The masked truth....

[Tambourine]

Personally I see incredulity without good reason as the reverse side of blind belief - in both cases, the likely end result tends to be the continued adherence to one's existing beliefs and prejudices.

 

[Revoltingest]

No one need worry....Madonna is here to set us straight.
(Except for @columbus.)
Madonna's Instagram flagged for spreading coronavirus misinformation
Excerpted....
Instagram has deleted a post by Madonna in which the pop star shared a coronavirus conspiracy theory with her 15 million followers.

She captioned the video with claims that a vaccine for Covid-19 has “been found and proven and has been available for months”. She continued: “They would rather let fear control the people and let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”

The video shows Dr Stella Immanuel, a primary care physician in Houston, Texas, claiming to have treated 350 coronavirus patients with hydroxychloroquine. She was speaking with a group called America’s Frontline Doctors outside the US Supreme Court building.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, FB was where I first saw it. The poster told us that the video was removed from YT. I checked it out and, sure enough, it was removed with the standard "...community standards.." nonsense. If you can you need to watch the entire video to get the truth.

What truth?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

What an incredible coincidence that of all the opinions one can have, it just so happens that Trump supporters doubt the efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of a respiratory disease, but have no doubt at all about the efficacy of one particular drug, hydroxychloroquine.

Call it a wild guess, but I think that if the Orange Leader just happened, on a whim, to doubt something other than masks or to promote some other drug, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

Let’s get real: Trump supporters don’t want to wear a mask because it is humiliating. Because it is a very visible admission that the Leader was wrong, this isn’t “just like the flu”. Trumpworld cares more about optics than science or public health, and nothing creates a more stark visual than everyone wearing a mask. That’s what this is about, lame excuses notwithstanding.

 

[Revoltingest]

What an incredible coincidence that of all the opinions one can have, it just so happens that Trump supporters doubt the efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of a respiratory disease....

It's not just Trump supporters.
Those very progressive Dutch oppose masks.
Dutch Government Suggests Masks Could Increase COVID Risk Due to Incorrect Wear

 

[Mr Spinkles]

It's not just Trump supporters.
Those very progressive Dutch oppose masks.
Dutch Government Suggests Masks Could Increase COVID Risk Due to Incorrect Wear

You’re right, that’s why Trump supporters oppose masks - because of the Netherlands. It’s lucky that Trump anticipated Dutch policy, or he might have disenfranchised a lot of his supporters.

 

[Revoltingest]

You’re right, that’s why Trump supporters oppose masks - because of the Netherlands. It’s lucky that Trump anticipated Dutch policy, or he might have disenfranchised a lot of his supporters.

Dutch scientists also advise that planting more tulips can
prevent infection. It just so happens that they have some
for sale.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Dutch scientists also advise that planting more tulips can
prevent infection. It just so happens that they have some
for sale.

I heard that injecting tulips with bleach will perk them right up.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I explained a good reason for removing the video, ie, claims that
masks are worthless, & that hydroxyetcetera is a "cure".
This is dangerous mis-info.

Physicians are much like car mechanics in that they service
a machine, just one biological rather than electromechanical.
Even though more schooling is required, one cannot automatically
treat one as an expert on all things medical.
1) Most don't do research, & aren't expert on emerging
diseases like Covid 19. Without research training, they
can easily misread their experience.
The link to Henry Ford Hospital shows research debunking
the "cure" claim.
2) They're human beings (not gods, as some behave
towards us), & can have non-evidence-based beliefs
that run counter to views of epidemiologists & their peers.
3) They might opine about things outside their field, eg,
radiologists holding forth on epidemiology.

A friend runs an escape room business. Various groups
of professionals will sign up for team building exercises.
He says that mathematicians are the fastest solvers.
Doctors are among the slowest. Epidemiologists are
math oriented in addition to health issue. I'd limit my
"expert" sources to their research...not some unknown
foreigner in a youtube video spouting conspiracies
& bad advice.

But doesn't people have the right to have both sides of the story?

Burning anti-maskers to the stake, blocking, deleting, etc info supposedly against masks is more ignorance than basing ones views by both sides of the story.

People against religion may say they believe in freedom is better than indoctrination but then be religious with there mask views, scriptural with their data, and ignore the other side.

It's hypocritical

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I question expert advice, particularly when it smells "off".
At times, I can use agreed upon info to debunk some expert claims.
Conspiracy theories are the easiest.
In the case of Covid 19, there is one profession with the most
expertise, ie, epidemiologists. I give their consensus the greatest
weight. There are good sources, eg, The Mayo Clinic.
Mrs Revolt & I have personal experience with Johns Hopkins.
(She got her masters in public health there.)
News & Information

On the internet, everything can be "true", eg, faked Moon landings,
the Military Industrial Complex conspiracy, alien invasions.
Sometimes, these proffered "experts" have credibility issues, eg,
Medical Directors to Stella Immanuel: Your COVID-19 claim unscientific

A lot of times I look at data as a grain of salt ad assess the issue based on my own circumstance and measures we are supposed to take to keep us safe. So, I wear mask not for how many numbers on the screen but what I see makes sense that gives worth my time and thought to act. I'm not easily persuaded with facts but sometimes people judge me for that. I can see how religious feel in some aspects to personally compare

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What an incredible coincidence that of all the opinions one can have, it just so happens that Trump supporters doubt the efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of a respiratory disease, but have no doubt at all about the efficacy of one particular drug, hydroxychloroquine.

