Posted on Mar 17, 2022
The CDC Quietly Updates Data on Child COVID Deaths
569
33
14
10
10
0
I really, really, really would like to be able to trust my government.
The CDC Quietly Updates Data on Child COVID Deaths
Posted from townhall.comPosted in these groups: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Government
Government
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 4
4
4
0
As for everything context is always everything. They don't give us the honest numbers by age group (needs to be every ten years), vaccinee and booster status to support their conclusions. What is the CDC afraid of? Then they wonder why we don't trust our political elite.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
A change of 416 out of 779,921 deaths that represents a .005% revision, well within a acceptable margin of accounting error. So I ask you, who is more trustworthy? Those who correct their mistakes, or those that refuse to admit they made any?
(4)
(0)
CWO4 Terrence Clark
Might want to take a refresher course in Spreadsheet 101. That's 416 (or 418) reduction from a 1339 base.
(2)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
CWO4 Terrence Clark - Original statement considered all deaths as the base, but fair enough. Even a correction of 70,000 deaths out of 960,000 is only a 7% correction. Outside a margin of error, but considering the difficulty of gathering, assembling, and normalizing data on the scale being collected... Regardless, I tend to trust those who own up and correct their mistakes.
(2)
(0)
CWO4 Terrence Clark
MSgt Steve Sweeney
Couple of thoughts. Lots of our taxpayer monies pay lots of beauracrats to simply do their job. Their job is to gather, assemble, etc. I can hardly image sitting in the Division President's office saying "Dan, I made a 24% clerical error negotiating that Food Clerks contract but I think we'll make it up on the Teamsters negotiation. I only made a 7% rounding error on their contract". Think I'd still be camping in our raggedy old tent. Also, this Walensky has been dissemmbling since she was appointed. There is a tidy legal term, "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”. A Latin term which means "false in one thing, false in everything." It in fact is a legal principle in common law that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not at all credible to testify about any other matter.
In fairness to Walensky, I've been a Covi-skeptic since prior to her turn at the helm.
Couple of thoughts. Lots of our taxpayer monies pay lots of beauracrats to simply do their job. Their job is to gather, assemble, etc. I can hardly image sitting in the Division President's office saying "Dan, I made a 24% clerical error negotiating that Food Clerks contract but I think we'll make it up on the Teamsters negotiation. I only made a 7% rounding error on their contract". Think I'd still be camping in our raggedy old tent. Also, this Walensky has been dissemmbling since she was appointed. There is a tidy legal term, "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”. A Latin term which means "false in one thing, false in everything." It in fact is a legal principle in common law that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not at all credible to testify about any other matter.
In fairness to Walensky, I've been a Covi-skeptic since prior to her turn at the helm.
(2)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
CWO4 Terrence Clark - You might have a point if contract negotiations on projected numbers set by contract negotiators and nation wide data collection from hundreds of disparate sources were anything alike, but they are not. It seems that you are very selective about applying your "false in one thing, false in everything" principle considering your support for the guy that wanted to reduce testing to improve the numbers, and considering your selection of source material. It would appear when people are telling you what you want to hear and what you have been conditioned to believe, that principle goes right out the window. But I suppose you are free to keep swallowing the bullshit they are feeding you.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google