[flagged]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907382...
The concerns encompassed.
• Inappropriate citation of references.
• Inappropriate design of methodology.
• Errors, misrepresentation, and lack of factual support for the conclusions.
• Failure to recognise and cite disconfirming evidence.
It blows me away that there can be a consensus of hundreds/thousands of researchers on something, and one person (with a history of mis/disinformation) comes along with a counter narrative, and certain people will point at that one person as proof that everyone else is wrong or "on the take."
Large cities are much more on the Democrat side and developers tend to live in those so the number of Trump supporters is still on the lower end.
The other part of the answer is compartmentalization, I guess.
It worked for me and my family.
> in some cases extremely adverse reactions including death
A much-more-common "adverse reaction" of Covid itself.
> Dr. Peter McCullough just testified that 74 percent of autopsies their group performed that the cause of death was the covid 19 vaccine
Which group? I looked him up because I wasn't familiar. He lost his licence for lying about Covid vaccines. I guess if you think the Covid vaccine is dangerous that's just more "evidence" of a cover-up. Anyway of course a guy like that is going to say that.
I mean, who knows, maybe 50 years from now all these crackpots will be vindicated. And if I'm alive then, not cut down early by myocarditis or mRNA cancer or whatever, I'll hail them as heroes. For now, based on the available evidence, they are crackpots.
If RFK Jr. or Peter McCullough suddenly say "Oh, we were wrong, vaccines are fine" then how much money and power do they lose?
Even if they went home every night convinced they're peddling lies... they'd still do it. It pays.
(Especially after you lose your license to practice)