depends entirely on how someone is 'questioning' something. Merely contradicting existing public health guidelines with misinformation or speculation provides n

depends entirely on how someone is 'questioning' something. Merely contradicting existing public health guidelines with misinformation or speculation provides no actual meaningful further input. as per the article, youtube's policy is: "and we make exceptions for videos that have additional context such as countervailing views from local health authorities". So presumably if your contradicting opinion is actually substantiated you're not getting the banhammer, which seems fair to me. But letting people rant against public health guidelines which exist to prevent harm (even if to some degree uncertain) without actually justifying their case is irresponsible.