Call it a wild guess, but I think that if the Orange Leader just happened, on a whim, to doubt something other than masks or to promote some other drug, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

Let’s get real: Trump supporters don’t want to wear a mask because it is humiliating. Because it is a very visible admission that the Leader was wrong, this isn’t “just like the flu”. Trumpworld cares more about optics than science or public health, and nothing creates a more stark visual than everyone wearing a mask. That’s what this is about, lame excuses notwithstanding.

Did Trump supporters say why they doubt? Trump didn't give a reason really. Just said it was his choice and people have choices.

 

[Revoltingest]

But doesn't people have the right to have both sides of the story?

The right to hear is OK with me.
But the provider also has the right to refuse to censor what they publish.
Moreover, it's good that they also assume the responsibility to censor
bad info that could endanger people.

Burning anti-maskers to the stake, blocking, deleting, etc info supposedly against masks is more ignorance than basing ones views by both sides of the story.

I don't believe in excoriating or igniting anti-maskers.

People against religion may say they believe in freedom is better than indoctrination but then be religious with there mask views, scriptural with their data, and ignore the other side.

It's hypocritical

I don't understand this.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The right to hear is OK with me.
But the provider also has the right to refuse to censor what they publish.
Moreover, it's good that they also assume the responsibility to censor
bad info that could endanger people.

I don't believe in excoriating or igniting anti-maskers.

I don't understand this.

Unless they are forcing people to do something against the law like advocate violence, it's just freedom of speech. Censoring it based on opinion is different than if say the YouTuber told viewers to murder someone.

Regardless our opinions on the topic, it's just as most topics (for some reason sex seems to be the exclusion), people have the right to hear both sides.

How can anyone make informed decisions on anything when they only hear what they want an shun, ignore, delete, whatever what they don't?

 

[Revoltingest]

Unless they are forcing people to do something against the law like advocate violence, it's just freedom of speech. Censoring it based on opinion is different than if say the YouTuber told viewers to murder someone.

Regardless our opinions on the topic, it's just as most topics (for some reason sex seems to be the exclusion), people have the right to hear both sides.

How can anyone make informed decisions on anything when they only hear what they want an shun, ignore, delete, whatever what they don't?

Youtube & other providers are businesses, not government.
They have a right to censor what they provide.
This doesn't deny anyone else their right to free speech or information.
It would be irresponsible to provide a platform for dangerously bad info.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Youtube & other providers are businesses, not government.
They have a right to censor what they provide.
This doesn't deny anyone else their right to free speech or information.
It would be irresponsible to provide a platform for dangerously bad info.

I'm not saying they don't have the right, I'm saying it doesn't make sense. Legality and rules aside, it doesn't invalidate we keep what we want and disregard the rest. My point is confirmation bias rather than the legality of the issue.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not saying they don't have the right, I'm saying it doesn't make sense. Legality and rules aside, it doesn't invalidate we keep what we want and disregard the rest. My point is confirmation bias rather than the legality of the issue.

It makes excellent sense to deny the platform to
people advocating dangerous behavior or info.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It makes excellent sense to deny the platform to
people advocating dangerous behavior or info.

That's not dangerous. Murder is dangerous. Talking "about" not wearing masks doesn't prevent people from doing so unless they can't think for themselves what's the best option not go by what they see in tv as as the divinity of factual information.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not dangerous. Murder is dangerous. Talking "about" not wearing masks doesn't prevent people from doing so unless they can't think for themselves what's the best option not go by what they see in tv as as the divinity of factual information.

If a provider believes that masks are beneficial,
then it makes sense to ban claim otherwise.
Of course, no one has perfect information.
But one uses one's own judgement.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If a provider believes that masks are beneficial,
then it makes sense to ban claim otherwise.
Of course, no one has perfect information.
But one uses one's own judgement.

Did the provider say the masks are benefitial, though?

YouTube has a lot of content not benefitial to many who watch. Even athlete shows will say "were not doctors" and leave viewers to choose what's right for themselves. Of course they have the right, but that doesn't invalidate my point it's best people have both sides. It would have been nice if the video stayed. Not because I agree or disagree with it, but just to see various opinions of the mask debate. Media tends to be one sided and put down anyone who disagrees with masks.

Rights aside, it just would have been nice to watch the whole video. I'm indifferent to either side so it just would have been nice

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Burning anti-maskers to the stake, blocking, deleting, etc info supposedly against masks is more ignorance than basing ones views by both sides of the story.

The other side can, to be blunt and frank, shut the **** up when the are getting people sick, hurt, amd killed. They have no right to be a danger to others.