IMHO, The NY Times is no different than the supposedly respected medical journals, in that they also choose to print subjects with conclusions supporting the mandated protocol, slanted so far as to turn over backwards. Not only do they appear to discriminate, but they remove already accepted and published studies on false charges or the clamor of the mob. Credibility is determined by the quality of the information, not the ‘respected names of authors’ who in many cases have shown themselves to have been compromised (high profile studies funded by grants that come with unspoken strings attached). Often the conflict of interest statements show no conflict or are not detailed enough (lying by omission). Will stop now, could go on, sorry.