![\"YOUTUBE](\"https:\/\/www.greenmedinfo.com\/sites\/default\/files\/ckeditor\/Sayer%20Ji\/images\/Screen%20Shot%202021-09-30%20at%2011_21_59%20AM.png\")
<\/p>\nWritten By: Sayer Ji, Founder
\nGreenMedInfo.com<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
On September 29th, YouTube announced a new \u201cvaccine misinformation policy\u201d on a blog post titled \u201cManaging harmful vaccine content on YouTube<\/a>,\u201d which was immediately followed by hundreds of mainstream news articles declaring this a major victory against so-called \u201canti-vaccine content.”\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The news cycle included further amplification of defamatory statements made by the\u00a0foreign dark money group<\/a>\u00a0the\u00a0Center for Countering Digital Hate<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0against the so-called \u201cdisinformation dozen” \u2014 a now fully debunked campaign of attack against 12 prominent health freedom advocates;\u00a0an attack that Facebook itself described as based on a “faulty narrative” with “zero evidence,”<\/strong>\u00a0according to an\u00a0August 18 statement<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0made by\u00a0Monika Bickert, Facebook’s vice president of content policy.<\/p>\n YouTube’s blog post opened up with the following revealing paragraph:<\/p>\n “YouTube doesn\u2019t allow content that poses a serious risk of egregious harm by spreading medical misinformation about currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and by the World Health Organization (WHO). This is limited to content that contradicts local health authorities\u2019 or the WHO\u2019s guidance on vaccine safety, efficacy, and ingredients.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Next, YouTube explained, \u201cWhat this policy means for you [content creators]\u201d:<\/p>\n Don\u2019t post content on YouTube if it includes harmful misinformation about currently approved and administered vaccines on any of the following:<\/p>\n Vaccine safety: content alleging that vaccines cause chronic side effects, outside of rare side effects that are recognized by health authorities<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Efficacy of vaccines: content claiming that vaccines do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Ingredients in vaccines: content misrepresenting the substances contained in vaccines<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Here are some examples of content that\u2019s not allowed on YouTube:<\/p>\n Claims that vaccines cause chronic side effects such as:<\/p>\n Cancer<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Diabetes<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Other chronic side effects<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n Claims that vaccines do not reduce risk of contracting illness<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that vaccines contain substances that are not on the vaccine ingredient list, such as biological matter from fetuses (e.g. fetal tissue, fetal cell lines) or animal byproducts<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that vaccines contain substances or devices meant to track or identify those who\u2019ve received them<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that vaccines alter a person\u2019s genetic makeup<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that the MMR vaccine causes autism<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that vaccines are part of a depopulation agenda<\/p>\n <\/li>\n Claims that the flu vaccine causes chronic side effects such as infertility<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Claims that the HPV vaccine causes chronic side effects such as paralysis<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n YouTube\u2019s Orwellian statements above represent highly concerning forms of state-sponsored misinformation and disinformation that claim to protect its users from the very acts they are imposing upon the public.<\/p>\n For example, if the only content allowed on its platform is that which reiterates or reifies the WHO\u2019s or CDC\u2019s claims that the COVID-19 vaccines are\u00a0unequivocally and a priori<\/em>\u00a0\u201csafe and effective,\u201d yet the U.S. government\u2019s own post-marketing surveillance system for vaccine harms \u2014 the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which is notorious for not representing up to 99% of the actual adverse events the public is experiencing1\u00a0<\/sup>\u2014\u00a0shows there have been over 15,000 deaths as a result of the vaccines<\/a>\u00a0thus far, then YouTube\u2019s policies and actions themselves constitute a form of \u201cegregious harm\u201d by actively participating in, along with the health authorities it references (e.g. WHO), the minimization and\/or coverup of the true side effects of these experimental vaccines.<\/p>\n In essence, by withholding or suppressing information on, or discussion about, the vaccines’ true risks, they are interfering with the mandatory\u00a0<\/em>medical ethical principle of informed consent, resulting in untold, but likely immense, harm to public health, civil liberties and human rights.<\/p>\n If the vaccines\u00a0were, in fact, \u201ceffective,\u201d then why is there already a push for boosters? And why are the vaccinated getting \u201cbreakthrough\u201d cases if the vaccines are truly \u201ceffective\u201d?\u00a0According to YouTube’s new policies, simply asking these questions will get you deplatformed, and you and your content labeled as \u201cdangerous\u201d and harmful to the public.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n YouTube\u2019s official position that the exercise of free speech and open discussion on topics of grave importance to human health, such as the nature, origin, or risks and benefits of treating COVID-19 with vaccines, are causing \u201cegregious harm by spreading medical misinformation\u201d is a boldface assault on the truth. And considering that YouTube is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, Inc., which\u00a0funds the WHO<\/a>\u00a0and the CDC<\/a>,\u00a0owns pharmaceutical and biomedical companies<\/a>, and itself receives\u00a0hundreds of millions of dollars<\/a>\u00a0from vaccine manufacturers like GlaxoSmithKline,\u00a0their actions go beyond conflict of interest to collusion.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Perhaps even more concerning<\/strong>\u00a0is what YouTube\u2019s new policy will do to hundreds of millions of users who face either\u00a0censoring themselves<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0or being entirely de-platformed. Millions who previously would have spoken up and out will now remain in silent complicity with an agenda deadset on covering up the harms being done by the COVID-19 vaccines, or covering up safer, natural alternatives. I cannot tell which is more egregious when it is all said and done: overt censorship or covert self-censorship?<\/p>\n Fundamentally, YouTube\u2019s latest decision is a declaration of war against the truth and the public’s right to informed consent. But it will require the tacit consent and\/or complicity of millions of users for them to be successful.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.greenmedinfo.com\/sites\/default\/files\/ckeditor\/Sayer%20Ji\/images\/Screen%20Shot%202021-09-30%20at%2011_14_07%20AM.png\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
If you’re posting content<\/h3>\n
\n
Examples<\/h2>\n
\n
\n