How the CDC Fooled the World

DEBATES ON COVID - VACCINES, 17 Jan 2022

Swiss Policy Research - TRANSCEND Media Service

15 Jan 2022 – Throughout the pandemic, the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) published numerous false and misleading studies that bolstered national and international political goals and guided social media censorship. Three recent examples illustrate the issue.

CDC: Science or Politics? (Pat Cross)

1) Covid, kids and diabetes

A recent CDC study falsely suggested that covid increased the risk of type 1 or type 2 diabetes in children, see reviews here and here (the study didn’t consider obesity rates, for instance). The misleading CDC study was published in parallel to the ongoing covid child vaccination campaign.

In reality, it is covid vaccines that have been shown to cause, in some cases, elevated (pre-diabetic) blood sugar levels and life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis, while lockdowns and school closures have led to an unprecedented increase in childhood obesity (and possibly diabetes).

Chart: Vaccine-induced increase in blood glucose (case study):

Vaccine-induced hyperglycemic emergencies (Lee et al., JES)

2) Face masks in schools

In September, the CDC published a study falsely claiming that masks reduced coronavirus infections in schools, see reviews here and here (“profoundly misleading”, “very shaky science”).

In reality, face masks have had no impact at all on coronavirus infections; in fact, the official CDC school study from May 2021 confirmed this, but the result was never publicized.

More recently, the CDC has begun recommending N95/FFP2 masks to the general public, but data from Germany and Austria showed already in 2021 that these masks had no effect, either.

Chart: N95/FFP2 in Bavaria (Germany) without benefit:

Covid cases in the German state of Bavaria (FFP2/N95 mandate since 01/21) vs. Germany overall (RKI/ISC)

3) Natural immunity

In October, the CDC published a study falsely claiming that vaccine immunity was more robust than natural (i.e. infection-acquired) immunity, see reviews here and here (“highly flawed”).

In reality, natural immunity has been shown to be far more robust and durable than vaccine immunity, even against the omicron variant (albeit to a lesser extent).

Chart: Seven times lower infection risk in recovered (red) vs. vaccinated (grey) people:

Infection rates after recovery vs. vaccination (SPR based on Goldberg et al)

Bonus: Covid vaccines and kids

In December, the CDC director publicly stated that “no safety problems” had been seen during the vaccination of young children (5-11), whereas the CDC’s own VAERS reporting system showed already numerous cases of serious cardiovascular, neurological and allergic adverse events in this age group at very low risk of severe covid.

Chart: CDC director vs. VAERS data:

CDC: Director vs. VAERS (Prasad)

Conclusion

In conclusion, pandemic guidance by the US CDC, as well as media reporting and social media censorship relying on it, have often turned out to be misleading and unjustified. To evade political misinformation campaigns, citizens should always double-check official claims.

British Medical Journal: Facebook urged to act over incompetent “fact check”

Related

• The face mask folly in retrospect
• Covid vaccines: a reality check
• Coronavirus origins

See also

• Advanced Online Media Use
• Hose to escape Google
• Twitter: Singing in the Rain

__________________________________________

Swiss Policy Research, founded in 2016, is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media. SPR is composed of independent academics that for personal and professional reasons prefer to protect their identities, and receives no external funding; there are no financial sponsors or backers. Our articles have been published or shared by numerous independent media outlets and journalists, among them Julian Assange, and have been translated into more than two dozen languages.

Go to Original – swprs.org

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Comments are closed.