4 ms·
And how exactly do they determine whether something is "dangerous medical misinformation"? I'm guessing it's probably based on WHO guidelines, which means a ve
by ZephyrBlu 5y ago
And how exactly do they determine whether something is "dangerous medical misinformation"?
I'm guessing it's probably based on WHO guidelines, which means a very large number of things are off limits.
- tamaharbor 5y agoWasn’t the WHO (and CDC) incorrect regarding several aspects of the recent Coronavirus?
- lotsofpulp 5y agoThere is nothing wrong with being wrong. There is something wrong if the process was corrupted and corrections are not made if known.
- sb057 5y ago"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China." https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152
- czzr 5y agoWhat exactly is wrong in that statement?
- pumaontheprowl 5y agoIt basically makes it impossible to propose any new medical treatment on Youtube when their definition of "misinformation" is really just "not proven to work." This would be more acceptable if they only banned discussion of treatments that are proven not to work, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
- loceng 5y agoIn fact you'd still need a prescription for Ivermectin from a physician, and that's where the curation/filter layer should be occurring - distributed amongst thousands of doctors vs. dictated by YouTube et al.