There’s potentially a conversation worth having here about how drug approvals work in the US and EU, but if you actually want to have that conversation please do so assuming good faith, and don’t resort to slinging accusations back and forth. Is your comment a sincere request for information? If so, you may want to consider rewording it to be a better lead-in to a productive discussion. Disengaging is also, of course, a totally valid option here.
what have I accused anyone of? my comment is a request for the person who is using the fact that sometimes some people are corrupt as evidence that in this particular case these particular people are corrupt. it’s vague, witch-hunty and tries to create the appearance of bad actors without presenting any valid reason to believe that anything untoward has taken place. If you or comment OP have evidence that this particular drug is known to be dangerous and that people have covered it up I’m all ears, I live for that kind of shit. But this drug is well-known, well-studied and has been globally available since 1960. Of course anywhere you find power you’ll find corruption but this, as they say, ain’t it fam and vague appellations to the existence of corruption in the general case is such a weak argument that it borders on bad faith in and of itself.
Actually, I agree with you. I can see how you might think I don’t given only the context of this comment chain, though. For added context, I’ve already asked the other users involved to please disengage, but it was in a different chain so you may not have seen it. I’m really honestly not trying to single you out.
My own opinions aside though, in the future if you see another user who you believe to be participating in bad faith, please report their comment. Reporting helps give us more context for what might seem to simply be escalatory language, and also helps surface things to the mod team much more rapidly. We do want the beehaw community to self-police, but we also want this to remain a nice place without long threads of unproductive argument.
There’s potentially a conversation worth having here about how drug approvals work in the US and EU, but if you actually want to have that conversation please do so assuming good faith, and don’t resort to slinging accusations back and forth. Is your comment a sincere request for information? If so, you may want to consider rewording it to be a better lead-in to a productive discussion. Disengaging is also, of course, a totally valid option here.
what have I accused anyone of? my comment is a request for the person who is using the fact that sometimes some people are corrupt as evidence that in this particular case these particular people are corrupt. it’s vague, witch-hunty and tries to create the appearance of bad actors without presenting any valid reason to believe that anything untoward has taken place. If you or comment OP have evidence that this particular drug is known to be dangerous and that people have covered it up I’m all ears, I live for that kind of shit. But this drug is well-known, well-studied and has been globally available since 1960. Of course anywhere you find power you’ll find corruption but this, as they say, ain’t it fam and vague appellations to the existence of corruption in the general case is such a weak argument that it borders on bad faith in and of itself.
Actually, I agree with you. I can see how you might think I don’t given only the context of this comment chain, though. For added context, I’ve already asked the other users involved to please disengage, but it was in a different chain so you may not have seen it. I’m really honestly not trying to single you out.
My own opinions aside though, in the future if you see another user who you believe to be participating in bad faith, please report their comment. Reporting helps give us more context for what might seem to simply be escalatory language, and also helps surface things to the mod team much more rapidly. We do want the beehaw community to self-police, but we also want this to remain a nice place without long threads of unproductive argument.