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

YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 803 posts

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#471

Post by nomel »

Ygg2 wrote: post #226
mbesto wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tech companies feeling competent to dictate truth is scary. What's scarier, the fact that tech companies feel competent to dictate truth or the fact that we let them?

Let them? First rule of internet is don't trust things on the Internet. Cross reference and double check. Everyone makes mistakes or lies.

When the whole hydroxychloroquine scandal was going on, I tried to cross reference and double check. Unfortunately, this meant I had to use DuckDuckGo rather than a Google product, since they were burying anything that spoke of it positively, including some of the original research papers.

It's hard to cross reference when one of the lines of the cross has been deleted.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#472

Post by djrogers »

rat87 wrote: post #364
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every year, ~647,000 Americans die from heart disease alone. Even if the COVID death numbers aren't over-inflated, I guarantee you that if I were to time-travel to 2019 and ask you if you think that it would be worth precipitating a global supply chain disruption, missed schooling and medical appointments for children around the globe, both first and third world, and the greatest erosion in civil liberties in Western…

If anything Covid deaths are significantly undercounted. How much is hard to tell but it's probably over a million and was likely 900k during March based on excess death estimates https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0...

Dramatically false. In fact over the past few months many places have reduced their Covid death counts by ~25%, as they took off the ‘died from X but had COVID’ people. Alameda county, Santa Clara county and others…

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#473

Post by 542458 »

giantg2 wrote: post #333
belorn wrote: post #316

In a diving medical video a few months ago, a diving doctor when through the different mask and what they did and what they protected against. It did not get removed or censored by Youtube, through maybe it went under detection. Surgical masks do not prevent infection to the person who wears it. They prevent spread by catching droplets so they don't spread to others. They do not filter the air you breathe, but it red…

"A n95 without a valve has properties of both, but tend to be quite expensive and reserve for medical personal only." They are a couple of bucks and can be reused for some time. I think supply has caught up now, and they are no longer restricted. Many people have these doe things like wood working.

I do believe supply has mostly caught up. I was able to buy a proper high-quality P100 respirator (99.9X filtration, as opposed to 95% on an N95 - and with oil resistance) from 3M a few months ago for not-far-above pre-covid prices.

It’s a pretty fabulous device - even working with extremely fumey substances, with the mask on I can’t smell anything. I’ve taken to using it when cleaning the compost bin or spreading fertilizer as well. You do need to get the right size for your face, beards are a no-go, and glasses are awkward - but overall I’m very impressed.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#474

Post by lupire »

xanaxagoras wrote: post #373
leviathant wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell me more about his career as a physician specializing in infectious disease.

Sure. As an ophthalmologist certified both by the American Board of Ophthalmologists and the National Board of Ophthalmologists, Rand Paul is both an expert in general medicine as well as ophthalmology. Given that it's fairly safe to assume that he knows more about practicing medicine than either one of us, is better prepared to read and understand medical research better than either of us, but most importantly, that…

> National Board of Ophthalmologists,

which Rand Paul personally invented, and he wrote the cerificarion exam that he took.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#475

Post by jcims »

thepasswordis wrote: post #448

The mask thing is actually frustrating to me in the opposite direction. The theory/intent behind cloth masks is that they might capture respiratory droplets, which might decrease mixing in a congregate setting. The cost is low, the risk is low, and the benefit (if it works) would be high. It's a no brainer: wear a mask if you are in a congregate setting until we have better data. But that isn't what MANY lay-people u…

It’s like the bike helmet paradox.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#476

Post by reubens »

kevinpet wrote: post #413
rhizome wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The masks work, but he only mentions a narrow use that isn't the current reason for wearing them. That's the misinformation; he got you, too. Think of it this way: "Don't wear a seatbelt because they don't keep other cars from hitting you."

Ah, I see, you're using "misinformation" to mean "came to a different conclusion than I did".

