In reply to:
Christian Angermayer
@C_Angermayer
·
408d
Christian Angermayer
@C_Angermayer
·
475d
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
409d
The statement by @C_Angermayer addresses a public issue, specifically the corporate influence on the FDA and its implications for drug approval processes. The tone is assertive and aims to clarify a point of contention regarding the nature of corporate influence, distinguishing it from conspiracy theories. The intent is to engage in a substantive discussion about the FDA's decision-making process and its impact on public health.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It focuses on presenting a factual argument rather than attacking individuals. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, as it does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying the nature of corporate influence on the FDA, which can foster empathy and compassion for those affected by the FDA's decisions. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the issue at hand without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to discuss a significant public issue with integrity. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.