Heres an example of yet another discussion on fakebook with leftists, liberterians, and unknowns - including myself. I removed names and replaced with other designations.
-
As we can see, the leftist does not provide a single link to a source of their statements.
-
The leftist also establishes themself as an expert in saying 'this is what I do'. The intent of this is that since theyre now an established expert, they dont have to provide anything backing up their statements OR refuting yours. Their word is enough.
-
Lefty #2 only chimes in once, but at least provides a source.
-
I provided a source for everything I said.
-
Ron Paul Liberterian remains silent but agrees with my statements
-
Leftist ends with classic case of projection in stating that "people only want to believe a certain narrative"
Lefty: Um your statement isn't true.... They have been testing to see if HQ works. It isn't working but a steroid is working better. They have been open and honest about it. But hey false narrative is the best right✌️
Liberterian: Ohio had banned the use of it.
Lefty: that's one state. They are testing it. They are not letting doctors just do it Willy nilly. There in lies what you are misunderstanding. It is being tested, research is controlled not just doctors doing whatever they want. HQ isn't the only thing being tested. There are many Drug companies working to see what works. Yes it can be all about money but it is about people lives but you are sharing false information
Which study? The fake one?
Lefty: this is my job so ....
Me: This isnt false information. Gilead has even changed their sales outlook to include the sales from Remdesivir. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gilead-raises-sales-outlook-covid-033119148.html
Lancet retracted a fake study that they also refused to allow peer review on prior to said retraction. I dont really view that as being open and honest about anything. Whats weird is that Gilead helped fund that study and the study wasnt to prove that Remdesivir worked, it was to prove that HCQ didnt. Why would they want to do that? I really wanted to avoid ad hominems here (attacking motive is a form of ad hominem) but given the circumstances, it is legitimate to question the motives in this case and should fall on the side of 'not ad hominem'. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200605/lancet-retracts-hydroxychloroquine-study?fbclid=IwAR15TmlvTJdI8TgPgpkYKrzcCTBh8QsEprgrs4ZZBArWwfkJFCwlYueEh
There are initial studies and doctor experiences that shows HCQ works as both a preventative and a treatment. It is safe for most people and commonly prescribed for other infections. In the beginning of the 'pandemic' hospitals across the country were buying up massive supplies of HCQ. Other nations have already proven it works. India is a great example of that. https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/pharma/why-icmr-continues-to-stand-firm-on-using-hydroxychloroquine-as-prophylaxis/76172274
Lefty: I read all the information that is coming out and it is being tested. They just want to do it right. 🤦🏼♀️
Lefty: IDC what you say. It doesn't matter to aside from the fact you are sharing false information. Pfizer and bill gates aren't the only companies running studies. Nor is it the only big company. Everyone wants a "cure".
Lefty: Do I want another vaccine? Hell no. Do I want something that can help more than it hurts? Yes. HQ is showing to be more harmful so.......
Lefty #2: Yes, I too read studies. Most recent I saw was random trial in Brazil. HCQ and HCQ + antibiotic were no better than placebo. N >800. I think it was released by NE Jrnl of Med this past week or so.
Lefty: people only want to believe a certain narrative and it doesn't matter if it's true or false. Its a sad reality. Plus giving an antibiotic for a virus is why we have antibiotic resistant bacterial infections
Im a PA who worked side by side with physicians for 20 years. I can confirm what you are saying about physicians being unable to process new information.
Physicians are technicians who rely on instructions from a text book to complete their task. They treat the textbook, not the patient. If its not in the textbook ot doesnt exist.
There are a few like Dr Immanuel who are curious or open to new treatments that are outside the box but those are few and far between.
Absolutely.
No one on the opposing side seems to be able to discuss this matter with a 'cultivated argument'. I dont even know if theyre googling; some of them just seem to take what the news said and then essentially repeat what they were told without doing any digging at all.
I really wanted to call out the last statement but I made an effort to stick to the topic and not shift the goalposts or attack anyone themselves even if it were legit. I almost didnt even attack the motive of Gilead there but felt it was relevant enough to include.
"People only want to believe a certain narrative..." says the person disregarding evidence that doesn't fit the narrative they want to believe. Hahaha. Excellent job staying on topic and not rolling with ad hominem. Very well thought out and executed.