[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Curious Mr. Fox [@CuriousMrFox101](/creator/twitter/CuriousMrFox101) on x XXX followers Created: 2025-07-27 00:33:08 UTC @davidmizrahiesq I’m going to need you to explain why you think “ethically preferred” is something to laugh at in vaccine trials. That term isn’t made up—it’s how research ethics boards actually talk. When a vaccine already exists and is known to work, it’s considered unethical to give people a placebo (like saline) instead of real protection—especially for serious diseases. Your comment—“ethically preferred my arse”—makes it sound like you think this is fake or silly. But what exactly are you arguing? That we should test new vaccines by giving people nothing, even when we know there’s already something that works? Would you say the same for cancer or heart drug trials? Trials use “active comparators” (real vaccines, not placebos) when it would be risky to leave one group unprotected. That’s standard practice in modern medicine. If you disagree with that, show some real experts or evidence that says it’s wrong. Just saying “my arse” doesn’t cut it. If you’re just here to dunk on science without a real point, say so. But if you want to be taken seriously, bring a better argument. XX engagements  [Post Link](https://x.com/CuriousMrFox101/status/1949266772512641352)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Curious Mr. Fox @CuriousMrFox101 on x XXX followers
Created: 2025-07-27 00:33:08 UTC
@davidmizrahiesq
I’m going to need you to explain why you think “ethically preferred” is something to laugh at in vaccine trials. That term isn’t made up—it’s how research ethics boards actually talk. When a vaccine already exists and is known to work, it’s considered unethical to give people a placebo (like saline) instead of real protection—especially for serious diseases.
Your comment—“ethically preferred my arse”—makes it sound like you think this is fake or silly. But what exactly are you arguing? That we should test new vaccines by giving people nothing, even when we know there’s already something that works? Would you say the same for cancer or heart drug trials?
Trials use “active comparators” (real vaccines, not placebos) when it would be risky to leave one group unprotected. That’s standard practice in modern medicine. If you disagree with that, show some real experts or evidence that says it’s wrong. Just saying “my arse” doesn’t cut it.
If you’re just here to dunk on science without a real point, say so. But if you want to be taken seriously, bring a better argument.
XX engagements
