flyangler

How bad are CDC communications? So bad that the NY Times called them out

Rate this topic

21 posts in this topic

Posted (edited) · Report post

This is neither a poltical nor ideological discussion. It is about how bad the CDC is at numerical analysis and policy formation.

 

So bad that the NY Times, a venue that has been supportive of the CDC's advice over the past year, is calling the CDC out on gross incompetence. Worse, those in the media repeated the claim without actually thinking about what the number was, how it was derived and whether they should report it uncritically or not. 

 

The NY Times reportage is a bit milder than other news organizations, but I will provide it here nonetheless. Keep in mind what you read, the CDC did not lie, exactly, but exaggerated the risk of outside transmission by a factor ranging from 10X to 100X, in an effort to be "cautious". 

 

But keep in mind what this weak statistic did - it offered advocates of requiring the wearing masks outdoor "data" to support their argument. 

 

A Misleading C.D.C. Number

We have a special edition of the newsletter on a misleading C.D.C. statistic.

 

When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released new guidelines last month for mask wearing, it announced that “less than 10 percent” of Covid-19 transmission was occurring outdoors. Media organizations repeated the statistic, and it quickly became a standard description of the frequency of outdoor transmission.

 

 

 

But the number is almost certainly misleading.

 

It appears to be based partly on a misclassification of some Covid transmission that actually took place in enclosed spaces (as I explain below). An even bigger issue is the extreme caution of C.D.C. officials, who picked a benchmark — 10 percent — so high that nobody could reasonably dispute it.

 

That benchmark “seems to be a huge exaggeration,” as Dr. Muge Cevik, a virologist at the University of St. Andrews, said. In truth, the share of transmission that has occurred outdoors seems to be below 1 percent and may be below 0.1 percent, multiple epidemiologists told me. The rare outdoor transmission that has happened almost all seems to have involved crowded places or close conversation.

 

Saying that less than 10 percent of Covid transmission occurs outdoors is akin to saying that sharks attack fewer than 20,000 swimmers a year. (The actual worldwide number is around 150.) It’s both true and deceiving.

 

This isn’t just a gotcha math issue. It is an example of how the C.D.C. is struggling to communicate effectively, and leaving many people confused about what’s truly risky. C.D.C. officials have placed such a high priority on caution that many Americans are bewildered by the agency’s long list of recommendations. Zeynep Tufekci of the University of North Carolina, writing in The Atlantic, called those recommendations “simultaneously too timid and too complicated.”

 

They continue to treat outdoor transmission as a major risk. The C.D.C. says that unvaccinated people should wear masks in most outdoor settings and vaccinated people should wear them at “large public venues”; summer camps should require children to wear masks virtually “at all times.”

Edited by flyangler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same NYT  that had a headline the other day saying TX had joined FL in moving to limit voting rights.....by requiring ID?  That one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 mins ago, HopHead said:

The same NYT  that had a headline the other day saying TX had joined FL in moving to limit voting rights.....by requiring ID?  That one?

One and the same NYT, which makes their point this out about the CDC all the more interesting. It would be like Terri Mae saying something positive about a thread in the assbaby, not impossible but improbable in the extreme. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CDC clearly has become politicized. They have a conflict within. They can’t produce information without considering the political ramifications of it. Good forbid they release a statement that could go along with a Republican take on things. 
 

that simple fact means they are disqualified as a reliable source of unbiased information. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 mins ago, ErikT said:

The CDC clearly has become politicized. They have a conflict within. They can’t produce information without considering the political ramifications of it. Good forbid they release a statement that could go along with a Republican take on things. 
 

that simple fact means they are disqualified as a reliable source of unbiased information. 
 

 

Or just plain incompetent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 mins ago, jmlandru said:

Dude, really can you go to the PG with this? It’s depressing. 

how do you figure?

 

the tavern is currently littered with Covid discussions as well as those complaining about masks. the CDC used some linguistic trickery, or chicanery (take your pick), to provide a basis to support states that want to continue to mandate that you, me, we have to wear a mask while outdoors, walking, running, biking, fishing, etc. 

 

you think this is not of general interest? you think this guy should be wearing a layer of neoprene covering his face while fishing from the bank of that lake? Never mind that neoprene offers little actual virus-blocking when used as a mask material. 

 

Slow Motion of Elderly Man Wearing Face Mask While Fishing on a Lake by  sevillagroupstudio

 

This is a campaign from the State of Montana from last year, under the former governor. His predecessor, a guy i know personally, tossed the existing outdoor mask effort as soon as he was sworn in. 

 

montana-1.jpg?w=788

 

The CDC statement supported arguments in favor of such nonsense. Credit to the Times for pointing it out as a vast exaggeration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 mins ago, RL Bucktails said:

Or just plain incompetent.  

Hanlon's razor states: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s in their interest to keep this virus front and center!

  You would think they would inform the public that Driving around alone in the the car Does not require a mask. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Most CDC executives where or are going to be Big Pharma exec's. It's been a turn style of unethical standards regarding executive and higher management employment for decades. Nothing new. Same for NIH and NIAID. 

If you guys have had family members as sick as mine have been over the last 17 years, you might have come across some of the complete disregard for ethics and standards that the CDC, NIH, and NIAID. I have known about Fauci and some of his lackeys' for almost 2 decades. He is one serious POS since the 80's.

Good for the NY Times. It won't change anything though. 

BTW most original data from the NIH and NIAID has been scrubbed. The SARS and MERS data is different from years past. Trust me, my wife and I have seen the difference from today (April 2020) and 2009.   

 

 

Edited by Nite_Bite_00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 mins ago, cheech said:

It’s in their interest to keep this virus front and center!

  You would think they would inform the public that Driving around alone in the the car Does not require a mask. :ph34r:

 

or how to keep your immune system boosted and strong. Nothing, control is there end game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

10 hours ago, jmlandru said:

Dude, really can you go to the PG with this? It’s depressing. 

here is a option for you, don't read it. 

Edited by Nite_Bite_00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cheech said:

It’s in their interest to keep this virus front and center!

  You would think they would inform the public that Driving around alone in the the car Does not require a mask. :ph34r:

It doesn't but see them with asks on driving alone still makes me laugh and question just how did that person survive to the age where they could drive legally.

Cabo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jmlandru said:

Dude, really can you go to the PG with this? It’s depressing. 

It’s not political. Stop being a big baby. 
 

I bet you want to work from home another year. 
 

Don’t make me come down to Philthy and drag you out of the house without a mask. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nite_Bite_00 said:

 

or how to keep your immune system boosted and strong. Nothing, control is there end game. 

The NIH published the definitive paper on keeping your immune system ready and prepared against covid many months ago. Even recommending Ivermectin. Just because you didn’t read it doesn’t mean they didn’t publish it :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.