He's a published medical expert; his papers on bone healing look very interesting and well done according to the abstracts. He gets into healing, growing and grafting bone, stem cell treatment and immune response after traumatic brain injury among other things.
I would love to see him get into the science of masks and vaccines during a di…
He's a published medical expert; his papers on bone healing look very interesting and well done according to the abstracts. He gets into healing, growing and grafting bone, stem cell treatment and immune response after traumatic brain injury among other things.
I would love to see him get into the science of masks and vaccines during a discussion with other experts who are dissenters. However, his Theory of Legitimization appears to be that if he has a public discussion on video that would somehow legitimize dissenting views.
But if he discusses it in a comment forum the dissenters are not legitimized (according to his theory.)
To DENY the dissenters legitimises their views: ANYTHING that cannot support itself & position ably within the spotlight of reasonable, objective debate can NOT be regarded as wholly verifiable. It very apparently seems to have a fat roll of pharma-cartel banknotes wedged up there in its anal canal.
Science of masks? There appears to be no such thing. Just a load of shitty models that prove they work and real world data that shows no noticeable difference.
He's a published medical expert; his papers on bone healing look very interesting and well done according to the abstracts. He gets into healing, growing and grafting bone, stem cell treatment and immune response after traumatic brain injury among other things.
I would love to see him get into the science of masks and vaccines during a discussion with other experts who are dissenters. However, his Theory of Legitimization appears to be that if he has a public discussion on video that would somehow legitimize dissenting views.
But if he discusses it in a comment forum the dissenters are not legitimized (according to his theory.)
To DENY the dissenters legitimises their views: ANYTHING that cannot support itself & position ably within the spotlight of reasonable, objective debate can NOT be regarded as wholly verifiable. It very apparently seems to have a fat roll of pharma-cartel banknotes wedged up there in its anal canal.
Science of masks? There appears to be no such thing. Just a load of shitty models that prove they work and real world data that shows no noticeable difference.