Hacker News Reader

Comment by ColanR | Hacker News Reader

It's too bad that we are so quick to silence those who we perceive as wrong. Apparently, the doctors in the video were using incorrect facts; I wouldn't know, the video is gone. Discussion is being prohibited, wherever there is an approved expert to say the viewpoint is wrong.

If dissention is labelled dangerous, and dissenting voices on important subjects are silenced, then we are creating an echo chamber with no respect for anyone but those who accept the perspective of the majority. How will we ever discover if the official message is wrong?

View on HN

I watched the video and I think there are both good and bad in it. I want to list them here for others to consider.

The wrongful:

1) They extrapolated non-randomized sample to be somehow indicative of the whole State's population (CA and NY were mentioned I believe).

2) They concluded that the COVID-19 death rate is similar to that of the regular flu.

The valid:

1) They made the point that it's impossible for the current restrictive measures to get to near-zero cases.

2) They made a call for people to look at the long-term societal consequences of the shutdown, referencing issues like domestic violence, child abuse, etc...

3) They are calling for reopening the economy by gradually opening up schools and small businesses as we ramp up testing.

The questionable:

1) They argued that after being shut inside homes, people are lowering their immune systems. When restriction lift and they go outside, the disease rate will skyrocket.

2) They are pretty much full-on Dwight-mode, calling for no social distancing and not wearing masks (in attempt to boost one's immune system).

> 2) They are pretty much full-on Dwight-mode, calling for no social distancing and not wearing masks (in attempt to boost one's immune system).

As a software engineer with very little knowledge of immunology, can someone with more insight explain whether there's any merit to the concept of "boosting" one's immune system like that?

If it is one smart person with an open mind and time to investigate, fine. But what we have is a mob with no time, interest, or capability to investigate, and every incentive to find a reason to end isolation. Most importantly, there is a very real deadly outcome if they get it wrong. Under those conditions taking the video down is the right move.

And yes, the quality of the content matters here. It is well-known that misinformation is incredibly hard to correct once the horse has left the stable, so low quality argument can do plenty of damage even if its easily debunked. It doesn't sound like this video was mere dissent, and I for one would be satisfied if the video was replaced, for example, with an annotated transcript pointing out the factual errors in the content.

There is a difference between silencing dissenters in a scientific discussion and silencing dissenters trying to push a viewpoint to the masses that may or may not result in tens of thousands of deaths if it gets sufficient traction. This is exactly the kind of thing Russian propaganda always tries to achieve: provide confusion and semi-legitimate experts spreading false narratives so that the population does not believe the government anymore - or simply doesn't believe anyone anymore.

See eg the EU's take on it:

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/eeas-special-report-disinformation-on...

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/

> There is a difference between silencing dissenters in a scientific discussion and silencing dissenters trying to push a viewpoint to the masses that may or may not result in tens of thousands of deaths if it gets sufficient traction

Interesting.

So.... forbid all speech that could result in a revolution, then? Say... An American one? Or maybe a Spring one. Or a French one.

I mean.. that's the standard you set up. In before "ARE YOU COMPARING A VIRUS TO A REVOLUTION?" blah. At the risk of overstating my case, life isn't the only valuable thing on earth.

Yes, especially when massive organized efforts of bots and astroturfing is involved. Some governments have been found to post hundreds of millions of fake social media posts per year.

It's the oldest trick in the book. Millions will die! You can't seek the truth in an non-transparent environment.

> This is exactly the kind of thing Russian propaganda always tries to achieve

How two Californian doctors talking about their own data and the reading of other counties data Russian propaganda?

> See eg the EU's take on it: https://euvsdisinfo.eu/

Form the website: "EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position"

You can view the full video here: https://www.turnto23.com/news/coronavirus/video-interview-wi...

Couple of their quick mental math when asked questions were wrong but most of it is sane and matches other sources.

How is estimating a death rate of 0.01% sane and what sources do you see matching it?

Some other sources: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-prison...

This will give you a 0.01-0.03% death rate for covid-19 (Assuming 2-4% of people who goes to hospital and tested positive die.)

I don't see anywhere in that article where the death rate is discussed. So I'm guessing you are just multiplying the two numbers together without understanding what they actually mean (similar to what the doctors in the video do).

As the article you linked points out:

> Some people diagnosed as asymptomatic when tested for the coronavirus, however, may go on to develop symptoms later, according to researchers.

Additionally, what contact tracing is being done means that there are some asymptomatic people being tested who do show up in the confirmed cases.

By source, I really meant someone with some epidemiological training. I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone with bottom range estimates below .1% and given the numbers in NY, I doubt NYs death rate can realistically end up below .5%

Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi have since been condemned by the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP):

https://www.aaem.org/resources/statements/joint-endorsed/phy...

> The American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) jointly and emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical society and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19.

