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

YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#891

Post by skyde »

ohdannyboy wrote: post #290

I was hesitant for a while and the massive censorship was part of it. I got vaccinated in May and have convinced others to get the shot since the side effects, while existent, appear to be minor compared to the reduction in harmful symptoms. Talking to my doctor is what did it for me. He cleared up most of my concerns and pressed me that my remaining concerns were too nebulous to be useful. If he just said "shut up a…

I think the data alone is an objective argument. Using basic math (Bayes theorem) I can compute it reduce my chance of death by 668 time and Hospitalization by 116 times.

see below:

Covid Fact: - proportion on covid death that are unvaccinated p(not(vaccinated) | covid-death ) = 99% - proportion of population this is unvaccinated P(not(vaccinated)) = 14% - proportion of population this is vaccinated P(vaccinated) = 86% Basic math: - Probability of death from covid if not vacinated P(covid-death | not(vaccinated)) = 0.99 * P(covid-death) / 0.14 - Probability of death from covid if vacinated P(covid-death | vaccinated) = 0.01 * P(covid-death) / 0.86 - How many time more likely to die from covid if not vaccinated P(covid-death | not(vaccinated)) / P(covid-death | vaccinated) = 608 Fact: if you are not vaccinated, You are 608 times more likely to die from Covid 19 and you are 116 times more likely to be hospitalized.

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#892

Post by notacoward »

Jimmc414 wrote: post #51

The problem is that questions about the vaccine are being labeled as anti-vaccine. Real data about the side effects of the vaccine constitutes science not anti-vax propaganda. It is distressing that supporters of informed consent are being lumped in with QAnon.

> The problem is that questions about the vaccine are being labeled as anti-vaccine.

When is a question not a question? When - despite phrasing - it admits no possibility of a satisfactory answer. Then it is functionally a statement, and should be treated as such with associated burdens of proof etc.

> It is distressing that supporters of informed consent are being lumped in with QAnon.

And how is one supposed to tell the difference, when every outward appearance is the same?

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#893

Post by max46 »

babypuncher wrote: post #745
AHappyCamper wrote: post #739

Recently I spoke with two senior scientists with decades of experience who specialise in pharmacology, biology, and vaccines, who both work at high-level labs that inspect all types of drugs. They both were extremely sceptical of the vaccine, with one being openly antagonistic towards it. YouTube's new rules allow them to post content, but they both say they've been warned by their jobs about speaking out - that they…

If there was a problem with the vaccine we probably would have noticed something by the time a billion people got injected with it. These skeptics need to put up some serious evidence if they want to be taken seriously.

>If there was a problem with the vaccine we probably would have noticed something by the time a billion people got injected with it.

Not when everyone who tries to talk about their bad experiences gets treated like qanon and the morons who thought 5G caused covid-19.

Even quoting CDC or letters from a company who makes the vaccines is considered dangerous misinformation and can get you banned if what you are showing doesn't paint the vaccine in a good light.

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#894

Post by munk-a »

monksy wrote: post #864

For those who were keeping track: The virus is just like the flu it's not a problem . The ICUs aren't that overloaded, theres no reason to worry .. -> We shouldn't have a lock down that is this strict allow people to make decisions on their own ... -> Restaurants shouldn't be required to be closed for indoor dining .... -> Let people chose to wear the mask or not (Considering the US/CDC's terrible stance on masks tha…

That the government is still visibly divided over whether vaccination is a good idea is what really troubles me here and it's pretty much purely America at this point. Canadian liberals don't like the Liberals - Liberals don't like the Conservatives and neither Liberals nor Conservatives like liberals. That all said every represented party in Canada (and almost every individual MP) is either pro-vax or losing a lot of clout right now. In the US the GOP is technically for vaccinations and sane mandates - but if you look at House Reps and Governors you'll see a lot of anti-mask mandate laws and other protests.

