I'd like to raise the possibility that this is a milquetoast to reaction to something that sounds potentially criminal and cruel. I have a friend with a daughter coming out of 9 months of chemo. The thought that any of the many drugs she consumed, some of which could damaged her body in various ways, were unnecessary and given only because of fraud seems positively monstrous to me.
> this is a milquetoast to reaction to something that sounds potentially criminal
General statement: if you see someone manipulating clinical data for personal gain, write an anonymous letter to your state attorney general and top doctor. That is fraud. Brushing it off could be construed as aiding and abetting. At the very least, it is a moral failure.
I appreciate you sharing the story. There's a difference between characterizing a specific reaction as weak and calling a person weak.
There's also a natural human tendency to overlook horrors when they are abstract and "data" which is why "5000 dead" is a statistic, but that kid around the corner who died is a tragedy.
The word "milquetoast" specifically criticizes a man as weak, timid, unasertive, or childish. If that's not your intention, you're misusing the word.
It's not equivalent to saying "this is a weak reaction".
You may have preferred I reacted more severely to what I observed, but I, like everyone, must pick my battles and this particular one was and is not a priority for me. And if it were a priority, I wouldn't go about combating it at such an individual level - this is just a symptom of the profit-driven system. Just look at Purdue and the opiod crisis they've created by lying to doctors and consumers, and how rich and powerful they've become in the process. The behavior is rewarded systemically.
