I know you're trying but you're just not sufficiently armed for intellectual debate and you continue to embarrass yourself.
The overwhelming majority of scientists and doctors disagree with him. So why is he more credible than the 99% of other scientists and doctors who you dismiss since that doesn't fit your narrative?
#8 is a quote from the Fact-Check from Rueters, it was not my posting my personal opinion. I am not Reuters so you can tell them how stupid you think they are, though the fact you couldn't make the distinction doesn't bode well for your judgement of others' intelligence.
The person who was front and centre of a big pharma business is all the sudden.......a quack????
Rueters is a joke of a company constantly citing "unnamed sources" as facts.