autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 1 year ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
YouTube hopes that this policy framework will be flexible enough to cover a broad range of medical topics, while finding a balance between minimizing harm and allowing debate.
In its blog post, YouTube says it would take action both against treatments that are actively harmful, as well as those that are unproven and are being suggested in place of established alternatives.
YouTube’s updated policies come a little over three years after it banded together with some of the world’s biggest tech platforms to make a shared commitment to fight covid-19 misinformation.
While the major tech platforms stood united in early 2020, their exact approaches to covid-19 misinformation have differed since that initial announcement.
Most notably, Twitter stopped enforcing its covid-19 misinformation policy in late 2022 following its acquisition by Elon Musk.
Meta has also softened its moderation approach recently, rolling back its covid-19 misinformation rules in countries (like the US) where the disease is no longer considered a national emergency.
I’m a bot and I’m open source!
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
there’s nothing to debate
Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
I’d say that claim is debatable
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
if you want to determine efficacy of a treatment, you run a clinical trial, not a debate
BilboBargains@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Can we run a clinical trial on that comment?
Reva@startrek.website 1 year ago
That argument falls apart if the scientific world is imperfect in some way. It was not that long ago that “race sciences” were a rather undisputed thing, even worse if you get into the psychiatric field, eugenics and all.