No, Peter, you're a politician. Period. Hard stop.
Conspiracy Theorist and Enthusiast? Probably. Most likely.
But, "Social Scientist". Um.... NO.
Washington (CNN)White
House trade adviser Peter Navarro on Monday said he was qualified to
engage and disagree with Dr. Anthony Fauci on the use of an
anti-malarial drug as a coronavirus treatment -- which is not yet proven as effective -- saying, "I'm a social scientist."
 | |
| John Berman, left, and Peter Navarro |
It was on Berman's CNN show recently that Navarro made his "Social Scientist" comments.
"Doctors
disagree about things all the time. My qualifications in terms of
looking at the science is that I'm a social scientist," he told CNN's
John Berman on "New Day." "I have a Ph.D. And I understand how to read
statistical studies, whether it's in medicine, the law, economics or
whatever."
Navarro's remarks follow reports
that he clashed with officials in the Situation Room over the weekend
about the unproven efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in treating
coronavirus. While the task force was discussing the latest on the
anti-malaria drug, an exasperated Navarro lashed out at Fauci, the
nation's top infectious disease expert, who has urged caution around the drug, a person familiar with the meeting told CNN.
Navarro
had brought a stack of paperwork about the drug with him into the room,
arguing it was proof that it could work to treat coronavirus, which
Fauci disagreed with because it was not data.
No, little Peter is a Trump-Talking-Head, nothing more, nothing less. Just because he has a Ph.D., doesn't mean he 1) Knows what he's talking about, and 2) Can't be a conspiracy theorist. Maybe little Peter will feel differently and take this more seriously once He gets the virus. Maybe.
A statement said that "anecdotal reports
suggest that these drugs may offer some benefit" in coronavirus
patients, but "clinical trials are needed to provide scientific evidence
that these treatments are effective."
In
a separate interview Monday morning with Fox News, Navarro said he
agrees it's important to have studies on the drug, but "there's also the
point of view that we are in war" and "we might take more risks than we
otherwise would."
"If
it saves lives, that's a beautiful thing," he said. "I think history
will judge who's right on this debate, but I'd bet on President Trump's
intuition on this one, because of all the doctors I've talked to and all
the scientific papers I've read and they're about this high."
Yeah, Social Scientist. I'm sorry, but, it just doesn't very scientific,
but it does sound like social B.S.
