See... this is where conspiracy thinking takes you. It's like an addiction, and you need to keep feeding it out of your head when the spigot runs dry. > peopl

See... this is where conspiracy thinking takes you. It's like an addiction, and you need to keep feeding it out of your head when the spigot runs dry. > people complain for years that industry shouldn't regulate itself, that it's too involved in studies about itself, and yet here we are, defending an indefensible status quo. You are inferring from the article (as it wants you to believe) that somehow this letter declares the existence of heretofore unknown studies funded, performed by and then suppressed by Johnson & Johnson. It doesn't say that, at all. The author just thanks someone for sending them a PDF or whatever. So I see a partisan rag making an ambiguous point and assuming that the straightforward interpretation ("ambiguous evidence" is like the easiest bet in science) holds. You see it, having already been primed with an interpretation, and need to start filling in details to preserve the conspiracy you've already adopted. Occam argues strongly that the Caller is just wrong and publishing garbage spin, as they've done many times in the past. Please stop.