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

“YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 329 posts

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#251

Post by lawnchair_larry »

marcinzm wrote: post #27
varispeed wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> insist on not using other treatments outside clinical trials That signals they may have conflict of interest. For example accidentally finding a treatment that works, could mean huge loss for vaccine business. (Just to be clear, I am not anti-vax. I got vaccinated myself and I believe there is no better option right now, however, trying to limit doctors in finding other means sounds extremely fishy)

Telling doctors to not randomly experiment on their patients outside of a controlled studies seems perfectly reasonable. Most medical groups tend to view uncontrolled human experimentation as very unethical and have for a long time.

Nobody is talking about randomly experimenting on patients, so this is a disingenuous attempt at reframing.

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#252

Post by op00to »

zephyr1 wrote: post #232
japgolly wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes orders of magnitude more effort to counteract bullshit than it does to produce it. Your opinion doesn't scale and not only is it easily exploitable by bad actors, it's happening in practice all over the place these days and is a huge, huge problem.

Or maybe your arguments aren't as good as you think...

Nah, his arguments are not only compelling but scientifically proven.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/15291006124510...

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#253

Post by ds206 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61
_holographic_ wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Garbage sure, as the many testimonies from doctors all around the world that say it works spectaculary. Big Pharma is running the show so no one is going to finance fancy double blind RCT´s. It´s completely crazy to ignore treatments for C19, this disease is easily treatable on symptom onset.

> testimonies from doctors all around the world that say it works spectaculary I have no view on this drug. But this standard of evidence is useless. Every substance-disease pair has positive testimony from doctors around the world. Ground tiger bones for cancer? Paprika for polio? Leeches for fever? tons of testimony. Totally worthless. What you need are quality studies.

Here, I have a video to fill you in a little about Ivermectin. It's only 12 mins long.

If you watch it, I have a question for you.

Based on the info in the video, do you think Ivermectin has potential to treat covid? Yes or no?

https://youtu.be/4O7uy4tzI8A

Another question. Should videos like this be banned by YouTube?

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#254

Post by paulpauper »

derefr wrote: post #103
pumaontheprowl wrote: post #69

If McDonald's mistreats me, I can go to Wendy's or Burger King and get a similar meal for a similar price. When Youtube mistreats me, where am I supposed to go? BitChute? Vimeo? Neither of those have even half the creators as Youtube. And if creators want to migrate off Youtube, how are they supposed to do that when they'll get less than 10% of the audience on the other sites? Youtube's moat way is too deep to be thr…

On the one hand, you're pointing at these alternative video hosting sites' lack of engaged audience as the problem with switching over to them. On the other hand, you're saying YouTube needs to be forced to allow anyone and everyone to stay on the site — literally, to have a channel at all. But you're making a very important hidden leap here: between people being allowed to have a channel on YouTube; and those channe…

youtube is more than the recommendation algo:

1. the community

2. user friendly interface

3 faster video loads, better quality, smoother playback compared to competitors

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#255

Post by dang »

zephyr1 wrote: post #70
piker wrote: post #6

Eric Weinstein is a clown, like, literally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein#Physics

Love it when Wikipedia states something as authoritative fact and then links to a biased opinion site by an uncredentialed author.

I've banned this account because you've been creating various accounts to troll HN (or borderline-troll, which still isn't ok). Can you please not do that? We're trying for more thoughtful conversation here.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#256

Post by fitzie »

marcinzm wrote: post #27
varispeed wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> insist on not using other treatments outside clinical trials That signals they may have conflict of interest. For example accidentally finding a treatment that works, could mean huge loss for vaccine business. (Just to be clear, I am not anti-vax. I got vaccinated myself and I believe there is no better option right now, however, trying to limit doctors in finding other means sounds extremely fishy)

Telling doctors to not randomly experiment on their patients outside of a controlled studies seems perfectly reasonable. Most medical groups tend to view uncontrolled human experimentation as very unethical and have for a long time.

the question I would ask is when a new virus caused a pandemic, would you want the medical/healthcare system to test existing drugs for suitability? if some drugs are know to treat various pathogens and have a well established safety record shouldn't we allow any doctor to experiment using their experience and informed consent?

waiting for a properly run study will cost lived especially when there are corporate and political interests controlling these tests.

it would have been easy to run dozens of prophylactic studies while this virus was running rampant. same for testing the dozens of clinical sourced protocols. instead the medical testing establishment shutdown and ignore all clinical protocols that were successful used, and put the message out so that medical journals, big tech, pharmacy boards, hospitals, suppressed more discussion and application of these protocols.

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#257

Post by dlp211 »

hollerith wrote: post #227
Pyramus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are asserting they don't want to benefit from both?

Ivermectin is an old drug, so cannot be patented, which means that Merck has no way to prevent competitors from selling the drug, so no way to keep prices high.

Yes, because we all know that insulin can be had for ten cents a vile right now....oh...wait.

Can we please stop trying to rationalize an irrational market. There is no reason to believe that the age of the drug has anything to do with it's profitability.

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#259

Post by seattle_spring »

ds206 wrote: post #21
MattGaiser wrote: post #14

The makers of Ivermectin are against the use of Ivermectin for Covid. https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use... The dissenters are advocating things even the company that stands to profit from those things opposes. That’s how off the deep end this is.

No. Ivermectin is off patent. There is no money to be made. That is the point. Everyone wants to invent new drugs and vaccines to make a buck. Btw, Merck is distancing themselves from Ivermectin because they have a new drug in the works. Please read/watch more.

Seems like there's a ton of money to be made with the drug. Just call it a "miracle cure" and sell it to all of the anti vax conspiracy theorists for $500 a dose. Works great for chronic Lyme antibiotics and essential oils, why not ivermectin too?

Re: “YouTube is shutting down dissenting Biology PhDs and MDs”

#260

Post by dlp211 »

throwkeep wrote: post #46
MattGaiser wrote: post #14

The makers of Ivermectin are against the use of Ivermectin for Covid. https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use... The dissenters are advocating things even the company that stands to profit from those things opposes. That’s how off the deep end this is.

What you're missing is that Ivermectin is decades old and off patent so anyone can make it cheap. Merck is against it because they are working on a new drug that they'll have a monopoly on. Typical of big pharma. Why are people blindly accepting what big pharma says when it comes to Covid, as though the industry has suddenly turned a new leaf?

Then a genetics company could produce it for Covid and beat Merck to market.
Post reply on HN