> So in varying conditions, it's not unreasonable that there's going to be varying policy implementation which are not 'inconsistent' with the science, even if

> So in varying conditions, it's not unreasonable that there's going to be varying policy implementation which are not 'inconsistent' with the science, even if they are 'inconsistent' with one another. Sure, but what we're discussing here is YouTube's single global standard that is being used to determine whether or not something is "misinformation" and should be prohibited on their platform. You argued that what YouTube is doing is good, because they're following CDC and WHO guidelines. I gave you one example of where the WHO and the CDC and the ECDC are completely at odds with each other, so what should YouTube do in that case? Which science should they follow? If I make a video on YouTube, talking about what a barbaric practice it is to force small children to wear masks, pointing out all the ways it is harmful for them, and talking about how little is gained from it, it would be seen as completely normal by most European viewers, because it is in line with public health recommendations from the ECDC. If I make a video on YouTube, talking about what a barbaric practice it is to re-open schools without mask mandates, pointing out the risk to teachers and staff, and talking about how much is gained from it, it would be seen as completely normal by many American viewers, because it is in line with public health recommendations from the CDC. Which video should be removed by YouTube for medical misinformation? The first? The second? Both? None? Or should YouTube apply different standards depending on your geolocation?