Misinformation, because it encourages a practice that is counter to the recommendations. Because it allows for a conclusion to be drawn that is counter to the recommendations.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#477

Post by Rebelgecko »

miles wrote: post #393
srinivgp wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty conclusive. It's been conclusive for years and years, before COVID-19. There's no question at all that masks reduce infectiousness through the extremely obvious method of preventing some virus particles from going from one person to another, and also no question at all that probability of infection depends on number of virus particles around, and that viruses in general produce worse symptoms when the ini…

> It's been conclusive for years and years, before COVID-19. March 2020: U.S. health officials say Americans shouldn’t wear face masks to prevent coronavirus https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-cdc-says-americans-don... In fact the U.S. surgeon general recently urged the public to “STOP BUYING MASKS!” “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t…

The CDC made that statement because masks work. It was worded dumbly, but they're just saying that when the mask supply is constrained, healthcare workers should be prioritized over the general public. If masks didn't work, there'd be no point in triaging who gets them.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#478

Post by __blockcipher__ »

scythe wrote: post #460
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are actively spreading disinformation. SARS-2 ("covid") will never be extinct. It is completely infeasible to eradicate a highly infectious zoonotic respiratory virus w/ abundant animal reservoirs. > but cloth masks work very well for reducing the likelihood that a covid-positive person will transmit the virus You cannot possibly honestly make this statement in good faith, considering that there has only ever bee…

>considering that there has only ever been one RCT done on SARS-2, and it showed no significant difference for its primary endpoint (self-infection). It didn't measure community spread, presumably because actually measuring that is extremely difficult, which is exactly why no study exists to confirm your statement. This argument only makes sense if you think it also makes sense to disregard all non-RCT evidence for t…

I'm happy to get into the philosophy of this, but you should know that mechanistic studies in the absence of RCTs are as good as useless. I can show you how to kill cancer cells in a petri dish. I can't show you how to cure cancer. They're very different beasts.

BTW I noticed you mentioned "number and momentum of droplets", which seems to suggest you're still stuck in the old respiratory droplet transmission model and aren't aware of the overwhelming evidence that SARS-2 is transmitted primarily via aerosols, which even mechanistically masks can't do anything against?

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#479

Post by MisterBastahrd »

iammisc wrote: post #275
MisterBastahrd wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Know who knows FAR more about infectious diseases than Rand Paul, a guy who didn't even get a bachelor's degree? Infectious disease specialists. We already know what they have to say about masks. Asking Rand Paul for his knowledge on infectious diseases and how they spread is akin to asking a random computer science graduate to tell you how to fix your Windows domain.

He may not have a bachelor's but he does have an MD, which is a higher degree and one that confers some expertise on medical matters last time I checked. > asking a random computer science graduate to tell you how to fix your Windows domain A random computer science graduate who does a bit of research should be able to tell you everything you need to know about your Windows domain. Certainly, they'd be better suited…

An MD is a generalist's degree. It doesn't confer anything but that he graduated from med school and knows a bit about human physiology. Infectious diseases are AT LEAST as far out of his wheelhouse as Windows domain servers are to computer science graduates, aka, anything that he even pretends to know about the subject is something he read online.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#480

Post by handrous »

rajin444 wrote: post #374
handrous wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But of course Covid is killing people, so we should abandon centuries of liberal democratic tradition and hard fought freedoms to continue the great work we've done stopping it. I'm entirely confused by this sentiment. What's been abandoned? Serious question, I have no clue what people mean when they post stuff like this.

Even Biden admitted the moratorium is unconstitutional. Nobody seems to care.

Ok, so the eviction moratorium? Maybe we just have very different historical perspectives, and that's why I don't get it. "Abandon centuries of liberal democratic tradition and hard fought freedoms" seems like wild hyperbole, given how the country usually operates, and has basically forever. We're still way on the "more free" side of things, as far as the spectrum in which the US has historically operated, by a long shot, and I don't see a strong trend the other way.
Post reply on HN