Trump aides review CDC coronavirus reports to better align with president's upbeat messaging: report

Fox News ^ | September 12, 2020 | Marisa Schultz

[familyop]

The president's political aides have successfully demanded to review and, in some cases, modify weekly Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports on the coronavirus to better align scientific reports with Trump's upbeat messages, Politico reported. Michael Caputo,...spokesperson at the Department of Health and Human Services this spring, and his team have led the effort to review the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports...

[familyop]

Democrats are making a big fuss about it, but it makes sense. It's important that government information on the epidemic is clear and cohesive. Opening the schools might also be wise, as those of you thinking the matter through will understand. Be reasonably smart, safe and take care of yourselves.

[no_go_lie]

How many Democrats at the CDC worked on and prepared those reports, twisting and slanting them to benefit the DNC and Biden?

[amorphous]

Thanks for posting. I saw a change in the data once HHS got involved. The dems will use it against him. Trump should have taken a hands off approach until after the election - if there even is one.

[DesertRhino]

Oh my God! That maniac President Trump actually thinks he’s in charge of the executive branch and it’s agencies! What a tyrant!

[Balding_Eagle]

Trump should have taken a hands off approach until after the election - if there even is one.

And that's exactly why he didn't take a hands off approach.

Hands off is the George W Bush approach and should never be used.

[amorphous]

What has been gained?

[Balding_Eagle]

I will (with amazement) assume you are serious.

There are many things already gained, one that comes to mind;

“Mr President, how can you say such things when your own CDC doesn’t back you at all, in fact here is what they just said, and it’s 180 degrees different than your assertion......................”

[FreeReign]

Thanks for posting. I saw a change in the data once HHS got involved. The dems will use it against him. Trump should have taken a hands off approach until after the election - if there even is one.

Describe specifically what changes were made and specifically why they were inappropriate.

Until you can do that, this complaint appears to be more bull poop.

[FreeReign]

Democrats are making a big fuss about it, but it makes sense. It's important that government information on the epidemic is clear and cohesive.

The CDC works for the president. Perhaps the president thought that the CDC wasn't making things "clear and cohesive".

Why would you think otherwise?

[amorphous]

I noticed an immediate delay in getting the data and a drop in case numbers but no corresponding decrease in fatalities after the usual lag.

[aimhigh]

Every Administration does this.

[familyop]

"Why would you think otherwise?"

I said that it makes sense. You wrote that I'm thinking otherwise. That's weird.

[familyop]

Some government employees were posting information that made it too easy for dishonest Internet propagandists to misconstrue and mislead the general public.

That’s the problem that’s being solved. Yes, Democrats are also misconstruing the effort to correct the problem. That’s what they do.

[familyop]

One example of what’s being cleared up is the recent gush of crazy talk about the death rate. Shady characters saw some web page text that wasn’t clear enough and was easy to misconstrue. That was before HHS got involved, which is only happening now.

[FreeReign]

Sorry, I read your first sentence too quickly.

There are too many articles and comments of interest, and not enough time to read them without skimming, is my excuse. ;)

[amorphous]

I use World of Meter’s. I tried going directly to the CDC as a source, but they wanted a written paper about what I would be using the data for and about $6,000 for access to it.

[familyop]

That’s okay. Thanks.

[familyop]

World of Meters is good. There’s a map at Reuters that gets more behind on publishing data in some places than others.

https://graphics.reuters.com/HEALTH-CORONAVIRUS-USA/0100B5K8423/index.html

The following is good. Don’t let the big numbers or ethnic group turn you away. They use software to gather data that’s more directly from sources around the country. Their data is used by other offices including the CDC. It all comes out on other sites about three days later, give or take. It’s administered by Chinese-Americans.

https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en

I find some of the state sites to be best for those states, and most importantly, for more specific data that yields insights into the disease and how it spreads in subgroups. The data comes from counties and cities. Here’s one of those.

https://mophep.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=8e01a5d8d8bd4b4f85add006f9e14a9d

[amorphous]

Thanks for the links.

I agree many of the states have more accurate data. I don't have the time to pull from each, and I think WorldofMeters.Info gets their data from the source closest to the origin anyway. WOM is the data source for my projections:

•Blue line represents projected death totals.
•Yellow line is actual death totals based on WorldofMeters.info data.
•Purple line is actual daily cases offset by 14 days.
•Red line represents projected daily deaths.
•Black extension lines are trend lines.