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

YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 596 posts

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#121

Post by spiderfarmer »

root_axis wrote: post #109
acituan wrote: post #51

I don’t agree with the interview contents, nor think professorship alone gives sufficient credibility in the face of a novel pandemic, data of which is in the process of emerging. That said, I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not. They don’t have in-house experts on these domains, they don’t have a magic epistemology machine that spits out the “facts”. They are good at writing web se…

> I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not This point is often repeated during discussions on these topics but I believe this is an inaccurate characterization. YouTube is not "in charge of deciding what is credible" in the fashion that kind of phrasing suggests; they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions…

A lot of people who blame Youtube for oppressing their right to disinform other people, would immediately oppress other people if they had the chance.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#122

Post by Rebelgecko »

DiffEq wrote: post #78
alabaster_punt wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a specific reason to believe that the model resulted in an incorrect conclusion, feel free to share it, instead of casting aspersions with cryptic nothings.

The model said if we don't lock things down China-style millions will die. But we see now from Sweden it was not true. See top graph: https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/covid-19-c... Also Neil's other predictions have been completely wrong on the Swine Flu and Bird flu. Why this "expert in his field" is still listened to is a mystery to me.

If you're talking about that first graph on the page, I think that it is not very helpful. Comparing total number of deaths can be misleading, especially for small countries like Sweden. If my state had a Coronavirus death rate as high as Sweden's 15,000 more people would be dead. Still not "millions", but it wouldn't be an ideal outcome.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#123

Post by AbrahamParangi »

root_axis wrote: post #109
acituan wrote: post #51

I don’t agree with the interview contents, nor think professorship alone gives sufficient credibility in the face of a novel pandemic, data of which is in the process of emerging. That said, I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not. They don’t have in-house experts on these domains, they don’t have a magic epistemology machine that spits out the “facts”. They are good at writing web se…

> I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not This point is often repeated during discussions on these topics but I believe this is an inaccurate characterization. YouTube is not "in charge of deciding what is credible" in the fashion that kind of phrasing suggests; they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions…

I’ll reiterate a point I’ve made before: the ultimate question is whether YouTube (and other social media platforms) should be permitted both the power to control on their platform as well as the freedom from liability of a common carrier. They exist in a limbo where they have their cake and eat it too- which I think is ultimately untenable.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#124

Post by drunkpotato »

YouTube consistently followed their policy of removing videos which promote misinformation, disinformation, and policy proposals that contradict the World Health Organization's official guidelines during an emergency pandemic.

I have my problems with YouTube, but this isn't censorship, and it isn't a conspiracy to silence anyone. It's an effort to be responsible to public health and safety. The hysteria I see here is completely unwarranted.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#125

Post by dang »

ppod wrote: post #21

Is there any way if I can find out why my submission is flagged? The last thing I submitted was also flagged (and then unflagged), but I have tried to abide by the submission guidelines.

The site guidelines ask you to email hn@ycombinator.com with questions like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Users flagged it. We can only guess why users flag things, but in this case I suppose it might have been a combination of users who are fatigued by this general topic having been repeated so frequently in recent weeks, and users who agree with the decision to take down the interview and don't think HN should have a thread about it. As I said, though—those are just guesses.

In the meantime, someone else reposted it and it was on the front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23258432. But since this post was first, I've turned off the flags on it and merged those comments hither.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#126

Post by mdoms »

gruglife wrote: post #102
kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There are two separate issues here: 1. Non-science: calling Karol Sikora a "professor of medicine" hides the fact that he's an oncologist; if he ever had any expertise it was in cancer, not epidemics, and he has no business speaking outside his field. Sikora is also a fellow of The Princes Foundation For Integrated Health and a professional member of the generically-named College Of Medicine. Both of these organizati…

> calling Karol Sikora a "professor of medicine" hides the fact that he's an oncologist; if he ever had any expertise it was in cancer, not epidemics, and he has no business speaking outside his field. Then why is Bill Gates the de facto lead on curing covid?

Bill Gates has spent decades on the front lines of various wars against infectious diseases. He may not have a university degree on the subject but he is as much an expert as anyone who does - not to mention, he mostly defers to the expertise of his many qualified colleagues when speaking publicly.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#127

Post by selimthegrim »

teslabox wrote: post #22
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternative medicine is mostly bunk, but I absolutely don't agree that it constitutes "harmful or dangerous countent" or should be banned from Youtube. Disputing the consensus should not by itself be forbidden, even when the consensus is accurate and important.

> Disputing the consensus should not by itself be forbidden, even when the consensus is accurate and important. I have a facebook page for sharing my take on non-monopoly medicine. I wrote a blog post for one of my websites commenting on a Spectator.co.uk article about how the Germans were doing much better with their SARS-CoV-2 patients than the Italians. The interviewed German doctor attributed their success to the…

Calling nitrogen mustard a ‘blister agent’ is unhelpful in this context.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#128

Post by xpe »

JSavageOne wrote: post #42

Google is a totalitarian institution and this is offensive to anyone who values free speech

You misunderstand what "totalitarian" means. Per Wikipedia:

> Totalitarianism is a political system or a form of government that prohibits opposition parties, restricts individual opposition to the state and its claims, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life. It is regarded as the most extreme and complete form of authoritarianism.

Also, free speech is not absolute.

Reasonable people can disagree how rights are balanced against the need for public safety. It helps not to throw around words unfairly.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#129

Post by pacala »

kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There are two separate issues here: 1. Non-science: calling Karol Sikora a "professor of medicine" hides the fact that he's an oncologist; if he ever had any expertise it was in cancer, not epidemics, and he has no business speaking outside his field. Sikora is also a fellow of The Princes Foundation For Integrated Health and a professional member of the generically-named College Of Medicine. Both of these organizati…

Meta: This is a very low quality post. It is accusing Karol Sikora of being 'either 'an insane person or an amoral profiteering liar' without a shred of evidence of such behavior. Assassinate the character of the messenger with no proof, then add insult to injury and wholly fail to address the message. What was so objectionable about content of the interview in question?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#130

Post by kerkeslager »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #97
kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There are two separate issues here: 1. Non-science: calling Karol Sikora a "professor of medicine" hides the fact that he's an oncologist; if he ever had any expertise it was in cancer, not epidemics, and he has no business speaking outside his field. Sikora is also a fellow of The Princes Foundation For Integrated Health and a professional member of the generically-named College Of Medicine. Both of these organizati…

he has no business speaking outside his field I agree with everything you wrote, except the above. He is a doctor, speaking on health issues, so he isn't speaking from outside the field of medicine. And I'd challenge that a specialist within the field of medicine can only offer valuable information or insight with their own speciality. Specialists on all fields are prone to group think, so people with related trainin…

That's all fine and good if you're knowledgeable in the field enough to evaluate his claims. But I'm not, and most of HN is not, so how do we know the difference between an outsider with the vision to see what the orthodoxy can't, and a charlatan trying to profit off lies?

The the fact is, charlatans are far more common than visionary outsiders.

And in Sikora's case, there are a lot of red flags indicating he's a charlatan and not a visionary outsider. The virus is "getting tired"? Really?

Post reply on HN