Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#61

Post by AnaniasAnanas »

krapp wrote: post #49
freedomben wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree. I personally think it's irresponsible not to vaccinate your kids. I also support schools and such requiring vaccinations for attendance (although that gets murky when the government runs the school). But using the government to forcibly inject stuff into people's bodies seems wrong.

Why do you keep calling it "stuff?" and why "forcibly inject?" You say you support vaccination but you can't help but describe it without the necessary context, as if random Feds are strapping babies down against their will and pumping random fluids into them against their will for no particular reason. You can make your argument and avoid the pointlessly nefarious language.

> as if random Feds are strapping babies down against their will and pumping random fluids into them against their will.

That's not completely wrong. The kids in my mother's generation for example were force-vaccinated in school and a lot of them suffered through life-threatening kidney issues caused by said vaccine. This is certainly not the case right now, but I have heard of people advocating for mandatory vaccination in schools.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#62

Post by everybodyknows »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #44
throwawaymath wrote: post #29

Fantastic. I would be thrilled to see other tech companies declare a holy war against this kind of misinformation. In fact, it would make me ecstatic if they started doing the same with other topics that have overwhelming scientific consensus, like climate change. I frankly don't care if it's censorship. It's a hill I'll happily die on.

Phlogiston, luminiferous aether, and Newtonian mechanics also once had "overwhelming scientific consensus". " The ends do not justify the means. " Even for something as important as addressing climate change.

Newtonian mechanics still has overwhelming scientific consensus, because it satisfies Occam's razor for most practical physics problems.

No one bothers calculating v^2/c^2 to estimate the kinetic energy of a Tesla.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#63

Post by rdtsc »

I wonder if they inadvertently strengthened the conspiracy theory by doing it. Sometimes censorship has that perverse effect. I easily see someone hearing from their "friend" about how Amazon has removed the video because they know it's true, and how it just validates all the bullshit claims presented there.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#64

Post by Throw22276 »

_red wrote: post #35
throwawaymath wrote: post #29

Fantastic. I would be thrilled to see other tech companies declare a holy war against this kind of misinformation. In fact, it would make me ecstatic if they started doing the same with other topics that have overwhelming scientific consensus, like climate change. I frankly don't care if it's censorship. It's a hill I'll happily die on.

You like "science" but can't actually read the insert. Why?

In response to the insert you posted;

Have you read the insert? The first highlighted point may seem odd out of context, but the context is right in front of the highlighted section. It's not saying the vaccine is ineffective, it's saying it is for immunisation in people who currently do not have the flu. The lack of studies mentioned is in relation to its effectiveness in people who take the vaccine whilst already being infected with the flu.

Highlighting the lack of proven effectiveness in children is odd too, since the very same insert states it is not for use in under 18s. It makes perfect sense it hasn't been tested on children.

The Mercury part doesn't even say anything negative, simply that it is an ingredient. There are many things that we know are poisonous in some contexts/quantities, whilst being harmless in others.

Im not sure if you're being disengenious on purpose, or if you simply lack the reading comprehension.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#65

Post by melling »

chrismcb wrote: post #34
asteli wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, this action says "We have chosen not to publish material, that is based on indisputably false premises, that may harm viewers and the public at large." That sounds like an acceptable line to me.

But is that true? Did they remove all videos based on false premises? And how did they decide the premise was false?

The one movie looks like it was 4.5 stars out of 5, with 3900 people rating it.

It has more reviews than the Matrix.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#66

Post by throwawaymath »

chrismcb wrote: post #34
asteli wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, this action says "We have chosen not to publish material, that is based on indisputably false premises, that may harm viewers and the public at large." That sounds like an acceptable line to me.

But is that true? Did they remove all videos based on false premises? And how did they decide the premise was false?

They need not decide the premise is false; they can rely on scientific consensus. It's not a perfect heuristic but it's the most useful one we have. If they're transparent about the sources they use and they're impartial and consistent in their application (read: no videos given special treatment), they're not arbitrating. They're (actively) reporting.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#67

Post by _red »

everybodyknows wrote: post #46
_red wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is an insert for you to enjoy! https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ

It's well known that each year's influenza vaccine is produced with imperfect knowledge of what strains may prove most dangerous later on in contagion season, after several months of selection/evolution/travel time.

So you're saying: We don't know if its effective, because its really really hard. However, we should make it illegal to refuse.

Its bracing how anti-science you sound.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#68

Post by jjeaff »

_red wrote: post #25
throwawaymath wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind helping us interpret this? I'm not picking up from this what you probably intend.

Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale. However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product. Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should'v…

As far as I know, no one is trying to force the flu vaccine. You have to get it every year and it is widely known to be potentially ineffective.

Measles vaccines on the other hand are considered about 97% effective.

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#69

Post by hugh4life »

Amazon is starting to ban some far right books. Sexual Utopia in Power is currently banned(it's on libgen) likely as a compete blacklist on it's publisher. The author had published a book on Kojeve for an academic publisher and the book has received positive feedback from many conservatives who have nothing to do with the far right. I see no reason whatsoever for it to be banned. It may be coming back because it's page is up and not completely deleted like many other books though it's still not up for sale.

https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Utopia-Power-Feminist-Civiliza...

Re: Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

#70

Post by throwawaymath »

mrep wrote: post #42
belltaco wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fake news isn't ideas. It's fake facts.

What is your definition of fake news or fake facts?

I don't really care for the "fake news" label since it's so politically charged. But I would say a thing is a "fake fact" - a falsehood, to speak plainly - if it asserts a claim about the world which has no support from the scientific community (or worse, is actively disputed by the scientific community).

In other words if it's not grounded in empiricism it's a "fake fact."

Post reply on HN