All things CoronaVirus

[Brooklyn]

Brazil reaches 500,000 covid deaths:


https://apnews.com/article/brazil-coron ... e7fb642406


RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — Anti-government protesters took to the streets in more than a score of cities across Brazil on Saturday as the nation’s confirmed death toll from COVID-19 soared past half a million — a tragedy many critics blame on President Jair Bolsonaro’s attempt to minimize the disease.

Thousands gathered in downtown Rio de Janeiro waving flags with slogans such as “Get out Bolsonaro. Government of hunger and unemployment.”

“Brazil is experiencing a great setback. The country was an exemplary country for vaccination in the world. We have widely recognized institutions, but today we are in a sad situation ”, said Isabela Gouljor, a 20-year-old student who joined the protest in Rio.

Other marchers hoisted posters reading: “500 thousand deaths. It’s his fault,” alluding to Bolsonaro.





Interesting how Brazil and USA had the most covid deaths as both had fascists leaders in Bolsonaro & tRUMP. As always, fascism = death and treason.

[tech37]

Because the FDA has process and procedures. They initially send a warning letter to the organization and individuals involved. Generally people only get prosecuted if they do it repeatedly ignoring notifications from the FDA. It is known as an FDA Form 483. Each instance of it being "shown" to the public could illicit a warning letter and ultimately a fine or other action. YouTube has a greater liability than the individuals in this case.

Do you have evidence they have been issued a warning?... if not, just speculation on your part. Their website is a year old and some have testified in front of the US Senate over the past year. I'll believe they are breaking laws when they're shut down, fined, and/or arrested.

tech, like this site, youtube has the right to permit or not permit what it wants, however those decisions do incur various costs, including regulatory risk as well as user response.

Of course they do, no problem. Luckily, another less affected platform has taken Weinstein on.

It is highly likely that Youtube was warned by the FDA about its users promoting drugs on the platform for unauthorized usage. It's a significant issue. It is less likely, though not impossible, that Youtube was specifically warned by the FDA about this particular podcast video.

I never referred to FDA warning Youtube, one way or other. At that point in conversation, I wasn't even referring to Youtube but was referring to Dr. Kory's website which I posted over a week ago, generating bluster bellows of "snake oil salesman"

BTW, the Youtube Weinstein/Malone/Kirsch podcast was not promoting anything. If you came away thinking that, you're mistaken IMO. The point of the podcast, delt with the alleged suppression of, for example, use and efficacy data of Ivermectin with regard to treating Covid and also the possible number of deaths caused by mRNA vaccines. That is not "promotion."

[tech37]

Because the FDA has process and procedures. They initially send a warning letter to the organization and individuals involved. Generally people only get prosecuted if they do it repeatedly ignoring notifications from the FDA. It is known as an FDA Form 483. Each instance of it being "shown" to the public could illicit a warning letter and ultimately a fine or other action. YouTube has a greater liability than the individuals in this case.

Do you have evidence they have been issued a warning?... if not, just speculation on your part. Their website is a year old and some have testified in front of the US Senate over the past year. I'll believe they are breaking laws when they're shut down, fined, and/or arrested.

tech, like this site, youtube has the right to permit or not permit what it wants, however those decisions do incur various costs, including regulatory risk as well as user response.

It is highly likely that Youtube was warned by the FDA about its users promoting drugs on the platform for unauthorized usage. It's a significant issue. It is less likely, though not impossible, that Youtube was specifically warned by the FDA about this particular podcast video.

However, it is certainly possible that other users complained/notified Youtube that Weinstein had breached the standards of Youtube. Given what I've seen of other Dark Horse podcasts, I wouldn't be surprised that such objections may have been raised earlier and that Weinstein had heard from Youtube previously to be careful. This one stepped way over the line IMO...apparently Youtube thought so too. Again, simply speculation, but a series of prior communications, or Weinstein's response, would explain why Weinstein is off the platform altogether, not just that specific video.

You yourself in your very first post of the podcast predicted its removal from Youtube.

These platforms have been getting all sorts of regulatory oversight pressure regarding content that is potentially damaging to public health, with such speech not protected under the First Amendment, akin to the illegality of yelling fire in a crowded movie theater.

Whether it's 'speech' fomenting violence or 'speech' touting drugs for potentially dangerous, unauthorized, usage, this is not protected speech...and the platforms are very concerned about regulatory oversight.

That said, alternative platforms may be willing to take the risk of violations, so provide avenues to reach an audience for the violence and snake oil peddlers.

