The AP is blaming the Mississippi Department of Health for the error.
To their credit, AP was engaging in less misinformation than other 'news' outlets. The article did not claim that Ivermectin is solely 'horse paste', but stated accurately that it comes in different formulations.
Yet this is quite the whopper. Even if the Mississippi Department of Health told you that, and I am not at all sure that they simply did not misinterpret the statement (creatively or otherwise) - surely the first thing you do is figure out whether these figures are at all plausible?
But as always with what Sowell calls the 'aha statistics', these are too good to check.
More importantly, how many of those calls were emergency calls? In how many of them was it recommended that the subject of the call be formally treated by a physician?
Someone calling in to find out if the medicine they or another person was about to take or had just taken doesn't guarantee a negative outcome.
Unless the 1.4% of total calls resulted in recommendations to emergency care, there's no reason for this statistic to be even the slightest bit relevant.
Commies venerate the Nazis and even name their dogs after Hitler.
These people who worship the Left that led to the Nazi's could literally take Mein Kampf and change out the nouns with their trendy language and it'd sound the same. That literally happened in the peer review process in the heart of the beast.
It took them 2 days (Aug. 23–Aug. 25) to correct, not 2 weeks. Look at the date on the before capture on archive.is, it says Aug 23 when you mouseover.
Before
After
The AP is blaming the Mississippi Department of Health for the error.
To their credit, AP was engaging in less misinformation than other 'news' outlets. The article did not claim that Ivermectin is solely 'horse paste', but stated accurately that it comes in different formulations.
Yet this is quite the whopper. Even if the Mississippi Department of Health told you that, and I am not at all sure that they simply did not misinterpret the statement (creatively or otherwise) - surely the first thing you do is figure out whether these figures are at all plausible?
But as always with what Sowell calls the 'aha statistics', these are too good to check.
70% of 2%.
So 20 of 1000 calls were about Ivermectin, and 14 of those 20 were about horse paste.
I wonder how many calls were about widely prescribed pain killers...
More importantly, how many of those calls were emergency calls? In how many of them was it recommended that the subject of the call be formally treated by a physician?
Someone calling in to find out if the medicine they or another person was about to take or had just taken doesn't guarantee a negative outcome.
Unless the 1.4% of total calls resulted in recommendations to emergency care, there's no reason for this statistic to be even the slightest bit relevant.
Just wait for the midterm election coverage:
Commies venerate the Nazis and even name their dogs after Hitler.
These people who worship the Left that led to the Nazi's could literally take Mein Kampf and change out the nouns with their trendy language and it'd sound the same. That literally happened in the peer review process in the heart of the beast.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/academic-journal-accepts-feminist-mein-kampf
110% of votes are in and DRUMPF got literally -17m votes, weird.
Exactly. If you must resort to ad hominem ... you have already lost the debate.
It took them 2 days (Aug. 23–Aug. 25) to correct, not 2 weeks. Look at the date on the before capture on archive.is, it says Aug 23 when you mouseover.
Ah, you are correct. I should have paid more attention to that.