The government is of the people - but it should be the best of us not the biggest conspiracy theorists among us (having one or two is fine - but this problem is a lot bigger than just Marjorie Taylor Greene)

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#896

Post by belorn »

jackson1442 wrote: post #792
ohdannyboy wrote: post #290

I was hesitant for a while and the massive censorship was part of it. I got vaccinated in May and have convinced others to get the shot since the side effects, while existent, appear to be minor compared to the reduction in harmful symptoms. Talking to my doctor is what did it for me. He cleared up most of my concerns and pressed me that my remaining concerns were too nebulous to be useful. If he just said "shut up a…

> She believed that if the vaccine was actually as great as they're saying they'd be able to make more objective goalposts and win arguments instead of stopping them because the other side is too stupid to make their own decisions. The problem I see here is that the (I hesitate to call it this) anti-vax "side" has been shifting goalposts since day n-1. If you've ever talked to someone who's shifted goalposts you'll s…

Depending on which country you look at you got different goals. Some tried isolation. Others tried herd immunity. We are currently trying those 2 dose vaccines and are already planning for a third before the winter has even started, and I suspect we will see talk about a forth dose by early spring. Then we have nations like Norway addressing covid as a new aspect of the seasonal flue with no end date.

The idea that we just take two doses and are done is clearly no longer the goalpost.

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#897

Post by heavyset_go »

ookblah wrote: post #50

Someone want to throw out there a better way to combat disinformation than just armchair criticizing their decision? I almost feel like people are siding with the anti-vaxxers out of "principle". Just a no win situation. It's too easy for bad characters to screw up an entire system with little effort (look at trolls, spammers, etc). Either you moderate everyone and slippery slope down into censorship where the tools…

> I almost feel like people are siding with the anti-vaxxers out of "principle".

This is called "spite". Turns out that the aphorism about one cutting of their nose to spite their face is incredibly apt.

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#898

Post by alex_munroe »

jackson1442 wrote: post #792
ohdannyboy wrote: post #290

I was hesitant for a while and the massive censorship was part of it. I got vaccinated in May and have convinced others to get the shot since the side effects, while existent, appear to be minor compared to the reduction in harmful symptoms. Talking to my doctor is what did it for me. He cleared up most of my concerns and pressed me that my remaining concerns were too nebulous to be useful. If he just said "shut up a…

> She believed that if the vaccine was actually as great as they're saying they'd be able to make more objective goalposts and win arguments instead of stopping them because the other side is too stupid to make their own decisions. The problem I see here is that the (I hesitate to call it this) anti-vax "side" has been shifting goalposts since day n-1. If you've ever talked to someone who's shifted goalposts you'll s…

> you cannot argue in good faith with someone who does not.

But the solution shouldn't be to shut down the discussion by banning the other side, because then you just have two sides who fight dirty.

One side refuses to see reason and understand arguments, the other uses shaming, coercion, and censorship in place of the arguments. If the truth is on your side, you shouldn't resort to that.

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#899

Post by travisparker »

Despite being a medical doctor, this disappoints me a great deal.

This sort of authoritarian non-discussion is exactly what's caused vaccine resistance to become an "activist movement" in the first place.

Some tinfoil-hat part of me wonders if that's actually the plan...

Re: YouTube is banning anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content

#900

Post by eric_cc »

Loughla wrote: post #114
mach1ne wrote: post #57

People don't see what the actual problem here is - perhaps because they don't want to see. What is happening is very much the transformation from an open society to one where freedom of speech is limited and certain other individual rights are stripped away. Perhaps not de jure, but de facto. And sure, one might argue that it's for a good cause (even though it's a complex topic). However, the fact is that as this is…

I genuinely don't get it. YouTube, a private entity and not a government entity, is saying they don't want certain content on their platform. This is not the end of your free speech. This isn't really even a movement away from free speech. It's YouTube exercising their right to freedom of speech by not allowing what they believe to be harmful or disagreeable on their platform. They already do this with other categori…

> I genuinely don't get it.

At least you admit it.

> You are more than able to start your own company and let whatever you want on that site.

"If you don't like YouTube, build your own" is a really shitty take. It's very obvious the role that YouTube has right now and why massive censorship is a problem.

Post reply on HN