This isn't the first time it happened nor will it be the last. Here in my country (Brazil) they invited an actual toxicologist, professor and ambassador of medical facility in São Paulo (since 2009) to speak live at CNN but when he mentioned that there's an over-exageration in terms of deadlyness and started putting actual data, studies and past examples in his speech, he was promptly and unapologetically interupted, we can even hear someone say "cut" in the broadcast, before the newswomans interupts him by saying, I kid you not, "We cannot continue the interview because the doctor is not able to listen to us..." all while the doctor was made silent by this statement. Makes me wonder who makes these decisions.
YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
31–40 of 596 posts
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#32I don't really care the content at all, but I really wish these platforms took the "phone company" approach, in which they considered themselves neutral carriers of information. In the US, I don't know an obvious issue besides legislative change to enforce this. However, once they consider themselves as "curators" of information with near-monopoly status, I hope they are litigated against successfully.
So should YouTube not be allowed to have any standards about what they want on their platform? Should they be forced to allow porn?
YouTube does not have a monopoly on video streaming. There is nothing stopping anyone from paying for the bandwidth and streaming anything they want by renting computer hardware and bandwidth from a colo.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#33Is it this Karol Sikora? > Promotion of alternative medicine > Sikora and the School of Medicine at Buckingham have in the past been supportive of alternative medicine. For a short time, Buckingham offered a diploma in "integrated medicine" (a relatively recent euphemism for alternative medicine). Sikora was a Foundation Fellow of Prince Charles' now-defunct alternative medicine lobby group The Prince's Foundation fo…
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.
Take a look at http://whatstheharm.net/
That should give you a better idea of what harms alternative medicine quackery can cause.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
>, but I really wish these platforms took the "phone company" approach, in which they considered themselves neutral carriers of information. This suggestion (and the comparison to phone companies) comes up repeatedly but Youtube can't _be_ a neutral carrier if they are funded by advertising . That's because the businesses' choice to pay for advertising is not a neutral choice . See "advertiser friendly content"[1] an…
> This suggestion (and the comparison to phone companies) comes up repeatedly but Youtube can't _be_ a neutral carrier if they are funded by advertising. That's because the businesses' choice to pay for advertising is not a neutral choice. It should be as well. Disallow advertising companies from paying for ads on specific content only. They should have a blanket agreement to show N ads, to user demographics, interes…
Why shouldn’t I as an advertiser not be allowed to choose which content I want my products to be associated with? It amazes me how willing HN posters are willing to give up power to the government.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#35I suggest everyone read this fellow's Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora
Do you think that such people should be banned from content distribution channels?
Yes. You have the right to say whatever you want but you don’t have the right to force someone else to publish it. If you want to publish what you want free of interference, pay for your own servers and bandwidth.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#36The virus is “getting tired” globally at the same time!? That sounds almost mystical.
Wasn't that what people were predicting would happen in the summer since the beginning? And then probably with a rebound in autumn/next winter.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
> Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell broke rank with consensus to share the experience of doctors on the front lines actually treating SARS-CoV-2 patients, by posting a few videos expressing his frustration at the standards his ICU was implementing while treating SARS-CoV-2 [0]. He single handedly changed the COVID-19 standard of care in the United States by objecting to the consensus policy of ventilating fully-coherent people…
> It's not the ventilation that was killing patients. It was the covid-19 that was killing patients.
I'm not a professional with years of slinging the lingo. But I think Kyle-Sidell's retweet of "Barotrauma is a real phenomenon" [0] implies [edit] that aggressive ventilation was actually what was killing people. Is it so unreasonable to propose that many of the prematurely-ventilated might have survived, if not for their ventilation?
Wikipedia has a page about Barotrauma, which is damage to bodies caused by pressure differentials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barotrauma
Dr. @erikfreyrMD's earlier tweet said "I don't know where this dogma of 'intubate early' came from. Intubation is a death sentence. " [1] (emphasis added).
[0] https://twitter.com/erikfreyrMD/status/1243775103071973376
[1] https://twitter.com/erikfreyrMD/status/1243697159037259776
[edit1: means -> implies]
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#38It would be great to see peer-reviewed papers, or even raw data to support these assertions.
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#39Hardly surprising that a video full of dangerous misinformation has been pulled. It would be worth reading about this particular professor on Wikipedia, particularly his support for alternative medicine, his false claim to have been a professor at Imperial college, and his claim that the UK's NHS is "the last bastion of communism". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora
Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy
#40There 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 organizations are lobbyists which promote alternative medicine.
2. Censorship: rather than allow conversation where real scientists can respond to Sikora's nonsense with facts, YouTube decided to push his followers into their own echo chambers where pieces like this which represents him as a martyr go unchallenged.
Sakora isn't a martyr: he's either an insane person or an amoral profiteering liar who doesn't care if his lies get people killed. But I don't think censorship is the answer to lies. Truth is the answer to lies.