Today's mental, I am alive challenge.........

Within the last three years with the onslaught of, “Covid 19” we have several leaders subscribing to, “follow the science.” Dr. Anthony Fauci being the biggest proponent of, “following science.” (https://nypost.com/2022/07/13/anthony-fauci-is-once-again-spouting-bad-covid-advice/)

What we should be asking ourselves is which science is Dr. Fauci and others following?

What is one definition of science? According to the University of Berkeley science is, “Science is both a body of knowledge and a process".

Ok, what is knowledge and what is the process? I am assuming that the process is the, “scientific method?” The following link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method mentions that the scientific method follows a fixed sequence of steps that represent a set of general principles. And here is the disclaimer, not all steps are included when creating a scientific inquiry.

Again, according to wikipedia the process involves the following steps:

A formulation of a question.
Hypothesis
Prediction
Testing
Analysis

But, the above steps include other factors or, “Components” such as

Replication
External Review
Data recording and sharing
Instrumentation

I am staying focused on this page and looking at all the information included.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Problem-solving_via_scientific_method

On the right hand side of the page is an outlined box titled, “Part of a series on Science.” Underneath the picture there are three major sub topics titled, “Overview, Branches and Society.” One of the sub, sub categories under, “Society” is “Pseudoscience”.

Linking over to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience I see several very interesting ideas regarding what is science and what is pseudoscience. In light of our planetary history over the last three years the indicators of possible pseudoscience according to the wikipedia link above are:

Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims.
Improper collection of evidence.
Lack of openness to testing by other experts.
Absence of progress.
Personalization of issues.
Use of misleading language.

The one example that comes to mind based upon the mainstream narrative in the United States is that Ivermectin was horse medicine and could NOT and should NOT be used as an alternative treatment for C-19.

Please read the following link on the National Institute of Health regarding Ivermectin.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/.

Here is the Conclusion in regards to Ivermectin.

Conclusions:

Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

I have included two other links for you to look at regarding Ivermectin:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/

https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/

In conclusion, it is important that all of us use CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS when assessing information!

Another interesting note regarding, “Science and Pseudoscience is the possibility that the two are, “PHILOSOPHICAL” in its approach.

Here is the following quote from wikipedia:
“The boundary between science and pseudoscience is disputed and difficult to determine analytically, even after more than a century of study by philosophers of science and scientists, and despite some basic agreements on the fundamentals of the scientific method.”

So the next time anyone tells you to follow the science we should question,

WHAT SCIENCE are you referring to?
Was a scientific method applied?
If so, what method(s) were used?
Are ALL Narratives being followed? Pro vs Con?
Are ALL narratives being allowed or are they being labeled as pseudoscience and/or conspiracy theories?