Even without endorsing any conspiracy theories, I don't think the WHO has proven themselves to a faultless institution.
YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
101–110 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#102Free speech (well, most freedoms, really) will die the day we decide "saving lives" is worth _any_ cost. Heck, we already decided trashing the economy is worth "saving lives" (how many?), I imagine some people would be overjoyed to remove the 1st amendment in order to lower disease spread, lower the suicide rate of those vulnerable to hate speech, etc. And why stop there? Remove 2nd amendment and you can save even mo…
You’re on a slippery slope and don’t consider that this is an exceptional situation. The danger of losing civil liberties comes when the exception becomes the rule.
AFAIK, no amendments have been violated since YouTube is a private entity. They can editorialize what they, how they want. It’s is their liberty to make a choice here, the same as your liberty to not support that choice.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#103Not even mentioning they are playing a dangerous censorhip game, it's very weird that they pick the WHO over the CDC after all the WHO controversies. (Taiwan, slow COVID-19 response, alignment with China lines, head of WHO was part of the corrupt Ethiopian government, $200M in business class travel, and probably more scandals.) CDC has also a way bigger budget than the WHO. $11.1B vs $4.2B. Ref: - https://en.wikipedi…
Does the CDC recognize Taiwan?
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it is, but almost no one who asks "but who decides x " in these threads is actually interested in debating the matter. They typically already believe no one should be allowed to decide, and they have no intention of actually engaging you in conversation beyond lecturing, berating and snark. Learning when to step away from such fruitless pseudo-debates before wasting hours on the online equivalent of beating one…
> almost no one who asks "but who decides x" in these threads is actually interested in debating the matter. They typically already believe no one should be allowed to decide I take you up on that offer. Let us, for a moment, discuss this. To disconnect us both from the exact matter at hand, because we are likely at this point pretty attached strongly to our biases to it, let us step aside, choose a completely differ…
To echo the other response:
When did YouTube become a government? The context is different. No matter what YouTube does, I can still host my own video.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#105The road to hell is paved with good intentions. WHO is a political organization with medical leanings just like Fox News is an entertainment channel that covers newslike topics. Yes, there's a lot of information out there about SARS-COV2 and COVID-19 infections out there that are downright misleading at best and life threatening at worst. No, censoring that content including videos is NOT the role of a hosting platfo…
Strawman arguments.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#106Free speech (well, most freedoms, really) will die the day we decide "saving lives" is worth _any_ cost. Heck, we already decided trashing the economy is worth "saving lives" (how many?), I imagine some people would be overjoyed to remove the 1st amendment in order to lower disease spread, lower the suicide rate of those vulnerable to hate speech, etc. And why stop there? Remove 2nd amendment and you can save even mo…
It happened in 1798, this isn't something that we've been waiting for.
https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1700s/The-Se...
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Canada for months we followed WHO's directions to a tee and ended up rapid growth of infections until we did a 180 and implemented nearly every measure that the WHO disagreed with. Taiwan is one of the few countries to have very few cases, and they essentially did a lot of measures the WHO did not recommend initially.
This is incredibly vague. WHAT measures did the WHO "disagree" with that saved Canada? I'd love to see this post cited up to include what measuring you're referring to in both parts (agree w/WHO and disagree) and where the WHO disagreed with Canada's measures.
I think he saying that Canada followed WHO advice to their detriment whereas Taiwan strayed from WHO advice with success. I don't know about any specific examples but the efficacy of masks is one I've heard about -- essentially the WHO discouraged use of masks whereas now the common wisdom seems to be that even makeshift masks when widely used are a lot better than none.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither does the US. Taiwan is only recognised by IIRC 12 natinos, mostly small island states. This has become another weird internet talking point as international recognition pretty much unanmiously switched to the PRC in the 1970s.
Edit: since people are misunderstanding this post, I am 100% pro-ROC and anti-PRC. I wish the ROC could rename itself to something else without triggering a PRC invasion. Check my comment history. I'm 100% pro-ROC and I support the ROC's continued (since 1912) independence as a sovereign entity. 中華民國萬歲 "Taiwan" isn't a country. It's an island controlled by the Republic of China alongside its other holdings. The ROC i…
That is what Chinese claim. I think what Taiwan says matters too.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
The majority of WHO controversies are made up, the WHO are not a political entity so they do not want to comment at all on political issues; and whatever you want to say about Taiwan it is a very heated political situation. That's also the evidence of "alignment with china": because we in the west see a failure to recognise taiwan as siding with china. Which is odd because the USA doesn't officially recognise Taiwan…
> The majority of WHO controversies are made up, the WHO are not a political entity so they do not want to comment at all on political issues; and whatever you want to say about Taiwan it is a very heated political situation. They make overt political statements all the time. For one: calling Taiwan racist when it took issue with the WHO’s inaction after their attempts to disseminate health information. Then Tedros c…
Please don't twist the situation.
The Head of the WHO was attacked by racist trolls who were outwardly Taiwanese; for excluding Taiwan from membership (like _all_ U.N. projects do), And he commented about the abuse.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/taiwan-who-tedro...
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. It's extremely upsetting to see decisions like the parent's. What's more concerning is the tone is absolute - the intention is "I know exactly what is right and the world shall follow my lead". That guy Gandhi causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy MLK causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy Edward Jenner with his braindead idea of vaccination proposing we infect ourseves to…
You're equating people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to MLK and Ghandi?
https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s13054-0...
'a new clinical trial to investigate vitamin C infusion for the treatment of severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia has begun in Wuhan, China'