Let me say that I don't think you sound "stupid" with your claims of a conspiracy to not investigate ivermectin because of some sort of nefarious, profit-seeking cabal of FDA and pharma, business people and scientists in cahoots to prevent a miracle solution (made by Merck) from being adopted, but you do sound like you're deep down the rabbit hole...

... youtube isn't a newbie to how this works. They have content police and lawyers. Internally when they recognize what they have, they likely would pull it down on their own. Best way to stay on the right side of the FDA (any regulatory body), is to be proactive. They get folks selling snake oil all the time posting videos.

Again, at this point I wasn't referring to Youtube. I was referring to Kory's website. Guess you missed that. And, the Weinstein podcast was not promoting anything.

[jhu72]

Has the website you are talking about been taken down?

[tech37]

Has the website you are talking about been taken down?

No, that's the point. If anyone at FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. felt that that site and those Drs. associated with that site were breaking laws, it would have been shut down long ago.

[jhu72]

Has the website you are talking about been taken down?

No, that's the point. If anyone at FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. felt that that site and those Drs. associated with that site were breaking laws, it would have been shut down long ago.

NIH & CDC don't have the regulatory authority. Only the FDA does. No one is reporting the site to the FDA most likely; or the FDA does not view it as off label recommendation, which I would find hard to believe after having watched the first hour of the podcast.

[tech37]

Has the website you are talking about been taken down?

No, that's the point. If anyone at FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. felt that that site and those Drs. associated with that site were breaking laws, it would have been shut down long ago.

NIH & CDC don't have the regulatory authority. Only the FDA does. No one is reporting the site to the FDA most likely; or the FDA does not view it as off label recommendation, which I would find hard to believe after having watched the first hour of the podcast.

No, but they have enormous power/influence across med establishment...see Fauci.

It's not as if the site is somehow flying under radar. As I said in an earlier post, twice in past year, Kory has testified to a Senate committee.

I'm sure the group of FLCCC site doctors have had their lawyers legally qualify the site content to the max.

[Peter Brown]

Has the website you are talking about been taken down?

No, that's the point. If anyone at FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. felt that that site and those Drs. associated with that site were breaking laws, it would have been shut down long ago.

NIH & CDC don't have the regulatory authority. Only the FDA does. No one is reporting the site to the FDA most likely; or the FDA does not view it as off label recommendation, which I would find hard to believe after having watched the first hour of the podcast.

No, but they have enormous power/influence across med establishment...see Fauci.

It's not as if the site is somehow flying under radar. As I said in an earlier post, twice in past year, Kory has testified to a Senate committee.

I'm sure the group of FLCCC site doctors have had their lawyers legally qualify the site content to the max.

Tech: something you’re missing is this: Democrats realize there are free speech issues to be considered if they directly interfere with private companies, so what they do now is utilize back channels and messaging to deplatform those ideas and people they don’t like.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... formation/

They don’t want you to know that healthy young boys are dying from the vaccine. This woman, with a large Twitter following, is a known anti-Trump and pro vaccine lunatic, so please read this thread where her nephew dropped dead from the second shot:

https://twitter.com/tburages/status/140 ... 49065?s=21

Democrats would prefer you never know anything other than their narrative.

[MDlaxfan76]

Because the FDA has process and procedures. They initially send a warning letter to the organization and individuals involved. Generally people only get prosecuted if they do it repeatedly ignoring notifications from the FDA. It is known as an FDA Form 483. Each instance of it being "shown" to the public could illicit a warning letter and ultimately a fine or other action. YouTube has a greater liability than the individuals in this case.

Do you have evidence they have been issued a warning?... if not, just speculation on your part. Their website is a year old and some have testified in front of the US Senate over the past year. I'll believe they are breaking laws when they're shut down, fined, and/or arrested.

tech, like this site, youtube has the right to permit or not permit what it wants, however those decisions do incur various costs, including regulatory risk as well as user response.

Of course they do, no problem. Luckily, another less affected platform has taken Weinstein on.

It is highly likely that Youtube was warned by the FDA about its users promoting drugs on the platform for unauthorized usage. It's a significant issue. It is less likely, though not impossible, that Youtube was specifically warned by the FDA about this particular podcast video.

