3 ms·
Just to be clear - I'm not anti vax and I'm not commenting here in support of RFK or his specific criticisms. This is something of a sidebar. I'm just curious
by pseudoscienflst 1y ago
Just to be clear - I'm not anti vax and I'm not commenting here in support of RFK or his specific criticisms. This is something of a sidebar.
I'm just curious about how many intelligent people take pharma company statements, or conclusions they've paid researchers for, as gospel.
(I'm being rate limited, as you noticed in your other comment. Yes I am here in good faith, no I am not ragebaiting. I don't have permanent accounts on HN to avoid doxxing, thanks for your concern, hope you can drop the ad hominems and focus on the discussion at hand)
- lovich 1y agoI’ll respond since this does appear to be good faith. Also yeah, they turned up the rate limiter, I’m getting hit every day, but you’ve got to admit between your user name implying you’re not real science and the content of your comments, how people would not believe you were being in good faith. Anyway, we’re not taking the pharma company’s word as gospel, that’s why people are looking at scientific studies which can be analyzed and falsified in a reproduction. The alternative in this situation is either doing nothing, in which case what is there to discuss, or taking RFKs word as gospel and he is historically a crank, his argument is logically flawed, and critically, he’s brought no counter evidence or science on his side. He just doesn’t like the results of the study and wants it to go away