Hardly surprising that a video full of dangerous misinformation has been pulled. It would be worth reading about this particular professor on Wikipedia, particularly his support for alternative medicine, his false claim to have been a professor at Imperial college, and his claim that the UK's NHS is "the last bastion of communism". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora
So what is so dangerous about it? Perhaps you need to consult a dictionary as to what danger really is. I don't know these people that made the video and I don't subscribe to magic crystals or whatever they are pushing/saying but I do know what Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson from Imperial college created in his flawed modeling - a world wide panic. That is what has been dangerous. Google is a private company I suppose and they can do whatever they want but it would be better to leave their videos up so they can be "peer reviewed" and mocked if what they are saying is farcical. Just like we do with these ladies: https://youtu.be/B4s9GLWiUJM
> what Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson from Imperial college created in his flawed modeling
Why do you say that? The reputation of the Imperial College team seems to have become a lightning rod for disgruntled right-wingers but the team is one of the world's most respected.
Imperial is one of the world's top universities. That's probably why Sikora falsely claimed on multiple occasions to be employed there.
There's nothing in the Imperial report that caused the UK government to change course that has been shown to be false. The prediction from the report was that the UK would suffer 20,000 deaths from the virus if extensive distancing measures were employed. The current total is 36,000 confirmed, so if anything the report was too optimistic.
I welcome Youtube to ban every member of the press and Congress who publicly supported our various wars, which are government policies leading to "unnecessary deaths." Cherry picking a nobody with no power who is into crystals is bs.
If you have a specific reason to believe that the model resulted in an incorrect conclusion, feel free to share it, instead of casting aspersions with cryptic nothings.
Also Neil's other predictions have been completely wrong on the Swine Flu and Bird flu. Why this "expert in his field" is still listened to is a mystery to me.
If you're talking about that first graph on the page, I think that it is not very helpful. Comparing total number of deaths can be misleading, especially for small countries like Sweden. If my state had a Coronavirus death rate as high as Sweden's 15,000 more people would be dead. Still not "millions", but it wouldn't be an ideal outcome.
Sweden is pitched as as some kind of example of handling the pandemic correctly, when their numbers[1] don't look good at all. From their numbers[2] 44% of people diagnosed ends up dead, implying they are way under tested or they have ridiculously deadly strain (I think it is the former). Because of that the most reliable indicator from them is number of deaths.
Now compare number of deaths with countries that reacted quickly, for example: South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and others.
It looked very wonky. I cannot judge if the code does not actually produce something worthwhile, but it certainly doesn't pass any smell tests. In no profession would work looking as sloppy as that be trusted. And for the critical decision it was used for I would expect something more robust.
So this is your source? An opinion piece in a right leaning columnist in a biased NY Post, where author couldn't even help himself but include other unrelated tidbits, like how is Joe Biden and Tara Reade related to corona virus? There's nothing there to verify that even the characters in the story are real not to mention the story.
This is just the first article I found at of many from many sources - I heard about it on MSNBC or somewhere like that when a reporter was asking him about it. This happened - it is a fact; the same thing occurred in Britain resulting in the same high death toll of elderly people. But bury your head - fine with me.
Are you serious? The orginally predicted death number was over 250,000 in Britain. How do you explain the numbers in Sweden which had a much different policy compared UK? Yes Sweden has a higher mortality/million pop rate, but estimates are showing that the number of people dying in UK from non-covid-19 health issues as a result of covid-19, (not going to hospital or getting treatment), would put those numbers on par.
No, that is not how the timeline went. As to who created the panic - it was Neil, Fauci and their ilk along with the media. The media, instead of reporting that the data shows old and sick people are the ones dying chose to hide that relevant fact and just report the death toll ad nauseam with no context - as a matter of fact they are still doing it.
what’s missing is the conversation of how many deaths we’re going to see from the lockdown itself in the form of suicide, alcoholism, drug overdose, domestic violence, mental health etc
Nobody is advocating to throw them under the bus. But the fact is since the virus is essentially unstoppable in its transmission rate everyone will be exposed to it...and what will be of those people will be of them. Their best hope is hospital care if they need it; our hospitals are not overwhelmed and neither are Sweden's...so these quarantine measures are an unnecessary burden.
The shape of your argument is why we are doomed to censorship. You could have kept to the abstract point about information itself not being dangerous, but instead you invoked the opposing team's narrative about what constitutes dangerous information. Eventually, we all lose.
