Some people say, “Yeah, well, YouTube is a private company, not a free speech venue; it can do as it pleases.” But that is rationalization, not argument. We, the audience, still must decide whether we approve of YouTube’s censorship or not. I sure don’t.
ZH: YouTube Censors Viral Video Of California Doctors Criticizing “Stay-At-Home” Order
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Perhaps you should record a YouTube video and let them know…
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Roberts
The best science is that – for now – the only way to curb the spread of the virus and to protect yourself is strict social distancing. What is the argument FOR spreading ideas that the best science says is wrong or even dangerous? Of course, government action is limited by the Constitutional protection of free speech including dangerous speech. But why should a for-profit company ignore the best science in what it publishes?
But, YouTube is a business so maybe you and other Trump supporters should boycott Google to show how mad you are that they block things you want to see?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “The best science is that – for now – the only way to curb the spread of the virus and to protect yourself is strict social distancing.”
There is no such thing as “the best science.” There is only science, which is always subject to revision.
As I said, YouTube can do as it pleases, and so can the rest of us. I don’t approve of this particular act of censorship, and I find your approval of it shallow-minded and misguided. In matters of science especially, dissenting views and alternative explanations are desirable.
LikeLike
@Roberts
No such thing as “best science?”
Well, that is a nonsense quibble of course but – for the sake of good fellowship – let me reword . . .
The ONLY science is that – for now – the only way to curb the spread of the virus and to protect yourself is strict social distancing.”
Better?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “The ONLY science is that – for now – the only way to curb the spread of the virus and to protect yourself is strict social distancing.”
Worse. Is it because you say so?
LikeLike
@Roberts
Because I say so? LOL! So lame! You working at becoming known as Tabor’s MiniMe?
If you know of another way – besides social distancing – to curb the spread of the virus and to protect yourself then please share what that might be. Here is a hint – there is still no vaccine nor a Trump-style magic bullet that will cure the disease if you get it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
…”Erickson asserts that there is only a “0.03 chance of dying from COVID in the state of California,””
I just wonder if the good urgent care owners took into account that the “stay-at-home” order had something to do with that fact? California acted early and have kept the spread in the state low. So it appears it is working, but the doctor, who is personally losing money, wants us to believe otherwise.
I also question the “100’s of autopsies” statement, but if it makes them sound good…
As far as the video being removed, that was NOT right. They are not spreading misinformation, just questioning the actions by the state. Now if they were to start promoting the injection of deodorizer as a treatment…well…
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “I just wonder if the good urgent care owners took into account that the ‘stay-at-home’ order had something to do with that fact?”
The 0.03 chance of dying they reference wouldn’t be affected by the stay-at-home order. It is the infection fatality rate, meaning the number of Covid-19 deaths divided by the number of infections. Since you have to be infected to be killed by Covid-19, the infection fatality rate would be the same whether the number of infections goes up or down. Or so the thinking goes.
LikeLike
“The 0.03 chance of dying they reference wouldn’t be affected by the stay-at-home order.”
I disagree because the chance of dying would go up as more people are infected. Especially if more people that are afflicted with any of the comorbidities become exposed. I think your logic is flawed, and that of the doctors.
But I am not a scientist nor statistician, so it is only my opinion.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “I think your logic is flawed, and that of the doctors.”
There’s nothing flawed in my logic, unless you disagree with how percentages are computed, and why.
On the other hand, comorbidities are certainly a factor. If we’re going to include them, we’ll need to know whether they are more common in the stay-at-home population or the general population. I’d guess they are more common among the less mobile group.
LikeLike
“There’s nothing flawed in my logic”…
In my opinion there is. You are using the same math thingy that others have used to prove you wrong. Now you are trying to prove your logic is sound. It’s called flip-flopping, and you are quite adept at it, apparently.
LikeLike
By the way, that “0.03” translates to a 3% death rate. the current nationwide death rate, based on reported cases, is 5.6% per Johns Hopkins.
LikeLike
It seems that Youtube was jsutified in taking down the video.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/29/health/california-doctors-coronavirus-claims/index.html
“The video also prompted the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Academy of Emergency Medicine to issue a forceful joint statement on Monday calling the pair’s claims “reckless and untested musings” that “are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19.””
As I stated, the basis for the video was monetar by the Urgent Care docs who are losing money.
“As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health,” the statement read, “COVID-19 misinformation is widespread and dangerous. Members of ACEP and AAEM are first-hand witnesses to the human toll that COVID-19 is taking on our communities. ACEP and AAEM strongly advise against using any statements of Drs. Erickson and Massihi as a basis for policy and decision making.”
LikeLiked by 2 people