Right, the problem is a lot of these folks are using the TV as their source of "scientific research" and avoiding looking for any information that might not be spun to one political direction or the other. I hear it a lot "science is not political" yet the same person who said that goes on these partisan "news" organizations making the shit political. That would be the first person anyone should stop listening and call bullshit on. Somehow we made a film about how awesome he is. (not going to lie, I laughed at the trailer showing his daughter going on about how bad he was treated when he fucked up the AIDS epidemic)
It's all damn propaganda. Anyway, that's why I point out that the National Library of Medicine on the NIH's website is where I found peer reviewed paper after peer reviewed paper on the efficacy of this particular medication. I had to look the shit up myself after someone on here showed a graphic depicting the low numbers of infection treated one way versus another. Sure enough, it was true.
Now going back and thinking of all the times I hear it called "horse dewormer" or whatever else. It goes to show that these "reporters" are not actually reporting and only doing as they are told. Problem is, when it all comes out they will all take the "well I didn't know" defense.
Right, the problem is a lot of these folks are using the TV as their source of "scientific research" and avoiding looking for any information that might not be spun to one political direction or the other. I hear it a lot "science is not political" yet the same person who said that goes on these partisan "news" organizations making the shit political. That would be the first person anyone should stop listening and call bullshit on. Somehow we made a film about how awesome he is. (not going to lie, I laughed at the trailer showing his daughter going on about how bad he was treated when he fucked up the AIDS epidemic)
It's all damn propaganda. Anyway, that's why I point out that the National Library of Medicine on the NIH's website is where I found peer reviewed paper after peer reviewed paper on the efficacy of this particular medication. I had to look the shit up myself after someone on here showed a graphic depicting the low numbers of infection treated one way versus another. Sure enough, it was true.
Now going back and thinking of all the times I hear it called "horse dewormer" or whatever else. It goes to show that these "reporters" are not actually reporting and only doing as they are told. Problem is, when it all comes out they will all take the "well I didn't know" defense.