It reminds of people who have never fired a rifle in their life, making gun laws. You mean there is difference between a .22 and Vulcan cannon? They are both guns.
Both sound like ARs to me, which is pretty terrifying.
You make decent points. For the most part, though, I see your comments as somewhat of a leap. To be able to tie increased drug/substance abuse to increases in adverse affects doesn’t equate to increase in big pharma instead. If anything, my takeaway from all of it is to avoid taking anything.
You’re absolutely right, though, that we should always question what we read…never take anything for face value. Who is funding these is 100% relevant, and was not so cohensidentaly left unsaid.
> It reminds of people who have never fired a rifle in their life, making gun laws. You mean there is difference between a .22 and Vulcan cannon? They are both guns.
Both sound like ARs to me, which is pretty terrifying.
You make decent points. For the most part, though, I see your comments as somewhat of a leap. To be able to tie increased drug/substance abuse to increases in adverse affects doesn’t equate to increase in big pharma instead. If anything, my takeaway from all of it is to avoid taking anything.
You’re absolutely right, though, that we should always question what we read…never take anything for face value. Who is funding these is 100% relevant, and was not so cohensidentaly left unsaid.
(post is archived)