Image 01 Image 03

Experts Blast CDC for Failing to Publish Critical Covid-Related Data It Collected

Experts Blast CDC for Failing to Publish Critical Covid-Related Data It Collected

CDC failed to publish a tranche of their data – omitting the impact on those aged 18-49, who are least likely to benefit from boosters.

One of the challenges of covering the coronavirus pandemic from the beginning was trying to get complex data to analyze.

Scientists could collect some and publish studies. But if their conclusions did not match the current narrative, their work was deemed “misinformation” and suppressed.

Now comes news that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has collected data on hospitalizations for covid in the country down by age, race, and vaccination status for over a year.

Yet, it has not made most of the information public.

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.

The agency recently debuted a dashboard of wastewater data on its website that will be updated daily and might provide early signals of an oncoming surge of Covid cases. Some states and localities had been sharing wastewater information with the agency since the start of the pandemic, but it had never before released those findings.

Two full years into the pandemic, the agency leading the country’s response to the public health emergency has published only a tiny fraction of the data it has collected, several people familiar with the data said.

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.

Data, shmata. When you have vaccines to promote and new pharmaceuticals to sell, there is no need to offer the public details on actual vaccine efficacy or numbers that allow people to conduct a personal risk assessment.

Multiple outside public health experts blasted the CDC’s slow release of information.

Epidemiologist Jessica Malaty Rivera was on the team that ran the Covid Tracking Project, an independent project that collected and published pandemic data until March 2021. She commented that they had been “begging for that sort of granularity of data for two years.”

Rivera was also dismissive of the CDC’s excuse about trying to prevent the data from being misinterpreted. “We are at a much greater risk of misinterpreting the data with data vacuums, than sharing the data with proper science, communication and caveats,” she said.

Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics’s Committee on Infectious Diseases, expressed frustration over the difficulty of obtaining CDC data on children who were hospitalized with Covid and had other medical conditions.

“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.”

Paul Offit, a vaccine expert and adviser to the Food and Drug Administration, also derided the agency‘s stranglehold on information.

He noted that, because the CDC had not published the information, American scientists were forced to rely on Israeli data.

‘There’s no reason that they should be better at collecting and putting forth data than we were,’ he said.

‘The CDC is the principal epidemiological agency in this country, and so you would like to think the data came from them.’

There will be many shocking and disturbing conclusions when these numbers are thoroughly reviewed.

Meanwhile, here is an excellent summary related to godlet Dr. Anthony Fauci’s pronouncements on vaccine efficacy.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


What is the reason they didn’t publish the COVID data they collected? Could it be:

1. It consists of gibberish
2. It is filled with lies and exaggerations
3. They are afraid they will be laughed at
4. Walt Disney has the copyright on Mickey Mouse

    CommoChief in reply to Peabody. | February 22, 2022 at 6:01 pm

    None of the above.

    The missing data sets almost certainly show that the need for vax and efficacy of vax are vastly lower than we have been told. It likely demonstrates that CDC has known for some time but refused to state publicly that generally speaking the severe negative effects of contracting Covid are confined to the elderly, those with significant health issues and the immune compromised. That the younger, healthier working age population had almost no risk and healthy children practically zero risk.

    They won’t release it because it will confirm, in one data set, that which the public has had to infer and piece together from multiple data sets. The CDC can’t afford the hit to it’s prestige; they are wisely keeping silent as long as they can. Imagine if the data confirms what the skeptics believed. The Covid karens will lose their minds; look at how much they oppose an end to mask mandates, not masks just mandates, for some perspective as to their reaction if St Fauchi admits he was selling snake oil.

    Idonttweet in reply to Peabody. | February 22, 2022 at 6:13 pm

    When you suppress data and findings because they don’t support a political agenda, it stops being science and becomes propaganda.

    CDC = Centers for Deplorables Control?

    Dimsdale in reply to Peabody. | February 23, 2022 at 8:27 am

    You don’t hide something if you don’t have something to hide.

Highly effective…at what?

    caseoftheblues in reply to Dathurtz. | February 22, 2022 at 7:38 pm

    Exactly….since it doesn’t stop you from getting it, getting hospitalized with it or spreading it. Highly effective at making a bunch of people really rich….maybe?

      Vaccines (Especially these.) have a limited effectiveness and are best for SOME people.

      They don’t want only the limited groups (Like me, over 50, Type 2 Diabetic) to use them and then some in those groups to ignore it (They will.) or their “Just in case” shotgun approach to be shown as mostly useless.

      You are under 40, close to a normal weight? You don’t need a shot. In fact, due to the shifting antigens of Coronaviruses that shift outside the vaccines, you catching it now and becoming Naturally Immune is better for you.

      If at a later age, obese, Diabetic, other comorbidities (Like COPD, or cancer treatment lowering immunity.) your natural immunity PLUS a shot will protect you much better in fact.

      Of course you sell a whole lot more expensive vaccines by giving it to everyone. Even children who DO NOT need it. There is that motivation. You retire from the CDC/Government Teat, you might get a better job at a drug company if you helped them make a billion dollars profit or so.

      Truth is most of the shots given are a waste of time, and really just harmless. Unlike the “Government killing people/Fertility Curtailment” tinfoil hat conspiracy folks say. Actual data would undermine sales and government pushing things later that really needs to be done. As if the truth leaking out (It always does eventually….) won’t undermine government/medical establishment credibility so people ignore almost everything they say in the future or something.

