Originally Posted by Prwlr
Originally Posted by kingston
Originally Posted by Prwlr

Originally Posted by kingston
If it wasn’t peer reviewed, there’s nothing to debate.



Just because a study was not peer reviewed does not mean that it is not valid, especially at a time when there is a massive amount of research being done and published in every scientist's hurry to get their study published first. The peer review process takes a lot of time and those peer review articles you are raving about may not be published for over a year or more.

It's like the double blind placebo controlled studies for the use hydroxychloroquin (sp?) that some doctors are saying that must be done before anyone can use it. Anecdotal information has thus far been proven to be right about its use.



Agreed, but that’s not what we’re dealing with here.


Agree the woman may, in fact, be a french fry or two short of a happy meal but she does point out some interesting "coincidences".

A few cards shy of a deck, eh?

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]