"Don’t post content on YouTube if it includes any of the following:
Treatment misinformation:
Content that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19
Claims that Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine are effective treatments for COVID-19"
They are legal and widely used drugs in most countries.
They might not be miracle drugs to treat COVID-19, but I don't see the point in this ban.
Besides the scads of dubious (or outright dangerous) health-related videos on other topics, YouTube has videos of people flying "wing suits" and engaging in many other risky activities.
It’s not just the laymen getting censored. It’s everyone.
Also, no offense, but how little faith do you put in our medical professionals and scientists that you think they can’t discern the difference between wheat and chaff?
The other things is pushing narratives that directly contradict our scientific understanding to an audience of nonscientists. And to be clear, "Ivermectin might work and there are good studies in favor of it" is not in that category, but "Ivermectin is the cure" is.
I think the Pierre Kory and Bret Weinstein podcast[1] is on the border between these two (with a bit of motte and bailey). But to get more insight into how it's landing, check the comments to that video. Lots of people finding ways to procure it, conspiracies, and a strong overlap with antivax.
How do you know the audience are nonscientists? Why would that be so bad,are nonscientists to be kept dark until 100% agreement among scientists is reached?
Science advances on many fronts, not just in peer reviewed papers.
So no, we don’t just believe the BS we are being told on the internet.
Now, the other questions are whether Youtube should be considered "in the US", and whether Youtube should be an enforcement arm of the FDA. That's the worrying part.
You just need a prescription
> In the US, you don't get to make medical claims that you can't prove are valid.
Is this a law or just your opinion? Are we expecting Bret Weinstein to be arrest in coming days?
Have you ever seen an informercial or something talking about a drug to fix something, and then it says something like "this drug has not been proven effective for this use"? That's pushing the line but not crossing it. Those people don't get arrested.
But if you said "Ivermectin is safe and effective for treating Covid", then you've probably crossed it. If you're making money from it, then you may have worse problems than Youtube banning your videos.
I don't know what Bret Weinstein says. If he says "this looks like it may work", he's probably OK. If he says "it's been shown to work", I would be surprised that the FDA hasn't done something.
[Edit: If he says "it's been shown to work" and he's selling it, that's where the FDA will almost certainly step in. If he says it but isn't himself selling it... I don't know how they respond to that.]
Disclaimer: IANAL.
Edit: and as other said, that the drug is legal is irrelevant and disingenuous. We're talking a new treatment system.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2020/04/25/calls-...
I'm sure some can be chalked up to simply people increasing their cleaning during a pandemic, but 100 in a day for a single state... come on.
Gonna sound harsh, but if you are dumb enough to ingest a poison on the say so of an obnoxious real estate developer, the world is better off without you. I’m ok with those folks removing themselves from the gene pool.
Wow, that’s insane. Time to report some talks on somatic hypermutation…