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.
Who determines what "dangerous medical misinformation" is?
As shown, today's "debunked conspiracy theory" can be deemed credible next year.
big tech colluding with gov entities to punish dissenting views seems like a very bad idea.
The issue is that YouTube has no ability to determine what is or isn't dangerous medical information. Running a video distribution service doesn't make you a medical expert.
After the bang up job they've done dealing with copyright strikes, demonetizing their political enemies, and providing virtually zero support and feedback for the very creators that contribute to the popularity of their platform, you'd have to be a sadomasochist to trust YouTube to be the arbiter for "dangerous medical misinformation" or any other "dangerous * misinformation" they decide to sensor.
I'm guessing it's probably based on WHO guidelines, which means a very large number of things are off limits.
This would be more acceptable if they only banned discussion of treatments that are proven not to work, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
"You didn't catch my mate Dave when he murdered that guy so I don't see why you should care about this little stabbing here..."