• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who still trusts the CDC?

Do you still trust the CDC for honest information on COVID?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

Rawley

Sedition Apologist™ and Charter Cult Member™
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2020
Messages
27,137
Reaction score
8,312
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative

Yes. Covid will be gone by April 2020, and if you ever get it just take some horse dewormer.
 
Answer :-

Only the Compliant and very Gullible .
Lazy people who do not understand the meaning of DYOR and are Headline Only Readers which is now what the bulk of Americans are .

See previous post ( 2) as a perfect example
 
"YOU CAN'T BELIEVE THE CDC" - people who believe in HCQ and Ivermectin as a covid treatment and "natural immunity" as legit strategy.
Seems you are lumping the folks at the NYTimes into that bucket.
 
Answer :-

Only the Compliant and very Gullible .
Lazy people who do not understand the meaning of DYOR and are Headline Only Readers which is now what the bulk of Americans are .

See previous post ( 2) as a perfect example
Seems if there was any question before that they are practicing politics rather than science, this shuts that door.
 
@Ethel2 any defense for the CDC withholding this data?
 
@Ethel2 any defense for the CDC withholding this data?
This is the reason given by the CDC. Basically they said they needed to make sure the data is accurate and actionable:


Kristen Nordlund, a CDC spokeswoman, said the reason for the slow release of data is “because basically, at the end of the day, it’s not yet ready for prime time.”

She added that the CDC’s “priority when gathering any data is to ensure that it’s accurate and actionable.”

You would be on the chandeliers if they released inaccurate data. I don’t mind waiting until they are sure it accurate.
Do you?
 
Righties hate CDC data because it doesn't tell them what they want to hear. It has nothing to do with how much or little of it they publicize.
 
This is the reason given by the CDC. Basically they said they needed to make sure the data is accurate and actionable:


Kristen Nordlund, a CDC spokeswoman, said the reason for the slow release of data is “because basically, at the end of the day, it’s not yet ready for prime time.”

She added that the CDC’s “priority when gathering any data is to ensure that it’s accurate and actionable.”

You would be on the chandeliers if they released inaccurate data. I don’t mind waiting until they are sure it accurate.
Do you?
No That is their bullshit excuse, that no one is buying. Even they voluntarily admitted that "Another reason is fear that the information might be misinterpreted, Ms. Nordlund said."

When the C.D.C. published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65 two weeks ago, it left out the numbers for a huge portion of that population: 18- to 49-year-olds, the group least likely to benefit from extra shots, because the first two doses already left them well-protected.

Much of the withheld information could help state and local health officials better target their efforts to bring the virus under control. Detailed, timely data on hospitalizations by age and race would help health officials identify and help the populations at highest risk. Information on hospitalizations and death by age and vaccination status would have helped inform whether healthy adults needed booster shots. And wastewater surveillance across the nation would spot outbreaks and emerging variants early.

Without the booster data for 18- to 49-year-olds, the outside experts whom federal health agencies look to for advice had to rely on numbers from Israel to make their recommendations on the shots.

Inexcusable.
 
"YOU CAN'T BELIEVE THE CDC" - people who believe in HCQ and Ivermectin as a covid treatment and "natural immunity" as legit strategy.
To take the word of an agency that admits publicly they lied because the truth was “not ready for prime time”, validates their opinion that the citizens they work for are too dumb to tell the truth.
 
Righties hate CDC data because it doesn't tell them what they want to hear. It has nothing to do with how much or little of it they publicize.
Exactly. Much the same reason they don't believe anything NASA says about climate change but believe everything Trump says. Facts don't matter, narrative is everything.
 
No That is their bullshit excuse, that no one is buying. Even they voluntarily admitted that "Another reason is fear that the information might be misinterpreted, Ms. Nordlund said."



Inexcusable.
Absolutely right. Millions of people that didn’t need the jab, provided millions of dollars for big pharma.
 
To take the word of an agency that admits publicly they lied because the truth was “not ready for prime time”, validates their opinion that the citizens they work for are too dumb to tell the truth.

Do you have the slightest clue how data preparation and visualization works?
 