    Peabody in reply to Dathurtz. | February 23, 2022 at 10:02 am

    Duh, I dunno.

Add this to the Pfizer’s foot dragging over releasing the research studies related to their vaccines. What exactly are these people hiding? It must be really good right?

Hey, I’m sure they’ll release the data in, say, 75 years.
Just to flatten the curvature of space.


I miss it so much

Refusing to answer a question IS an answer.

At this point I literally don’t know why anybody trusts the CDC.

In Oct 2021, the CDC published and promoted the Kentucky study that claimed an unvaxed previously infected individual was 2.6x more likley to catch covid a second time than a vaxed previously infected individual.

Major problems with that study
1) the period covered was march – august 2021 so it omitted any with a vax older than 6months
2) the used an invalid denominator in the equation
3) They used a bogus / non revelvent “control group”
4) failed to use the entire population of previously infected which they had the data

I emailed the CDC and to the authors of the study with the Kentucky department of health inquiring to get clarification of their math, but with total of 4 emails , never received a follow up response.

Hope that explains why I lost faith in the CDC

I had similar issue with the Kansas mask mandate v non mandate mask county study done by the KU policy group.

which covered the period from July to sept 2020? the study findings were that the non mask counties had a 30%+ greater infection rate.
I obtained the raw data which showed the gap had nearly closed at the end of the study period.

I emailed the study authors requesting any information of follow up study for the -4-5 weeks post the end of original study.

got no response to multiple emails

the reason became evident when others did follow up study showing slightly lower infection rates in the non mask mandated counties.

CDC, Center for Deception and Control. The entity is a propaganda outfit whose only purpose has become unreliable if not maliciously misleading.

Fauxch needs to end up like Mussolini.

Domain experts who are not empathetic with the consensus would undoubtedly misunderstand, misinterpret the plain data of the multi-trimester trial(s).

They’re also failing to publish the safety data, not that they’re really bothering to collect it. Given how many hospital groups appear to have a formal or informal policy that adverse events must not be reported I suspect pressure from CDC to adopt such policies.

They haven’t release any data except when they lost law suits. But by law, they are require to release the data before the vaccine is approved.

CDCs corruption and incompetence have been obvious since well before COVID. The agency should be abolished. Same for FDA. Both agencies exercise a degree of corrupt authority that does far more harm than good.

    MattMusson in reply to billdyszel. | February 23, 2022 at 8:50 am

    I was at a meeting on Sunday with my county’s top infectious disease doctor. He said out loud that he used to believe anything the CDC said was golden. Now, he does not take anything the CDC says at face value.

The last thing they want is for people to think for themselves.

    Dimsdale in reply to mailman. | February 23, 2022 at 8:31 am

    And the maleducation by the government schools (and others) makes sure of that. Critical thinking was buried by mindless, racist, critical race theory.

Gee, imagine that… hiding the data.

Now why on earth would they want to do that?


The list of who should be fired is getting longer every day. The job of the CDC shouldn’t be political, yet it is. Anyone, guilty of making it political, should be fired today and keep firing until you get responsible people who will resign and make trouble for anyone trying to make it political again.

    Ironclaw in reply to bflat879. | February 23, 2022 at 9:08 am

    Fired is much too good for them.

    henrybowman in reply to bflat879. | February 23, 2022 at 12:30 pm

    Unfortunately, the pendulum is swinging the other way.

    For 20 years or so, after CDC Director Mark Rosenberg made several public statements flatly declaring that guns should be banned, the fedguv had a legislative prohibition (the Dickey Amendment) on the CDC spending money to promote gun control. Not to study gun violence, mind you, only to promote gun control.

    The usual Karens moaned and screamed (and not in a good way) that the CDC was being forbidden to study gun violence (i.e., they lied), until Democrats again regained a hard lock on Congress and the WH, and the prohibition was removed about two years ago, at which point the CDC got into the gun-banning business once more.

    Curiously, the lie was obvious to anyone who researched it, because in 2013, Obama tasked the NIH/CDC to study the cost/benefit issues of guns (illegal violence vs. self-defense), without violating that law in the least, and there was no pushback from anyone on either side of the issue.

    (Except from Obama, when he discovered that the study — like all previous studies — proved that the self-defense benefits of guns far outweighed the downside.)

    nordic_prince in reply to bflat879. | February 23, 2022 at 2:13 pm

    Fired? Hell, the entire CDC needs to be deep-sixed – along with every other three-letter agency.

Settle down, kids. The FDA said they’ll share their (molested) data pertaining to Pfizer vaccine approval with the general public…in 2076. #HoldYourHorses

Assume they will do to you, all that but which you prevent them from doing. Nothing less.

When one lie is told, why does anyone believe anything further? The coincidence that anything said after that point is truth is merely coincidence.

The same is true for that which they got “wrong.” Even more so for that which they got wrong, but proceeded with the arrogance and forcefulness in course correction as if that error were an anomaly never to be repeated.

As Canada has shown us, after 3 weeks, this stopped being about the virus. I’m being generous and forgiving of government in the timeline of that assessment.

They may as well just give a full admission that their entire narrative has been nothing but BS. There is no reason to hide this data unless it contradicts every but of the fascist garbage they’ve been pushing.