I never referred to FDA warning Youtube, one way or other. At that point in conversation, I wasn't even referring to Youtube but was referring to Dr. Kory's website which I posted over a week ago, generating bluster bellows of "snake oil salesman"

BTW, the Youtube Weinstein/Malone/Kirsch podcast was not promoting anything. If you came away thinking that, you're mistaken IMO. The point of the podcast, delt with the alleged suppression of, for example, use and efficacy data of Ivermectin with regard to treating Covid and also the possible number of deaths caused by mRNA vaccines. That is not "promotion."

tech, several of us referred to Kirsch and Weinstein as akin to selling snake oil, as in claiming efficacy and safety that's unproven to the gullible.

Dunno about this other guy, whether he's a quack or not. Haven't seen his site.

Youtube has been and is making difficult choices about what information to allow on its site and what not to allow. Just as are most of the large platforms.

They have generally decided that if content being published, as if factual, is not factual, and has the potential to harm the public, that they have a duty to their community to remove such content.

Harm can be in a number of ways, but certainly advice about drugs and vaccines is dangerous territory. When offered up as if authoritative and proven, yet clearly not, all the worse.

I was a bit taken aback by the opening salvo assertions regarding ivermectin (and all the more so when I later looked at what the manufacturer Merck and the FDA say). They definitely are touting it as a miracle drug that can be used prophylactically to create "herd immunity" against Covid...which is nonsense on its face. They then try to suggest that taking the vaccine is far more dangerous than what the actual authorities say, playing directly on vaccine fears and gullibility...putting the public directly at harm.

That they couch this all in pseudo-scientific discussion does not make it better, it makes it worse.

And here you are telling us there's some cabal of FDA and Pharma trying to make us not be safe from Covid...

[tech37]

Because the FDA has process and procedures. They initially send a warning letter to the organization and individuals involved. Generally people only get prosecuted if they do it repeatedly ignoring notifications from the FDA. It is known as an FDA Form 483. Each instance of it being "shown" to the public could illicit a warning letter and ultimately a fine or other action. YouTube has a greater liability than the individuals in this case.

Do you have evidence they have been issued a warning?... if not, just speculation on your part. Their website is a year old and some have testified in front of the US Senate over the past year. I'll believe they are breaking laws when they're shut down, fined, and/or arrested.

tech, like this site, youtube has the right to permit or not permit what it wants, however those decisions do incur various costs, including regulatory risk as well as user response.

Of course they do, no problem. Luckily, another less affected platform has taken Weinstein on.

It is highly likely that Youtube was warned by the FDA about its users promoting drugs on the platform for unauthorized usage. It's a significant issue. It is less likely, though not impossible, that Youtube was specifically warned by the FDA about this particular podcast video.

I never referred to FDA warning Youtube, one way or other. At that point in conversation, I wasn't even referring to Youtube but was referring to Dr. Kory's website which I posted over a week ago, generating bluster bellows of "snake oil salesman"

BTW, the Youtube Weinstein/Malone/Kirsch podcast was not promoting anything. If you came away thinking that, you're mistaken IMO. The point of the podcast, delt with the alleged suppression of, for example, use and efficacy data of Ivermectin with regard to treating Covid and also the possible number of deaths caused by mRNA vaccines. That is not "promotion."

tech, several of us referred to Kirsch and Weinstein as akin to selling snake oil, as in claiming efficacy and safety that's unproven to the gullible.

Several? jhu72 and you. They were not selling/promoting anything... the entire podcast was about suppression of information. The point again... they can't prove anything to those in power who won't listen. This is not that difficult or are you simply playing dumb for some reason?

Dunno about this other guy, whether he's a quack or not. Haven't seen his site.

Here's a novel idea, why not try looking. I posted the comprehensive site last week. Prior to the Malone/Kirsch podcast, Weinstein had Dr. Kory on a Youtube podcast as a lead in to the one he was silenced for. BW was most likely warned by Youtube following the Kory podcast before the Malone/Kirsch podcast. Good for BW, he and his audience will be better off now anyway.

Youtube has been and is making difficult choices about what information to allow on its site and what not to allow. Just as are most of the large platforms.

Forget Youtube. Weinstein is done with them and vis versa. Why are you going on about it?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Because the FDA has process and procedures. They initially send a warning letter to the organization and individuals involved. Generally people only get prosecuted if they do it repeatedly ignoring notifications from the FDA. It is known as an FDA Form 483. Each instance of it being "shown" to the public could illicit a warning letter and ultimately a fine or other action. YouTube has a greater liability than the individuals in this case.

Do you have evidence they have been issued a warning?... if not, just speculation on your part. Their website is a year old and some have testified in front of the US Senate over the past year. I'll believe they are breaking laws when they're shut down, fined, and/or arrested.

tech, like this site, youtube has the right to permit or not permit what it wants, however those decisions do incur various costs, including regulatory risk as well as user response.

