Joined
·
12,093 Posts
I would class all scientific reviews of a paper as peer review, although it often refers to the reviews done prior to publication. The point is that errors were found and the paper retracted. That’s a good thing, no? That shows the system works.
The problem isnt the facts, it’s your interpretation of them. Causation and correlation. Look them up. You see a correlation when France changes the prescription status of HCQ, and you turn it into a causation. You do the same for all your other ‘facts’.
At the end of the day, you’re supporting a fringe theory without the medical, scientific or statistical qualifications required to interpret the data, or ‘facts’. I, on the other hand, am happy to leave it to the experts. Not the experts of my choosing, but all of them.
Oh, and by the way, no one actually believes the Sudanese governments official covid death figures. I suppose you believe North Korea only had its first covid death this month too?
The problem isnt the facts, it’s your interpretation of them. Causation and correlation. Look them up. You see a correlation when France changes the prescription status of HCQ, and you turn it into a causation. You do the same for all your other ‘facts’.
At the end of the day, you’re supporting a fringe theory without the medical, scientific or statistical qualifications required to interpret the data, or ‘facts’. I, on the other hand, am happy to leave it to the experts. Not the experts of my choosing, but all of them.
Oh, and by the way, no one actually believes the Sudanese governments official covid death figures. I suppose you believe North Korea only had its first covid death this month too?