Cherry Picked Data Will Persist As COVID-19 Reports Continue

Isn’t it interesting that COVID-19 restrictions are still being talked about at the same time that President Joe Biden’s administration is trying to get rid of Title 42? It’s difficult to argue both at the same time.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is now citing the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) and reported, “one in five COVID-19 survivors aged 18-64 years and one in four survivors aged greater than or equal to 65 years experienced at least one incident condition that might attributable to previous COVID-19.”

With lingering symptoms of COVID-19, there’s a high likelihood that prevention measures will persist. The excuse will turn from immediate risk of harm to long term risk of harm.

The report also concluded that “Implementation of COVID-19 prevention strategies, as well as routine assessment for post-COVID conditions among persons who survive COVID-19, is critical to reducing the incidence and impact of post-COVID conditions, particularly, among adults aged greater than or equal to 65 years.”

The focus can’t be on long-term symptoms when considering lockdowns or other policies, it has to be the overall risk involved and mortality rate. Not everyone is buying the new claim. Dr. Vinay Prasad said that the report was “embarrassing” and didn’t account for “increased diagnostic labeling/ascertainment bias.” Prasad also said that the federal government should be embarrassed for tweeting an infographic associated with the study.

Dr. Adam Cifu tweeted that the study “did not pass the sniff test” based on his own experience with post-COVID patients.

The report also outlined that there were 26 different conditions that recovered patients suffered from and they varied by age. The largest increase in risk for those who recovered from COVID-19 were acute pulmonary embolism and respiratory symptoms. Younger patients had long lasting smell and taste issues and those 65 and older had renal failure and thromboembolic events.

At the same time, the National Institute of Health published a conflicting study that says there are no long term post-COVID symptoms for people who are 6 weeks outside of infection. The study also found that those who are more susceptible were women and people with anxiety disorders.

The author of the study said, “Exploratory studies found no evidence of persistent viral infection, autoimmunity, or abnormal immune activation in participants with PASC. Abnormal findings on physical examination and diagnostic testing were uncommon.”

Which study do you think the federal and state government will use to try to push more “public health” measures? From the beginning, all governments have cherry picked data that supports their narrative. There’s no evidence that it will subside anytime soon.