Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Please explain how withholding relevant information from someone would make them more adept at interpreting statistics based off that data.
When it comes to passing laws (or policy, codes and such), each government uses a "style guide." That's due to the fact that every specific word has a specific meaning (even words like "a," "the" and "of"), often different from what the word means (or is thought to mean) in common parlance.
If this agency were an objective party, they would never make this statement. But if the CDC was a promoter of vaccines (as many have suggested), this is exactly the sort of statement they would make. Other than just being a mouthpiece for the drug companies (with at least a semblance of being independent), it also makes sense as if the vaccines are "ineffective" or worse, harmful, the Federal Government itself has liability. Both for most vaccines in general, and the drugs masquerading a vaccines under EUA in particular. This would be potentially damning information in a lawsuit.
No one is arguing it would. On the population level such incompetence is terminal, which means that the only valid responses to it reside in the realm of damage control, i.e. minimizing the extent of harm the population is able to cause by misinterpreting data. Giving the population all the data that exists will not make the population any more capable of making use of the data. Nothing will... apart form ensuring better health and education for the next generations.
No, as the premise is that the population is incapable of accurately assessing even the most 'correct data'. As I said, during the pandemic we've all seen the numerous ways in which the laymen are able to misinterpret statistics. This is because intuition and common sense do not lend themselves to interpreting statistics particularly well. Rather, working with statistics requires a specific skillset.
So we get somewhat of a Streisand effect, it adds more fuel to argument people are making against the covid hysterics, the very interpretations they claim to be trying to avoid will now go into overdrive.The CDC has now surpassed its buddies over at the CIA and refuses to release even public, non-classified pandemic data covering mortality, gender, age, vaccination status, co-morbidities, etc. Why mentioning the CIA? Well, some years ago the CIA refused to release declassified information on the Bay of Pigs invasion as it may "confuse" the public and people may "misinterpret" it. I doubt two of the biggest agencies within the US govt are using identical language in regards to very similarly nefarious events without this being standard procedure and also an indication of the the bombshells the concealed information contains.
"...Fifty-one years after the failed attempt to invade Cuba, the Central Intelligence Agency and Department of Justice continue to claim that releasing the final volume of a CIA history of the debacle would “confuse the public” and should therefore remain withheld. "
CIA Claims Release of its History of the Bay of Pigs Debacle Would “Confuse the Public.”
17 April 2012 UPDATE: Fifty-one years after the failed attempt to invade Cuba, the Central Intelligence Agency and Department of Justice continue to claim that releasing the final volume of a CIA h…unredacted.com
Without that data CDC is now refusing to publish, it is virtually impossible to judge vaccine effectiveness (and safety) and the only data publicly available are the pharma-sponsored studies. Needless to say, those are not exactly reliable. When asked why it is refusing to release the data, which is public and must be released by law, CDC stated that the information "...might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective." BINGO! To me, the CDC just admitted what we have been discussing on the forum since the clotshots first became available in late 2020.
Furthermore, as it turns out the COVID-19 data published by CDC so far is a tiny fraction of what CDC has collected since the start of the "pandemic" in March 2020. You can safely assume whatever has been publicly released is undoubtedly cherry-picked to favor vaccines, show severity of COVID-19, benefit of lockdowns, etc. Keep in mind that CDC has not yet released even the final raw mortality data for neither 2020 nor 2021. The raw numbers released for those years are provisional and subject to change, in CDC's own words. The only data the CDC considers final is the so-called "excess mortality". That is actually a contradiction of terms, as "excess mortality" is based on a model and can never be truly final since it does not correspond to anything real. Also, such model-based data easily be massaged to show whatever the CDC wants. Unsurprisingly, CDC keeps mentioning only the "excess mortality" in its propaganda materials, and has even dropped the word "excess", so that most people hearing/reading the propaganda would walk away with the impression that those numbers are solid, raw death numbers when in fact they are mostly imaginary (just a model).
So, it looks like CDC is basically keeping all the juicy info on the "pandemic" to itself. Unless somebody sues, just as in the case of Pfizer vaccine data, CDC won't release that information even though it is most likely required to do so by federal law. Even if somebody sues, CDC will probably try to pull the same trick as FDA and claim it can release the data no earlier than 2075 due to staff shortages. And since the court in which that case would be decided is probably different from the one in which the FDA cases was decided there is a good chance the CDC may get its wish.
@Regina @tankasnowgod @Drareg
The C.D.C. Isn’t Publishing Large Portions of the Covid Data It Collects (Published 2022)
The agency has withheld critical data on boosters, hospitalizations and, until recently, wastewater analyses.www.nytimes.com
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zerowww.zerohedge.com
"...The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has kept reams of its Covid-19 data under wraps for more than a year, the New York Times reports, holding back figures at least partly because it doesn’t trust the public to interpret the information correctly. The agency’s seemingly selective disclosure came to light in an article by the Times on Sunday. Among the data being withheld is a breakdown of Covid-19 hospitalizations by age, race, and vaccination status. The CDC also chose not to report on such findings as the efficacy of booster shots in 18- to 49-year-olds, even though it collected the information, the article added. Although it’s the agency leading America’s Covid-19 response, the CDC has published only a “tiny fraction” of the data that it has collected, the Times said. In lieu of US data being made more widely available, experts were forced to look elsewhere for information – such as Israeli figures on booster shots – that would help them make informed recommendations."
CDC withholds Covid-19 data that could be ‘misinterpreted’ – media
The US CDC has reportedly withheld key Covid-19 data for more than a year partly in concern that the information might be “misinterpreted”www.rt.com
"...Such omissions have included figures on Covid-19 infections among fully vaccinated Americans. According to the media report, the CDC has been reluctant to publish those figures because “they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.” Nordlund confirmed that concern as one of the reasons. Epidemiologist Jessica Malaty Rivera, part of an independent Covid-19 data-tracking project, told the Times that her group had been begging for such information for two years. “We are at much greater risk of misinterpreting the data with data vacuums than sharing the data with proper science, communication and caveats,” she argued."
