CDC Caught Red Handed Fudging the Numbers on Gun Violence
Voters depend on the accuracy of the information provided to them by journalists, researchers, academics, and government agencies. In the last decade, as more and more people get their news online, the internet has given us critical access to alternative sources of information.
Now we know that these alternative sources are indispensable- because we cannot trust the institutions that have traditionally provided us with the information we need to make informed choices and to cast intelligent votes. The mainstream media’s handling of President Trump and Russian collusion is a perfect example of this. If you’ve only listened to MSNBC or CNN for the last two years, you’d be convinced President Trump was guilty of colluding with a foreign country to win the 2016 election.
The CDC has long been a go-to for information about all matters regarding far-reaching health and safety concerns. But in recent years, we found that much of what they do is tobacco science, based on biased studies fueled by sketchy funding models.
As it relates to the subject of gun violence statistics, CDC bias could not be worse. We’ve seen wildly inconsistent results from comparative studies of FBI and CDC research. For 2017, the FBI claims that just under 11,000 homicides were carried out using firearms. The CDC’s firearms violence study from the same year sites just over 14,500 firearms-related homicides. That’s a difference of 33%, a wild variation.
So, how do they arrive at such drastically different results? Well, the FBI’s report is based on data reported by law enforcement agencies all over the country, but not all law enforcement entities report the same way or on the same things.
What makes the CDC’s report different is the fact that their conclusions are based on the reporting of emergency departments. The CDC collects data from every hospital across the nation while law enforcement does not deliver the same number of accounts. So the CDC has a much wider information dragnet to derive their conclusions from. That all sounds well and good, but there’s more.
Their reports are based on a small, cherry-picked number of hospitals. The CDC does not deliver unfiltered statistical results based on all the reports they receive. Rather, they choose 60 hospitals from all across the nation and extrapolate their final result from there. In other words, they choose the hospitals that look the way they want the whole country to look and base their final numbers on those hospitals.
This violates the scientific method in two ways. One, it draws a broad conclusion from a small sample. And two, it selects the samples it wants for use in delivering their final results.
If this were to be reported widely, it would be a major embarrassment. The CDC, and organizations like it are expected to adhere to a high level of scientific integrity. Instead, their research on gun violence is about as good as a poll conducted by MSNBC where they call 100 housewives in San Francisco and ask their opinion. That is essentially what the CDC is doing, and they are doing it intentionally to make it look like we have a 33% bigger problem with gun violence than we actually do.
It’s called lying- and their motivation can only be explained by political bias.
This isn’t the first time the CDC has been caught lying. Dr. Andrew Wakefield has been dragged through the mud for revealing the deceptive reporting methods of the CDC in regard to vaccine safety. What he discovered was that they were suppressing and disposing of data that showed some vaccines were dangerous. Since then, the media, and the medical establishment has been desperate to defame him.
So what we see here is that the CDC is making guns look more dangerous than they are while making vaccines look safer than they are. This kind of pro-establishment/anti-citizen bias is precisely the sort of thing that should disqualify an entity from any claims of serving the public good.
One of the questions we asked ourselves while compiling evidence for this report was, why do they take so many samples from emergency rooms if they only use the data from a small number of them? The answer is that they are choosing the data given by emergency rooms that see the most gun-related fatalities.
Worse still, the hospitals they choose change each year. Sure, a few are consistently represented. Emergency rooms in Chicago, Oakland, and East LA are always included in CDC’s annual gun violence extrapolations. Their secondary choices change depending on which cities had the most gun violence that year.
So you can see that while they are taking a small sample, they are not being lazy. They are doing everything they can to get the worst numbers from the worst data available in their effort to make gun ownership into the boogie man they want it to be. In other words, they lie.