| ▲ | epistasis 6 hours ago |
| [flagged] |
|
| ▲ | javea71 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think you'll find there's a rational distrust in big pharma |
| |
| ▲ | epistasis 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think I'll find that, after investigating the claims I have heard. | |
| ▲ | babypuncher 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Two things can be true: Big Pharma can be evil, and their products are much better vetted for safety and efficacy than random peptides sourced form mystery factories. | | |
| ▲ | mullingitover 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The Venn diagram of people who distrust big pharma and the people who uncritically trust the far larger “wellness” industry is a circle. | |
| ▲ | vlian2088 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | and do you really think a significant percentage of forced vaccination detractors are taking mystery peptides? have there been studies, or are you vibing this guess off snarky reddit comments? | | |
| ▲ | ianm218 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Anecdotally I know several people who would fall in the camp of anti vax but openly use peptides. And intuitively it makes sense we’re talking about groups of people who are skeptical of main stream institutional health recommendations but trust specific personal sources for medical advice. I’m vibing but it feels like there is a pretty clear intersection of peptides and the fringe science health community no? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | quotemstr 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nobody's used state power to mandate peptides and social media censorship to reports of adverse effects. As many of us said at the time, the mandates weren't worth the destruction of public trust, especially because the vaccine wasn't even sterilizing. The next time there's a crisis, resist the urge to use the government to achieve outcomes by brute force. It doesn't work and has generational adverse consequences. |
| |
|
| ▲ | api 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| “I won’t put chemicals from big pharma in my body!” Proceeds to raw dog a bunch of “research chemicals” cause some roided up bro talked about it on a podcast… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U7gbFMWZWlo They’re not vaccines though. |
|
| ▲ | alex1138 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | doginasuit 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Well cited doesn't mean very much outside of the context of peer reviewed work. This book pushes Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine as "miracle cures", thanks to that idea my relatives also have a stockpile of both. | |
| ▲ | LastTrain 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I have a simple rule. If a person spews complete bullshit I no longer trust them. | |
| ▲ | epistasis 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | manwe150 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Having read it, he does cite something for almost every claim. Although almost every source also contradicts his conclusions on some basic, logical, statistical, mathematical, or humane level, if you bother to fact check them. So it’s quite hard to quantify what it means to say it has good citations. | |
| ▲ | lettergram 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | shakna 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | RFK's reliance on terrain theory, disproved continually since some five hundred years ago, does much to assist in citations - it is common to cite bad science as evidence where we need to improve public comprehension. | | |
|
|
|