Of course they do, no problem. Luckily, another less affected platform has taken Weinstein on.

It is highly likely that Youtube was warned by the FDA about its users promoting drugs on the platform for unauthorized usage. It's a significant issue. It is less likely, though not impossible, that Youtube was specifically warned by the FDA about this particular podcast video.

I never referred to FDA warning Youtube, one way or other. At that point in conversation, I wasn't even referring to Youtube but was referring to Dr. Kory's website which I posted over a week ago, generating bluster bellows of "snake oil salesman"

BTW, the Youtube Weinstein/Malone/Kirsch podcast was not promoting anything. If you came away thinking that, you're mistaken IMO. The point of the podcast, delt with the alleged suppression of, for example, use and efficacy data of Ivermectin with regard to treating Covid and also the possible number of deaths caused by mRNA vaccines. That is not "promotion."

tech, several of us referred to Kirsch and Weinstein as akin to selling snake oil, as in claiming efficacy and safety that's unproven to the gullible.

Dunno about this other guy, whether he's a quack or not. Haven't seen his site.

Youtube has been and is making difficult choices about what information to allow on its site and what not to allow. Just as are most of the large platforms.

They have generally decided that if content being published, as if factual, is not factual, and has the potential to harm the public, that they have a duty to their community to remove such content.

Harm can be in a number of ways, but certainly advice about drugs and vaccines is dangerous territory. When offered up as if authoritative and proven, yet clearly not, all the worse.

I was a bit taken aback by the opening salvo assertions regarding ivermectin (and all the more so when I later looked at what the manufacturer Merck and the FDA say). They definitely are touting it as a miracle drug that can be used prophylactically to create "herd immunity" against Covid...which is nonsense on its face. They then try to suggest that taking the vaccine is far more dangerous than what the actual authorities say, playing directly on vaccine fears and gullibility...putting the public directly at harm.

That they couch this all in pseudo-scientific discussion does not make it better, it makes it worse.

And here you are telling us there's some cabal of FDA and Pharma trying to make us not be safe from Covid...

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/asia/phi ... index.html

Why not.

[old salt]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/asia/phi ... index.html

Why not.

You ever been to Olongapo City ?

[tech37]

"British doctor Peter Daszak who tried to gag Wuhan lab leak theory is FIRED from UN commission investigating COVID after he was exposed for organizing letter denying leak claim in The Lancet medical journal"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... eport.html

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/asia/phi ... index.html

Why not.

You ever been to Olongapo City ?

No. You vacationed there? Guy may have good reason for his approach.

[jhu72]

I don't think there is any question about this, we are already seeing it in the numbers. The never vaxers better wake up in the next few months. Winter is coming.

[wgdsr]

this seems like a good time to dole out another study on vitamin d:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/1-in-4-ho ... eli-study/

23% vs 3% death in hospitalized patients.
14x more likely to have serious disease or critical condition.

israel evidently has a tracking system of millions of patients, including vit d levels. had a large study done 4th quarter last year as well.

i don't have a youtube channel, but i play message disseminator on fanlax.

[wgdsr]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/asia/phi ... index.html

Why not.

You ever been to Olongapo City ?

No. You vacationed there? Guy may have good reason for his approach.

do they have room in jails for 108 million people?

[MDlaxfan76]

this seems like a good time to dole out another study on vitamin d:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/1-in-4-ho ... eli-study/

23% vs 3% death in hospitalized patients.
14x more likely to have serious disease or critical condition.

israel evidently has a tracking system of millions of patients, including vit d levels. had a large study done 4th quarter last year as well.

i don't have a youtube channel, but i play message disseminator on fanlax.

What this study doesn't address is the causality versus correlation.

Most people aren't Vitamin D deficient, but if you are, it may well be likely you have other issues that impact morbidity.

Does taking Vitamin D prophylactically help?
For those who otherwise would have been deficient?
For those who weren't deficient?

Would be interesting to know...meanwhile, taking some Vitamin D doesn't hurt...don't swallow the whole bottle, but taking a little everyday, no sweat.

[Typical Lax Dad]

this seems like a good time to dole out another study on vitamin d:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/1-in-4-ho ... eli-study/

23% vs 3% death in hospitalized patients.
14x more likely to have serious disease or critical condition.

israel evidently has a tracking system of millions of patients, including vit d levels. had a large study done 4th quarter last year as well.

i don't have a youtube channel, but i play message disseminator on fanlax.