What else should scientists do than challenging the status quo?<p>Bret (Eric's brother, biology PhD) had a 2h long conversation with Pierre Kory (MD) and it was taken down by YT. One of the things they talked was the recommendations of WHO and other organisations to focus on supportive care only (supporting the patient while their organism fights the disease by itself). They insist on <i>not</i> using other treatments outside clinical trials. The argument that running experiments would cost lives doesn't seem coherent. It's not like we have this 100+ yrs practice of dealing with SARS-CoV-2 epidemic with well established protocols. What if we're clinging to a suboptimal strategy?
The makers of Ivermectin are against the use of Ivermectin for Covid.<p><a href="https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/" rel="nofollow">https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use...</a><p>The dissenters are advocating things even the company that stands to profit from those things opposes.<p>That’s how off the deep end this is.
If McDonald's mistreats me, I can go to Wendy's or Burger King and get a similar meal for a similar price. When Youtube mistreats me, where am I supposed to go? BitChute? Vimeo? Neither of those have even half the creators as Youtube. And if creators want to migrate off Youtube, how are they supposed to do that when they'll get less than 10% of the audience on the other sites? Youtube's moat way is too deep to be threatened by any competition no matter how technically advanced the competition is.<p>Youtube is a monopoly and needs to be regulated as such. The electric company can't cut off my power because I was using their electricity to discuss experimental medications, so why should Youtube be allowed to deny me access to the online public square for the same reason? If Youtube wants to be the thought police of their users, they need to first allow an alternative to survive.
While ridiculous, Eric Weinstein is a bit over the top with his accusations from time to time. For example Blaming the physics community for not looking in to his personal “unity” theories more.
YouTube's position is that this is medical misinformation about Ivermectin.<p>One of the comments on this Twitter thread argues the video "isn’t just advocating for more complete Ivermectin trials, he’s recommending its use based on a collection of low quality studies. That’s dangerous, and I don’t see how you can blame YouTube for deferring to the advice of the major health bodies on this matter."<p>Personally I'd never heard of Ivermectin, so I Googled it, and for what it's worth the top result that came up was an official page at FDA.gov headlined "Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19"<p><a href="https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19" rel="nofollow">https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul...</a>
A quick search on pubmed shows that limited trials on Ivermectin have been done, and more trials are underway.<p>It certainly seems to work in vitro, but needs higher concentrations than have been tested to be safe in vivo so far.<p>So... it sort of depends on what the people were saying in their videos. If they're saying it's a possible hopeful contender for near future: that's true.<p>If they're saying "buy lots of ivermectin now", without any qualifying statements, that might be different.
Based on YouTube’s reply, seems they took his video down for promoting dangerous medical misinformation. If that’s what happened, I don’t see an issue.
It is hard to come up with a good framework for this: this is a classic exploration (possibly effective and cheap remedy) versus exploitation (known remedies that are really mostly unavailable to the developing world) mechanism.
In general, even there exploitation mechanism has been questionable for many things COVID-related (debate around making), and the establishment flip-flipping on the lab leak theory doesn’t inspire confidence.
This is a controversial issue surrounding the safety and efficacy of Ivermectin, a prescription drug, as an COVID-19 treatment.<p>Edit: the issue surrounds efficacy too.
Yes, that's what pseudo-authoritarian institutions do when they want to subvert and homogenize society's belief system.<p>You could see this coming from a million miles away. No one should be shocked, especially those that egged it on (not finger-pointing at Eric or his brother here).
It's funny how everyone agreeing with YouTube hasn't watched the video in question.<p>Y'all are very opinionated on the 2nd or 3rd level information instead of the primary source.<p>Par for the course these days...
There so many individuals who think that cynicism or even criticism is a sign of intelligence, but it's actually a sign of ignorance.<p>For whatever biological reason, humans associate those who do that with being more intelligent than everyone else.
Eric Weinstein is a clown, like, literally.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein#Physics" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein#Physics</a>
On the’censored’ man’s attempted foray into a different field, physics:<p>“ The paper qualifies that the author "is not a physicist" but an "entertainer", and it has received strong criticism from the scientific community, including having "no visible impact" and having "gaps both mathematical and physical in origin that jeopardize Geometric Unity as a well-defined theory, much less one that is a candidate for a theory of everything.”<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein#Physics" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein#Physics</a>
Here's my confusion - why do they think there's a conspiracy against them because Ivermectin is off patent when COVID is on the verge of being beat in the west because of widespread vaccination?
It's hilarious to see libertarians whining about being oppressed by corporations. Like, dude, isn't your whole philosophy that corporations should be allowed to do whatever they want without regard for anybody else? Go start your own YouTube. It's what Galt would have done.
People with deep agendas like to imagine everyone else has an agenda as well. In reality, YouTube just wants to make as much money as possible. If people die taking alternative medical treatments for covid, an angry mob will come and demand Disney pull ads from YouTube again. If you have a problem with the censorship, blame the cancellers, not YouTube.
This is the direct result of giving out too many phds. There’s no signal, only noise. Trust in our academics, rightfully, in rapid decline. Habermas come to pass.
This is what people have always wanted. The bloody paternalists are winning in America and they want to tell us what we’re allowed to watch. “Facebook is responsible for radicalization”<p>Nah, Facebook just links you to like minded people. You have a problem facing the fact that it’s your grandpa who is a racist shit, that your brother is an incel, and that your sister thinks trans women shouldn’t be allowed to use women’s toilets. So you blame Facebook.<p>So you guys decide you want to blame Facebook and Twitter and YouTube. They’re “not doing enough”. Let them be and get your grandpa off them if you care so much.