> The problem is that questions about the vaccine are being labeled as anti-vaccine.
When is a question not a question? When - despite phrasing - it admits no possibility of a satisfactory answer. Then it is functionally a statement, and should be treated as such with associated burdens of proof etc.
> It is distressing that supporters of informed consent are being lumped in with QAnon.
And how is one supposed to tell the difference, when every outward appearance is the same?
When is a question not a question? When - despite phrasing - it admits no possibility of a satisfactory answer. Then it is functionally a statement, and should be treated as such with associated burdens of proof etc.
> It is distressing that supporters of informed consent are being lumped in with QAnon.
And how is one supposed to tell the difference, when every outward appearance is the same?