3 ms·
All anti-vaccine misinformation, right? I'm starting to worry how often these kinds of announcements include misinformation as only one of the things to be cens
by chuckee 5y ago
All anti-vaccine misinformation, right? I'm starting to worry how often these kinds of announcements include misinformation as only one of the things to be censored. The article is unclear whether the content has to be false or misleading, with phrases like:
"content that alleges vaccines cause chronic health effects or contains misinformation on the substances in vaccines"
Does that mean the European Medicines Agency would be blocked for listing Guillain-Barré syndrome as a possible (very rare) side-effect [1]?
What about statements like "Compulsory vaccination is wrong"?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford%E2%80%93AstraZeneca_COVID-19_vaccine#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford%E2%80%93AstraZeneca_COV...
- bayesian_horse 5y agoYou're just trying to be a smart-ass.
- mrcrypto2020 5y agolookup ad hominem
- _nicelaris_ 5y agoA vaccine with currently no long-term studies being touted as having "no chronic health effects" surely qualifies as misinformation, no? Without 3, 5, 10 etc year studies, there's no way of knowing that there are no long term negative side effects. I highly doubt that legitimate misinformation that favors these vaccines and the pharma companies that produce them will be moderated at all, or at least anywhere near at the same rate as anti-vaccine (or even vaccine questioning) content. Note this is not a claim that there are issues with the vaxes, just skepticism of sweeping claims about a relatively novel virus and novel vaccines, and the standards that are applied to moderation.