why the CDC data (and the CDC itself) cannot be trusted
because public health monopolies are inevitably captured by private interests that are not your interests. because that's what monopolies do.
watch what i do, not what i say.
wise words in a world of hypocrisy.
so let’s have a little looksie at the actions of the public health regulators, shall we?
foremost, the definitions of “vaccinated” adopted and allowed by the FDA were deeply problematic from the start. they broke every rule of bayesian analysis and were obviously designed to hide a risk accentuation period immediately after jab and prevent it from being counted in the outcomes. this has been well covered in other cattitudes.
this definition ignores the risk of the vaccination and often attributes it to non-vaccination.
this simple graphic made by some cheeky internet cat sort of says it all:
then they manipulated the denominator for “unvaccinated” in all the percentage calculations that compare vaxxed to unvaxxed by using out of date censuses and thus subtracting those vaxxed (based on dose counts) from too small a population count. this overstates prevalence of all issues in the unvaxxed by ascribing them to an artificially reduced cohort size.
this gets called “denominator gate.”
the issue becomes clear in this excellent graphic made by longtime gatopal™ @HOLD2
you can see more here.
but what really blows the stats problems into the stratosphere is flat out ascribing of all “unknown” status outcomes to the unvaccinated. the desperately poor record keeping around this issue is bring used to badly slant data. this is a great walk through of the issue (toward the end)
Here is how I think they falsely suppressed the real rate of vaccinated patients entering U.S hospitals and dying:
In the most popular electronic medical record system in the U.S (EPIC), on the sidebar of every page in the chart are the name, demographics, room number, provider team, and COVID vaccination status of the patient. What I found weird from the outset was that, in EPIC, there were only two categories under the COVID-19 vaccine status section, “Vaccinated” or “Unknown.” There was no “Unvaccinated” status. Also realize that “Unknown” was interpreted by all providers and official data as akin to being “Unvaccinated”. Everyone I took care of in the ICU in 2021, except one, had an “Unknown” vaccination status. How could that be? How come only one ICU patient of mine in the entire year was reported as being “fully vaccinated?” Even if the vaccines worked really well (which I knew they didn’t), something was off, like really off.
and what looks to be going on on the ground:
In order to be documented as vaccinated on admission, you had to have received the vaccine from a primary care physician’s clinic who worked for that same hospital system in a system office, and that they had already documented in the electronic medical record. If you got a vaccine from anywhere else outside that hospital system’s clinic, you were assigned an “Unknown”, i.e. “Unvaccinated” status in the electronic medical record.
this is beyond slipshod, obvious to any first year data analyst, and yet is the data being used to tell doctors to “follow the science.”
and worse, many think they are.
(it’s also why CDC vaccine efficacy data diverges to strongly from other more reputable data systems like UK, denmark, and israel.)
none of this instills confidence. nor, probably, should it.
this seems too egregious and consistently one sided to be an accident.
it feels to me like someone wanted it this way and knew how to play the system. even if such errors were once honest, criticisms of them have been out for a year or more. and nothing has changed. the CDC has vilified and attacked critics and encouraged medical boards and institutions to censure or terminate them.
now, from one point of view, this can be described as “undermining faith in institutions of public health, medical systems, and doctors.”
from another it can be depicted as “revealing the lack of trustworthy behavior that was always there among guilds and monopolies bent past the service of health.”
and maybe that is a good thing.
look, there are good doctors and bad, just like there are excellent plumbers and guys who’ll flood your basement.
but imagine what plumbers would be like if they had to kowtow to regulators captured by “big waterheater” and would lose their jobs and possibly their license if they bucked.
imagine what they might try to sell you.
imagine what they might be credulous enough to fall for if the sources of “official information” were all tainted by agenda.
and imagine how many drugs you don’t need they might wind up pushing on you.
i have had i don’t know how many doctors or pharmacies push a flu shot on me. you don’t need a prescription, just walk in and get the shot. i have asked each of them “on what evidence-based studies do you claim efficacy and risk/benefit for this in my case?” i have yet to have any provide even a single response. this will earn you either a glassy eyed incomprehension or that sad “oh, you’re one of those” headshakes at walgreens.
fun fact: you could do the same for 20 other popular medicines to say nothing of the potential ill effects of the sheer pharmaceutical load under which many americans today labor.
take 20 pills a day and who knows what you’re getting into short or long term?
the CDC does not even track “rolling stones concert in a convent” level VAERS data and the FDA follow up these days looks worse. do you really think they’re even trying to assess this? because, spoiler alert, they aren’t. because they don’t want to know the answer. because it might be bad for business.
consider this massive and overt failure to assess bad batches apparent in the pfizer data pulled together (under governmental duress using FOIA) by ICAN and wonderfully explained here:
the killer takeaway is twofold: first, deaths per lot is much higher in some lots and they ALL trend early.
