The CDC hits a new low

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-cdc-hits-a-new-low/comments

Graphics added by Think for Yourself

by Alex Berenson, Unreported Truths, Oct 30, 2021
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-cdc-hits-a-new-low

(I didn’t think it was possible either)

Yesterday the Centers for Disease Control, America’s not-at-all-politicized public health agency, released a new study purporting to show that vaccination protects against Covid infection better than natural immunity.

Of course, a wave of stories about the benefits of mRNA vaccination followed.

To do this, the CDC used some magic statistical analysis to turn inside raw data that actually showed almost four times as many fully vaccinated people being hospitalized with Covid as those with natural immunity – and FIFTEEN TIMES as many over the summer. I kid you not.

Further, the study runs contrary to a much larger paper from Israeli researchers in August.

As my two-year-old likes to say, How dey do dat? Well, the Israeli study drew on a meaningful dataset in a meaningful way to reach meaningful conclusions.

It counted infections (and hospitalizations) in a large group of previously infected people against an equally large and balanced group of vaccinated people, then made moderate adjustments for clearly defined risk factors.

It found that vaccinated people were 13 times as likely to be infected – and 7 times as likely to be hospitalized – as unvaccinated people with natural immunity.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fcb14a801-5e30-4be0-b63d-a425765369eb_750x428.jpeg

(SOURCE: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full-text)

In contrast – how do I put this politely? – the CDC study is meaningless gibberish that would never have been published if the agency did not face huge political pressure to get people vaccinated.

Let’s take a look.

The study had a bizarre design. The agency’s researchers looked at 200,000 people who had been hospitalized with “Covid-like” illnesses from January through August in nine states.

Right away, this choice sets up the study in a problematic way; for most of that time, people who had received Covid vaccines believed (because the CDC and others told them) that they were at VERY low risk of getting Covid, and certainly symptomatic Covid.

Thus they may have been less likely to go to the hospital at all, or be tested for Covid once they arrived. But put that aside.

Then the researchers decided to compare two groups – people who had definitely had Covid at least 90 days before and received another Covid test around the time of their hospitalization and people who had been fully vaccinated at least 90 days (but no more than 180 days) before and received a Covid test around the time of their hospitalization.

This choice is also bizarre. Those of you who have been paying attention will know that this date range is designed to make the vaccines look as good as possible by testing in the happy vaccine valley, the short period when mRNA vaccines are at maximum effectiveness (in fact, they are probably starting to lose it by the sixth month).

But more importantly, this criteria excluded the VAST majority of the people hospitalized with Covid-like illnesses or tested for Covid.

Only about 1,000 people out of the 200,000 people hospitalized for Covid-like illnesses over the eight months had a previous documented Covid infection.

(Given the fact that at least 20 percent of Americans, and probably more like 40 percent, had had Covid by the spring of 2021, this is a strikingly small percentage – and certainly doesn’t suggest long Covid is much of a threat.)

And only 89 of those 1,020 people with natural immunity tested positive.

In contrast, 324 out of the 6,328 vaccinated people who met the study’s criteria tested positive. But isn’t 324 more than 89? It sure is.

And the CDC didn’t have – or didn’t publish – figures on how many people were actually in the two groups – those with natural immunity and those infected.

Instead, it compared the PERCENTAGE OF POSITIVE TESTS in the two groups.

But why would the percentage of positive tests matter, when we don’t know how many people were actually at risk?

Great question.

But, amazingly, the statistical manipulation then got even worse.

The natural immunity group had an 8.7 percent positive test rate. The fully vaccinated group had a 5.1 percent positive test rate.

So the natural immunity group was about 1.7 times as likely to test positive. (1.7 * 5.1 = about 8.7.)With such a small number of people in the natural immunity group, that raw “rate ratio” may well have failed to reach statistical significance.

(We don’t know, because the CDC didn’t provide an unadjusted odds ratio with 95% boundaries – something I have never seen before in any paper.)

Instead, the CDC provided only a risk ratio that it had adjusted with a variety of factors, including “facility characteristics [and] sociodemographic characteristics.”

And finally, the CDC’s researchers got a number that they could publish – hospitalized people who had previously been infected were five times as likely to have a positive Covid test as people who were fully vaccinated.

Never mind that there were actually four times as many people in the second group. Science!

By the way, buried at the bottom of the report is some actual data. And it’s bad. The CDC divided the hospitalizations into pre- and post-Delta – January through June and June through August.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F30d5ffb7-4e0d-473d-ac0f-cc4cdc4cec9c_750x1334.png

Interestingly, the number of hospitalized people with natural immunity actually fell sharply over the summer, as Delta took off.

About 14 people per month were hospitalized in the winter and spring, compared to six per month from June through August. (Remember, this is a large sample, with hospitals in nine states.)’

But the number of VACCINATED people being hospitalized soared – from about three a month during the spring to more than 100 a month during the Delta period.

These vaccinated people still were less than 180 days from their second dose, so they should have been at or near maximum immunity – suggesting that Delta, and not the time effect, played an important role in the loss of protection the vaccine offered.

Now that’s a finding worth pursuing.

Don’t worry, the CDC will get right on it.

_________________________________________

There are over 1,700 comments, many worth reading, and too many to copy and paste here. Here are just the first few. You can find them at this link.


The American Academy of Pediatrics threatens to revoke my board certification. I rather accept that than let them commit child abuse on a massive scale all in the name of Marxism. 
My husband is a surgeon and he said he can not believe how corrupt the medical profession is. The FDA, Big Pharma and the CDC are not your friend, they never were. By the way Dr. Scott Gottlieb (another corrupt doctor) blocked me on Twitter. I guess the truth hurts.
You are spot on. Gottlieb has been corrupt for a long time. 
Never trust a doctor who speaks like a car salesman and gels his hair back. Creepy! Scott Gottlieb=FDA/Pfizer, Stephen Hahn = FDA/Moderna, Tony Fauci=NIH/Moderna. Shall we connect the dots?

Everyone needs to watch the videos of Event 201 held in NYC on October 18,2019. Readers digest version is the pandemic was planned for years.
Absolutely, event 201 was not a drill in case of a pandemic as they wanted the people to believe. They were telling you what was going to take place and how “they” are going to implement the said plan.
And they handed out spike protein toys as party favors. I have a picture of it.

Published by

Ungekrzte

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity ... the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This immaturity is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the [European] Enlightenment. "Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet [or vaccine], and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind ... should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts. "Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the immaturity which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas [e.g., Leftist ideology, identity politics] these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting immaturity. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from immaturity by cultivating their own minds." - Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment"

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s