Still reading, and I’m vibing with a lot of the critiques that I have often thought we’re overlooked, but I’m also finding the article a bit sus/one-sided. GFI isn’t full of morons, so I tried to look for responses to the article.
Here’s a long Twitter thread from a GFI scientist: https://twitter.com/elliotswartz/status/1442833513800110085?s=21
As he says - it’s good scrutiny, but it’s got some blinders on and I’m sorry but don’t just take the word of a pharmAg ghoul and a non-profit that won’t even stand by its own report.
Still reading, and I’m vibing with a lot of the critiques that I have often thought we’re overlooked, but I’m also finding the article a bit sus/one-sided. GFI isn’t full of morons, so I tried to look for responses to the article.
Here’s a long Twitter thread from a GFI scientist: https://twitter.com/elliotswartz/status/1442833513800110085?s=21
As he says - it’s good scrutiny, but it’s got some blinders on and I’m sorry but don’t just take the word of a pharmAg ghoul and a non-profit that won’t even stand by its own report.