To take the word of an agency that admits publicly they lied because the truth was “not ready for prime time”, validates their opinion that the citizens they work for are too dumb to tell the truth.
Who was it? The guy who said he had deliberately minimized covid so as not to cause panic?
Somebody prominent...
 
No That is their bullshit excuse, that no one is buying. Even they voluntarily admitted that "Another reason is fear that the information might be misinterpreted, Ms. Nordlund said."



Inexcusable.
First, you speak ONLY for yourself, so when you say that "no one" is buying what Ms Nordlund said, you really mean that YOU don't buy it. Too bad. Its good enough for me.
Second, whatever makes you think that you are entitled to all the data all the time? Hint: you aren't.
 
Absolutely right. Millions of people that didn’t need the jab, provided millions of dollars for big pharma.
Any guess why the death rate from covid might be three times as high in one country as it is in their next-door neighbour?
 
People can argue about trust if they like. I'll just say it's a problem if a scientific institution is withholding information that could be beneficial. The article cites bureaucracy and technical ability, but the glaring takeaway is obviously their reluctance to release information because it might be misinterpreted. I think it's safe to draw an inference on what they meant by that and what the data likely showed, but couldn't they explain that? The slope seems a tad slippery if the CDC, or any similar agency, is going to collect data and then decide whether the public can be trusted with the information.
 
This is the reason given by the CDC. Basically they said they needed to make sure the data is accurate and actionable:


Kristen Nordlund, a CDC spokeswoman, said the reason for the slow release of data is “because basically, at the end of the day, it’s not yet ready for prime time.”

She added that the CDC’s “priority when gathering any data is to ensure that it’s accurate and actionable.”

You would be on the chandeliers if they released inaccurate data. I don’t mind waiting until they are sure it accurate.
Do you?
Haha, no, that is not the reason given, that was a reason given.
 
First, you speak ONLY for yourself, so when you say that "no one" is buying what Ms Nordlund said, you really mean that YOU don't buy it. Too bad. Its good enough for me.
Second, whatever makes you think that you are entitled to all the data all the time? Hint: you aren't.
Why do you think this is about me? Did you read the article? Should these Drs. just STFU and accept the crumbs the politicians at the CDC think they will understand?

“Tell the truth, present the data,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert and adviser to the Food and Drug Administration. “I have to believe that there is a way to explain these things so people can understand it.”
Knowing which groups of people were being hospitalized in the United States, which other conditions those patients may have had and how vaccines changed the picture over time would have been invaluable, Dr. Offit said.
Relying on Israeli data to make booster recommendations for Americans was less than ideal, Dr. Offit noted. Israel defines severe disease differently than the United States, among other factors.

“There’s no reason that they should be better at collecting and putting forth data than we were,” Dr. Offit said of Israeli scientists. “The C.D.C. is the principal epidemiological agency in this country, and so you would like to think the data came from them.”

It has also been difficult to find C.D.C. data on the proportion of children hospitalized for Covid who have other medical conditions, said Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics’s Committee on Infectious Diseases.
The academy’s staff asked their partners at the C.D.C. for that information on a call in December, according to a spokeswoman for the A.A.P., and were told it was unavailable.
Dr. Nordlund pointed to data on the agency’s website that includes this information, and to multiple published reports on pediatric hospitalizations with information on children who have other health conditions.

The pediatrics academy has repeatedly asked the C.D.C. for an estimate on the contagiousness of a person infected with the coronavirus five days after symptoms begin — but Dr. Maldonado finally got the answer from an article in The New York Times in December.

“They’ve known this for over a year and a half, right, and they haven’t told us,” she said. “I mean, you can’t find out anything from them.”
 
Why do you think this is about me? Did you read the article? Should these Drs. just STFU and accept the crumbs the politicians at the CDC think they will understand?
You wrote that "no one is buying it". You only speak for yourself. No one else. What you really mean is that YOU are not buying it.
I read the article. The CDC releases data once its been verified-and I don't blame them one bit for releasing only the data that won't be misinterpreted by the clowns on the right. You keep feeding those trolls and they tend to grow. I am fine with cutting them off and providing data, once verified, to people who need to have it.
 
Back
Top Bottom