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

YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 596 posts

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#91

Post by DiffEq »

DanBC wrote: post #81
DiffEq wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what is so dangerous about it? Perhaps you need to consult a dictionary as to what danger really is. I don't know these people that made the video and I don't subscribe to magic crystals or whatever they are pushing/saying but I do know what Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson from Imperial college created in his flawed modeling - a world wide panic. That is what has been dangerous. Google is a private company I suppose…

> but I do know what Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson from Imperial college created in his flawed modeling - a world wide panic. You don't think the tens of thousands of deaths in Italy, Spain, France, and the US had already caused that panic by the time his model was released?

No, that is not how the timeline went. As to who created the panic - it was Neil, Fauci and their ilk along with the media. The media, instead of reporting that the data shows old and sick people are the ones dying chose to hide that relevant fact and just report the death toll ad nauseam with no context - as a matter of fact they are still doing it.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#92

Post by modzu »

kerkeslager wrote: post #79
modzu wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did you watch the piece? what exactly was "insane" about it? and imo the issue here isnt what is "true" -- nobody knows the truth with corona; its novel . so what's important is having a guide to truth. and that guide is scientific thinking -- the scientific method. experts are dead wrong all the time . but they dont stay wrong.

I didn't watch the piece, but I've read enough of what Sakora has written to conclude that Sakora is a consistent liar. Even if a liar tells the truth, he's not a valuable source of information because you don't know whether what he says is true or not. > and imo the issue here isnt what is "true" -- nobody knows the truth with corona; its novel. If nobody knows what's true with corona, then shouldn't claim to know w…

ive never heard the name sakora before. genuine question -- just curious how/why you've come across their writing, when it seems the claim is that they are some kind of quack?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#93

Post by macintux »

kerkeslager wrote: post #68
alabaster_punt wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which is why it's important that we present the truth right next to it, so people don't have to look elsewhere. This still assumes that people will be willing to watch it. > Well, it is available, in places where the truth isn't available, so I don't really know what you think taking it off YouTube has achieved. It has achieved a lower spread of misinformation. Now nobody browsing YouTube will happen upon this vide…

> It has achieved a lower spread of misinformation. Has it? I'm not really sure how you came to this conclusion. If kicking Sakora off YouTube causes his followers to become angry and go share his personal site through a bunch of different channels, that could easily outpace the impact of a YouTube channel where refutations are included. If someone censored your views, what would you do? Why do you think people who d…

YouTube is one of the largest disseminators of information in the world. No amount of small replacements with an existing audience of gullible fools can make up for the loss of audience of hundreds of millions of not-yet-introduced-to-this-garbage victims.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#94

Post by Majromax »

mchusma wrote: post #5

I 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.

> However, once they consider themselves as "curators" of information with near-monopoly status

They're already that. Youtwitgrambook's front-page and suggestion algorithms are forms of curation, specifically designed to maximize some form of engagement metric.

Their respective content policies are really just an attempt to correct the failings of algorithmic curation.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#95

Post by bloopernova »

kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There 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 organizati…

> Truth is the answer to lies.

"A lie gets halfway around the world before truth puts on its boots" - not sure who actually said this

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/07/13/truth/

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#96

Post by gnusty_gnurc »

nojito wrote: post #73
modzu wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did you watch the piece? what exactly was "insane" about it? and imo the issue here isnt what is "true" -- nobody knows the truth with corona; its novel . so what's important is having a guide to truth. and that guide is scientific thinking -- the scientific method. experts are dead wrong all the time . but they dont stay wrong.

He’s not qualified to speak about infectious disease. Infectious disease is a distinct specialty in medicine.

Are you qualified to decide whether someone with medical expertise can discuss medicine, health and policy?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#97

Post by WillPostForFood »

kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There 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 organizati…

he has no business speaking outside his field

I agree with everything you wrote, except the above. He is a doctor, speaking on health issues, so he isn't speaking from outside the field of medicine. And I'd challenge that a specialist within the field of medicine can only offer valuable information or insight with their own speciality. Specialists on all fields are prone to group think, so people with related training from the outside should be welcomed to challenge the orthodoxy.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#98

Post by gnusty_gnurc »

throwawaysea wrote: post #47
DSingularity wrote: post #30

The virus is “getting tired” globally at the same time!? That sounds almost mystical.

I don't think they mean that literally, but are saying that there is some mechanism that is causing the virus to spread less.

It’s crazy how much demagoguing is going around, and arriving at the conclusion to silence these people.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#99

Post by gnusty_gnurc »

This is a bad trend. If scientists in China contradicted the government (and directly - the WHO), it seems like YouTube would have censored them. Debate is what sustains free society and free society will perish when certain narratives become unquestionable.
Post reply on HN