>>Your claim that the Fanapt report is bogus is based on what?
From watching it get pulled from two news outlets.
I have a complete web page of one of them stored on the machine upstairs. URL is now dead. The other one, that I didn’t save, updated their article and completely dropped the section where Fanapt use was asserted by some bozo claiming to be “uncle Jonathan Lanza”.
Here is another dead link that at one time referenced this scammer:
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2012/12/16/news/local/doc50ce2ee9ab4f8441433667.txt
Note that there is nothing there, it is a dead link.
Also, in one of the threads where we were discussing this someone posted a link to a forum where they had this scammer’s name and discussion of the Fanapt claim. You can probably find the thread and read up if you dig in my recent posts a little.
Ultimately, it is really up to you to provide a credible primary source for the claim, and not for me to prove a negative. That’s how basic argumentation logic works.
I didn't ask you to disprove my claim.
You made a whole new claim, that the guy in the report was a scammer and that the report was bogus. It was that "positive" that I asked you prove.
That's "basic argument logic".