If you are going to make an argument about something this provocative, spend some time and energy on your logic.
You took the position that Patriots players shouldn't be given an anti-viral because of a single study done on a small group regarding vaccines. So let's look at that:
- It is very early research. Science at this stage of research development is always about scoping the next experiments, not about drawing conclusions. There's a very good chance that the next experiment will provide different results.
- It was a very small study.
- It was about a type of drug (vaccine) that has no bearing on the type of drug you are wishing would be denied to Patriots players: anti-viral medications.
Your argument (or, rant more appropriately) is totally defeated by any of those three points. Put all three together and your argument becomes the raving of a crazy person on a street corner.
I don't trust big pharma, either, as institutions. I've done a good deal of work inside them. I also know that many people who work in big pharma are concerned about the things you are concerned about. Demonizing everything and everyone gets us nowhere, and makes you appear powerless.
