YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

Post by anonymousiam » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 1:28 AM UTC

ojnabieoot wrote: post #59

joshuamorton wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a particularly great argument (and is scientifically dubious). There are different strains of flus, colds, and recently, a few different strains of coronavirus. You can't generally be reinfected by the same strain. What can happen is that new strains can infect you. There are tons of cold strains around, and the flu mutates quickly enough that each year we get a new one, so vaccines have to be redeveloped…

> You can't generally be reinfected by the same strain. Unless the word "generally" is doing a lot of work in this sentence - YES YOU CAN be reinfected by the same strain. It's called "homologous reinfection": the person's natural immune response is not always up to the task of actually providing immunity to a specific viral strain, and that exact same viral strain can reinfect the patient even immediately after reco…

Post by BurnFroggyBurn » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 1:32 AM UTC

Post by cam_l » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:30 AM UTC

ipiz0618 wrote: post #63

cam_l wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like eating 'fads' lollies as a kid is not a slippery slope to drug addiction. Banning clear misinformation* is not a slippery slope to censorship. Just like drug addiction, each step along the path to censorship is a clear decisive act. I am way more concerned about the fast train to banning encryption than the baby step of banning misinformation. And by the way, let's also not lose sight of the fact that prese…

This is assuming that the YouTube management (or the software behind) is authoritative of what information is correct. In reality, YouTube has not just once banned stuff "by mistake" and will continue to do so.

Post by bduerst » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 5:45 AM UTC

anonymousiam wrote: post #42

gruez wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Enter this search on Google and see what you get: "Is hydroxychloroquine effective in treating COVID-19?" what am I supposed to be looking at? is there supposed to be an info box that says "yes" or "no"?

Sorry for not being clear. I am not the best communicator. What you should notice upon entering that search term are the wildly conflicting results. Google will present a "No" answer near the top, but if you scroll down through the thousands of results, you will see some saying "Yes", some saying "No", and some saying "We don't know". Google (and all of the other big social media giants) was quick to post a definitiv…

Post by brink » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 5:54 AM UTC

threatofrain wrote: post #18

anonymousiam wrote: post #2

This is the slippery slope of censorship on display for everyone to see. What panel of certified physicians is YouTube using to identify what information is correct vs. incorrect? I'm pretty sure they don't have any doctors doing this. The ban is a political act and not a scientific one.

If misinformation leading to loss of life can be traced back to YT, wouldn't YT be far more at risk for across-the-board negative response? Science and politics have a massive intersection in the arena of public communication; e.g., fracking, nuclear energy, climate change, vaccines... IMO, any nation which cannot establish a harmonious relationship with their own institutions of science is in a shaky spot.