> COVID-19 misinformation is widespread and dangerous. Members of AAEM and ACEP are first-hand witnesses to the human toll that COVID-19 is taking on our communities. AAEM and ACEP strongly advise against using any statements of Drs. Erickson and Massihi as a basis for policy and decision making.

I found this breakdown of the claims informative: https://twitter.com/ct_bergstrom/status/1254481543759683584?...

> From there, they scale up to the state level and claim 12% incidence statewide. The news story says it is using the same calculation, but it can't be—how did they get from 6.6% to 12%?

You have more data from LA: https://reason.com/2020/04/20/l-a-county-antibody-tests-sugg... 12% and more I believe is from NYC: https://www.livescience.com/covid-antibody-test-results-new-...

And this found in a reply .. https://mobile.twitter.com/darakass/status/12549732188735856...

It's with your logic that we have the anti-vax movement, the anti-gmo one, flat-earthers and so on and so forth.

Do you feel threatened by voices you disagree with? Aren’t dissenting voices and debate pillars of our democracy?

Perhaps people feel like these dissenting voices are threatening the pillars of our democracy!

Dissent is a pillar of democracy.

What are the other pillars and what if one dissents against them? I'm not saying that's happening here, but not all dissent is tolerable, no?

Some people would say the access of all citizens to firearms. Should we censor anyone who opposes that?

What about people promoting censorship? Should they be censored as a threat to free speech?

There is no idea so dangerous that it can't be discussed. Whether you should act on the dissenters' opinions is a completely separate matter.

It’s all fun and games until your kid gets polio...

You can allow antivax movements to voice their flawed arguments and yet make vaccines mandatory.

You can allow them to speak yet consider their opinions worthless.

Yeah, that's what's happening and kids are dead because of it and more will do.

Total free speech is cancer.

They won't be dead if you make vaccines mandatory, but don't shut down free speech of anti-vaccers.

Speaking against vaccines should be allowed. Not taking vaccines should not be

Everybody that disagree should go out and do as they want. Let them go take a walk in the hospital without a mask, it's all a game, no?

But then don't come choked up to the hospital unable to breathe and take the place of a person who followed the recommendations. You decided to do it, you deal with the consequences.

Discussion and debate is important, acting like a spoiled Karen isn't.

> Aren’t dissenting voices and debate pillars of our democracy?

No, not all dissenting voices are equal. When your opinion is factually wrong you should not be allowed in the public discourse.

Great. Don’t have problem with that. Why do you?

Why would you not have a problem with the anti-vax movement spreading disinfo and getting kids killed of diseases that had been eradicated in the country?

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be bought at the price of chains and slavery?"

Chains and slavery being a bit overstated, but hey that's the quote.

In the long term, those few lives matter less than the billions - trillions - uncountable quadrillions - who benefit from free, Liberal cultures (capital L, not lowercase). This is not because the ends justify the means; they do not -- it is because the freedom to choose, even your own death by Darwin, is a pillar of a free society.

> freedom to choose, even your own death by Darwin, is a pillar of a free society

People who don't want to stay home anymore are not a danger to themselves only, I could not care less if they die, I actually prefer if they do. But by not following distancing orders they are a danger to others.

As of touting this as some kind of Freedom Fight is mostly a load of bullcrap. What you are missing in your perfect world is that we should not tolerate the intolerant.[0]

You want to risk your life, go at it, but you should not be allowed to risk the lives of others.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

> People who don't want to stay home anymore are not a danger to themselves only, I could not care less if they die, I actually prefer if they do. But by not following distancing orders they are a danger to others.

So are all the people who get the flu every year. Oh by the way which yearly kills more than has been killed yet by COVID. Guess we should lock up all those war criminals!

> What you are missing in your perfect world

lol... gotta love HN commenters who live such cozy lives that they have absolutely no perspective. Check your privilege, is that the saying? THIS is what your "stay at home" order has caused: https://reportediario.com.mx/noticias/vallarta/filas-de-cien....

THIS is what I live around. THIS is what I see. Hundreds of thousands, millions, starving and dying, so that comfortable Americans and Europeans can posh off about how "go out and you'll kill people". You don't give a shit about people ACTUALLY suffering. Just the hypothetical ones your brain tells you about, but you don't even care about the same hypothetical ones who carry the flu.

Never Argue With a Fool, Onlookers May Not Be Able To Tell the Difference. - Mark Twain

Nobody can setup a list of allowed topics, controversies or debates for society without destroying its ability to grow: any rule will eventually lead to censor a valid point.

20 years ago, when you talked about mass surveillance, you were a paranoid conspirationist or a crook.

70 years ago, when spoke against the vietnam war, you were anti-patriotic or a communist.

Not to mention we can be wrong now, or right now but wrong in the future.

As everyone should know is almost impossible to delete something from the net. Google "bitchute dr erikson"

LiveLeak will probably not take it down, they can go elsewhere.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com