You obviously haven't watched the episode nor are you familiar with Bret and Heather's rigorous scientific approach regarding this topic.
back
2 comments
Call me old fashioned but I don't source my medical evidence from two creators on youtube.
As I already stated, Bret and Heather both have PhD's in biology and the episode in question with Dr. Kory also featured Dr. Malone the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology. You are misrepresenting the content.
I’m curious about their motive for misrepresenting the content - I agree that they are, but it’s not obvious what the angle is for a commenter here.
They have committed to the new religion of “trust the experts” and are reacting to heresy.
I, too, only trust people in labcoats.
Ahem, I prefer beanie propeller hats.
> You obviously haven't watched the episode nor are you familiar...
If you are going to be rude to someone like that, you should provide your own evidence. Provide us links to specific points in the talk that you feel makes this episode substantial. Or show some manners.
How was I rude? The assertion, "One person claiming that a drug has effectiveness based on their anecdotal experience" is absolutely false and not at all representative of their channel content. I think the burden of proof lies on the one making the false assertion. Also my comment was also after this topic was flagged and taken down. I find that extremely rude and intellectually dishonest.
> I think the burden of proof lies on the one making the false assertion.
In an open democratic society everyone is responsible for surfacing the truth as they see it. Then we all decide indepedently what is a true or false assertion based off the evidence given.
Your job here is much easier: cite anything. Their job is much harder: they have to make an assertion about the entire episode. You should try to provide something substantial. Instead, you've come off as a bully & rude, dismissed the reply out of hand & done nothing to say why. You refuse to be helpful because you've asserted that you're right & they're wrong and that's all there is to it. It should be easy for you to make a real claim, beyond 'you're wrong'.
There is seemingly a lot of evidence for Ivermectin. I agree with you that people making a claim should provide evidence for it - but people asking for evidence shouldn't just assume there is none. It's like if I said I don't trust the vaccines because I don't trust one guy's anecdote about using the vaccines and not getting sick. That's not what vaccine-advocates are basing their argument on.