5 ms·

Yeah, I don't agree with this assessment of the risks there. The more people that are vaccinated, the shakier his argument becomes. Covid19 has very real, wel

by eloff 5y ago

Yeah, I don't agree with this assessment of the risks there. The more people that are vaccinated, the shakier his argument becomes. Covid19 has very real, well documented risks. The common vaccines have very low known risks by comparison. The space for unknown risks shrinks by the day. That's the danger inherit with being a contrarian. Mostly you end up being wrong. It's a very important role though, to challenge accepted beliefs and create a dialog around them.

busymom0 5y ago
His main criticism is with 1. Not allowing dissenting opinions in the scientific community along with silencing any criticism from both media and big tech. If we are silencing dissenting view points, then are we really getting the truth? 2. Pushing it on pregnant women, kids and healthy youngsters where the risk vs reward isn't in favour. 3. Pushing it on people who have already recovered from COVID. There's no reason for this. I was hoping that after what's happened in the last 1.5 year (and even past centuries), we would have learnt our lessons on how bad censorship is. But people don't learn their lessons. Bret correctly called it "intellectual authoritarianism".
- gameswithgo 5y ago
  Everyone here hears about Weinstein literally every day. He and his brother may be the least silenced people in history. As well I have been twitter mobbed by Eric, making my account useless for quite a while. so he is perfectly happy to silence people who critique him I guess.
  - busymom0 5y ago
    > least silenced people in history His YouTube channel's already got strikes and videos taken down and demonetized. He's moving his podcast over to Odysee because of this. His ArticlesOfUnity twitter account (unrelated to COVID) was banned too.
    - chillwaves 5y ago
      Are they applying rules especially to him? Or are they not making exceptions for him? I don't see a problem with the latter. It is almost always the latter.
      - busymom0 5y ago
        > It is almost always the latter. That tells me nothing will change your mind as it indicates that you still think social media censorship is anywhere remotely fair.
  - canadianfella 5y ago
    > Everyone here hears about Weinstein literally every day. I have never heard of him before.
- abnry 5y ago
  Absolutely. It starts to get a little too deep down the rabbit hole for me saying that Ivermeticin being withheld is the "crime of the century" and that it isn't being used because it isn't patented and so there is no financial incentive to use it. It's a bold claim which I don't know how well is supported. But he deserves his uncensored say, especially since the whole lab-leak hypothesis debacle. Big Tech has acted shamefully in all of this. It is increasingly clear now.
- eloff 5y ago
  I think 2 is debatable, and not vaccinating specific groups takes away from herd immunity, which hurts everyone. To be fair he discussed that criticism. He's completely right about 1 and 3.

by eloff 5y ago

busymom0 5y ago

His main criticism is with 1. Not allowing dissenting opinions in the scientific community along with silencing any criticism from both media and big tech. If we are silencing dissenting view points, then are we really getting the truth? 2. Pushing it on pregnant women, kids and healthy youngsters where the risk vs reward isn't in favour. 3. Pushing it on people who have already recovered from COVID. There's no reason for this. I was hoping that after what's happened in the last 1.5 year (and even past centuries), we would have learnt our lessons on how bad censorship is. But people don't learn their lessons. Bret correctly called it "intellectual authoritarianism".

gameswithgo 5y ago
Everyone here hears about Weinstein literally every day. He and his brother may be the least silenced people in history. As well I have been twitter mobbed by Eric, making my account useless for quite a while. so he is perfectly happy to silence people who critique him I guess.
- busymom0 5y ago
  > least silenced people in history His YouTube channel's already got strikes and videos taken down and demonetized. He's moving his podcast over to Odysee because of this. His ArticlesOfUnity twitter account (unrelated to COVID) was banned too.
  - chillwaves 5y ago
    Are they applying rules especially to him? Or are they not making exceptions for him? I don't see a problem with the latter. It is almost always the latter.
    - busymom0 5y ago
      > It is almost always the latter. That tells me nothing will change your mind as it indicates that you still think social media censorship is anywhere remotely fair.
- canadianfella 5y ago
  > Everyone here hears about Weinstein literally every day. I have never heard of him before.
abnry 5y ago
Absolutely. It starts to get a little too deep down the rabbit hole for me saying that Ivermeticin being withheld is the "crime of the century" and that it isn't being used because it isn't patented and so there is no financial incentive to use it. It's a bold claim which I don't know how well is supported. But he deserves his uncensored say, especially since the whole lab-leak hypothesis debacle. Big Tech has acted shamefully in all of this. It is increasingly clear now.
eloff 5y ago
I think 2 is debatable, and not vaccinating specific groups takes away from herd immunity, which hurts everyone. To be fair he discussed that criticism. He's completely right about 1 and 3.