Reposted by Vivek Ramaswamy
The statement addresses a public issue, specifically the FDA's rejection of MDMA therapy for PTSD, which is a matter of public health and regulatory policy. The tone is critical of the FDA's decision, suggesting it was a bureaucratic issue rather than a scientific one. The intent appears to be to inform the public and possibly advocate for a reconsideration of the FDA's decision.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It focuses on a regulatory decision and its implications. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others. 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 and empathy by highlighting the potential benefits of MDMA therapy for PTSD sufferers. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It critiques a bureaucratic decision rather than individuals. [+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 uses influence to potentially advocate for the betterment of society by addressing a public health issue. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to discuss a public concern. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.