are bound by IRB boards for research on humans and more generally are bound by all sorts of codified ethical standards.