Of Freedom, Country and Vaccination

[Dahlsim]

Read what I stated. It is not that difficult to understand. Science is evidence based.

Actually I would say you don't understand it very well outside of the box you have drawn your world in which quite frankly is too small and to inflexible to work for many of areas we need understanding in, scientific or otherwise. 

All kinds of things are evidence based.  Evidence is a very generic word in and of itself.   We need more detail than that.   

evidence
1: something which shows that something else exists or is true 
2: chiefly US, somewhat formal : a visible sign of something 
3: material that is presented to a court of law to help find the truth about something 

Sorry to say but once again you don't really understand that you're presenting everything from a box that is defined as science by a modern consensus.  Science is not the only field to rely on evidence.   We all rely on evidence every day and there many other valid ways that societies have reached accurate understandings before the formal constructs of a scientific method ever existed.  Anecdotes are a form of evidence.  They have their weaknesses especially when you try and apply to broad groups and various situations but societies have progressed for thousands of years on simple observations. 

The scientific method formalized an approach to those observations, hypothesis, testing etc.  
It was and is a great methodology.  It does not solve every problem and is not even applicable to every form of investigation.  
In this case, it takes time and our understanding of Covid needs to be supplemented by every available form of data and investigation. 

People are free to disagree but they have to provide evidence.

Seriously?  I'm going to ignore the quotes and the whole line of rambling you did where you basically go find different quotes from certain doctors that may have been included in the many references I gave.  

The disingenuous thing is you're pulling out quotes that have nothing to do with any point I made as if I have endorse everything any of these professionals have ever said on the topic.  That's nonsense.   

I gave a link for instance to an article with 58 medical doctors in one post, over 160 doctors, scientists and researchers on another forum and I gave you many others that support the points I have made: 

Eighty one research studies 81 
https://brownstone.org/articles/79-research-studies-affirm-naturally-acquired-immunity-to-covid-19-documented-linked-and-quoted/ 

We should not force COVID vaccines on anyone when the evidence shows that naturally acquired immunity is equal to or more robust and superior to existing vaccines. Instead, we should respect the right of the bodily integrity of individuals to decide for themselves.

You can question the validity or meaning of the evidence but to pretend that the only people providing evidence are one side of any debate is absurd.  As if you and the references you cited are the only people providing evidence?  Let's try to be just a little more genuine here.   

And why isn´t it possible to test the treatment option in a study.

A lot of things are possible but it's not all being done for various reasons and I've never said or implied that they reasons are all nefarious.  It was a quote from the Harvard article you linked by the way said what you are responding to. Since you omitted it in your reply, let me requote it. 

Quote:

Demonstrating whether an herb — or any substance, for that matter — can enhance immunity is, as yet, a highly complicated matter. Scientists don't know, for example, whether an herb that seems to raise the levels of antibodies in the blood is actually doing anything beneficial for overall immunity.

Point is, using formally agreed upon consensus methods, some of the quite important aspects of what may strengthen or boost the natural immune system, is not known, and can be highly complicated to prove using those methodologies. 

Make sense?