Media coverage of the Delta variant has bordered on hysteria, a tactic to support the government's vaccination mandates. But as often is the case, the evidence underpinning the policy does not match the media hype because the government's data on the variant is unreliable and lacks scientific rigor.
The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) has been called out by scientists for its tracking on two issues: Its figures on the number of variant cases and data on so-called Delta breakthrough infections. These are not trivial matters given the administration decisions on vaccines and masks.
Most scientists who have weighed-in agree the Delta variant spreads significantly faster than regular COVID, or what scientists refer to as Alpha, the original virus. However, many take issue with the data produced by the CDC during the explosion of the new variant.
Before addressing the variant data, here is the CDC's data on the number of cases and fatalities since July 18, when the variant first made its appearance in the United States, until August 24:
- 3,865,802 cases
- 30,971 deaths
- Fatality rate: 0.81%
On the death percentage, note the media has not included this data in most of its coverage. For perspective, a foreign concept for the media, during the height of the pandemic in the U.S. the fatality rate reached a zenith of 2.23% during periods of skyrocketing cases.
In examining the data, the CDC cannot with any specificity report how many of recent cases are attributed to the Delta variant. The reason has not been fully explained to the public. As Dr. Stephen Morse, professor of Epidemiology at the Columbia University Medical Center, told Reuters:
"Genomic sequencing is the definitive method for identifying variants. As of now, it's also the main way that new variants are identified when they appear."
To understand why the point is relevant, consider that many local and state health departments do not have genomic sequencing equipment, sophisticated devices that are capable to determining the entire genetic make-up of a specific organism or cell type. These machines often cost $1 million or more.
Current tests for COVID do not screen for a particular variant. Hence, the CDC cannot calculate the number of Delta variant cases with finite accuracy. Instead, the agency conducts its own genomic testing on 750 viral samples weekly submitted by state and local health departments.
That is a small sample size (0.074%) of the more than 1,101,265 COVID cases reported by the CDC in a single week in late August. Based on the samples, the CDC estimated in August that 80% of new cases were the Delta variant. That falls short of confirmed Delta variant cases. It is merely a projection.
It is also important to understand the CDC does not disclose the states or cities where the samples are drawn. No one knows if samples are an accurate geographic representation. Additionally, case reporting and fatalities are based on voluntary cooperation by local and state health agencies.
The CDC should be transparent in its reporting on the Delta variant. CDC percentages for Delta variant cases should be issued with this caveat: These figures are only an estimate based on a limited number of samples. No one knows how many Delta cases are among the 3.8 million since July 18.
The second issue with CDC data concerns so-called breakthrough cases, incidences of fully vaccinated people being infected with the Delta variant. The agency's initial embrace of this theory is based on an outbreak in a single Massachusetts county in July.
Of 499 cases in Barnstable County, 74% occurred among fully vaccinated people, according to a study, which has not been peer-reviewed. Genomic sequencing confirmed 133 were infected with the Delta variant. Most did not require hospital care, but among five who did, only four were fully vaccinated.
This study, published by the CDC, was used by the agency to revise masking guidance to include fully vaccinated Americans. The agency, however, acknowledges on its website that the Massachusetts data is "insufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness" of vaccines.
The Kaiser Family Foundation did its own analysis of limited state data and reported that the rate of breakthrough cases among fully vaccinated Americans is below one percent, ranging from 0.01% in Connecticut to 0.54% in Arkansas. KFF calls breakthrough cases "extremely rare."
The number of deaths among breakthrough cases, according to the foundation's analysis of state data, is "effectively zero." It begs the question: Is the CDC advice for fully vaccinated Americans to wear masks based on science? No one is allowed to question the CDC rationale for fear of censorship.
Before the Barnstable County data, inexplicably the CDC announced on May 1 that it was halting tracking of all breakthrough cases, focusing instead on those patients requiring hospitalization. The official reason was not to burden healthcare systems.
Harvard Health called the decision "surprising" and added the cases tracked from January through April of 2021 show "no clear pattern that could advance our understanding of why they (breakthrough cases) occur." Then Harvard adds this clincher on its website:
"There could be other reasons for the CDC's decision. First there's the challenge of messaging around encouraging people to get vaccinated. Focusing on breakthrough cases sends a misleading impression that vaccines aren't effective. This might complicate efforts to battle vaccine hesitancy."
An impartial review of facts does not support the alarm about breakthrough cases. This is not rigorous scientific investigation. Obviously, the media has tacit endorsement for its overblown reporting on the Delta virus. Otherwise, the CDC and the administration would push back on the coverage.
The Washington Post published an article on August 19 quoting" senior administration officials and outside experts" about the "growing frustration with the CDC's slow and siloed approach to sharing data, which prevented officials across government from getting real-time information about how the Delta variant was bearing down on the U.S."
There should be no doubt the CDC has let down the country and the thousands of doctors, nurses and hospitals grabbling with the surge in cases, whether Delta or the Alpha COVID virus. The frontline health care professionals need factual, accurate data to prepare for an onslaught of cases.
The administration should demand an overhaul at the Centers for Disease and Control immediately, including replacing the director. If the world has learned no other lesson, it should be this: Without scientific knowledge and meticulous data, efforts to tame the virus will be hindered.
No comments:
Post a Comment