and second, those lots were all the early lots. the lots starting with 3xxx came about a year after launch (as can be seen here)
clearly, there was either something very different about the early lots (and i’m not buying the “it was the old and infirm taking them” explanation because AE’s and deaths look more prevalent in the young and fit) or something happened to the VAERS reporting that shut down the capture rate on this outcome severely.
in the former case, the FDA and CDC and health systems should have been screaming for answers and shutting down vaxx campaigns until those answers came. in the latter, they actively colluded to cover up adverse events from a vaccine.
which one makes you want to leave them in charge?
and this is hardly an isolated case. all cause mortality got pulled down out of CDC reporting for months and is currently just starting to come back.
they seem oddly slow on identifying causes (particularly around cancer and heart issues) as well.
the UK pulled down the case data by vaxx status when it went against narrative.
and look what british columbia did: (thanks to prof freedom who has done so much great work here for the graphic)
it seems like the knee jerk public health response to the smoke alarm going off is to take out the battery and gaslight anyone who asks what that beeping was.
that is not the act of a servant of public health. it’s the act of a monopoly defending itself.
meanwhile, in much of the developed world, safe medicines and treatment regimens of likely and even proven efficacy were pooh-poohed and even outright maligned.
incredibly low risk drugs were called unsafe and safety data of truly dangerous modalities hidden and ignored.
trials with patient populations that looked nothing like the treatment group and used rigged definitions were greenlit in vaccines and therapeutics like paxlovid.
drugs that outright missed their clinical endpoints were coaxed over the finish line with post facto adulteration (yes remdesivir, i’m looking at you.)
the process has become badly broken, because monopiles serve themselves and their political masters. monopolies do not arise naturally.
they are put in place by the state.
this isn’t about corporations being evil. in general, they aren’t and even if they were the fact of consumer sovereignty makes it difficult, nigh impossible to act upon. to do so requires coercion and so if you want foolproof indications as to which corporations aspire to evil, find the ones whose business models are predicated alliance with the state and who seek not to offer products, but to get government to subsidize and mandate them and to destroy and render illegal all alternatives.
it takes 2 to tango, and the dance of fascism requires both corporations and government. neither may achieve it alone but when paired on the dancefloor, the result is all but inevitable.
if we are to return public health to the public, we must take it away from the government.
they are not capable of its pursuit.
the CDC and NIH should be abolished and real information on outcomes and efficacy of everything laid plain in the public view.
health records should be personal, open source, fully portable, user controlled, hashed and provider updated for each drug and procedure, and fully auditable by any permitted to read them.
the aggregation will take care of itself through incentives and big data. you’d have an open, honest, and vastly more powerful system to analyze health that we have today in about 2 weeks.
the current system does not serve health or patients. its serves gatekeepers.
and it encourages and enables misbehavior.
surely you cannot believe that agencies that lied so readily, widely, and fluently about covid have only lied about this thing and not dozens or hundreds more or that this was the first time they ever closed ranks in the spin room to impede truth and shift narrative?
the choice is not between “good regulatory monopoly” and “bad regulatory monopoly.” the former is an illusion. it’s a made up marketing pitch.
the real choice is between public monopoly or private entities subject to competition and the reputational needs imposed by consumer sovereignty. it is a choice between market discipline to win trust though accuracy or being disciplined by the lackeys of leviathan for power and profit. it’s a choice between owning your information or being owned by others control of it.
sorry, but it’s true. it’s just public choice theory.
it is not valid to compare alleged utopian benefits against real costs and real options. “well let’s just regulate the good stuff next time because good people are in charge” is not a real option.
a system that controls so much profit will always get captured by those who profit from doing so.
so, sorry, but the terminator called and what’s living in our house is not what it says it is.
follow someone besides the CDC if you want to live.
There were always a few honest and courageous doctors and scientists, even if the profession as a whole failed us. My husband, Dr. Chris Milburn, got fired as regional ER director for merely questioning whether the vaccines MIGHT have unknown long term side effects and suggesting that kids should remain in school. We are organizing a Free Speech in Medicine and Science conference (see https://pairodocs.substack.com/p/free-speech-in-medicine-and-science for details) in late October. It sure would be nice to have some savvy internet cats in attendance.
The COVID pharma "science" seems roughly analogous to all the nutrition "science" pushing veganism wherein they conclude you'll get colorectal cancer from "red and processed" (nice arbitrary category lump and vague terminology) meat, based on a survey of self-reported dietary patterns for a year from memory and not even beginning to control for lifestyle factors.
I think that even the most charitable interpretation of this phenomenon still forces us to conclude that humans are naturally terrible at considering all variables, and thus should be very hesitant to make drastic life choices based on what calls itself "science." It only gets worse the less charitable of an interpretation you take.