Aug. 15, 2023 - Epoch Times
10:28
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Good evening, and right before we dive into the main topic, I'd like to quickly mention, yet again, that on the back end of this YouTube channel, I was recently informed that the system decided to delete my episode, which exposed how the CDC was collecting the cell phone tracking data of 55 million Americans in order to see whether compliance with the mandates was effective at curbing COVID. And even though I appealed that decision, well, that went absolutely nowhere. | |
| Some 20-year-old with blue hair and a nose ring over in Silicon Valley, they decided that people across the country should not have access to that report, even though that report of mine was based exclusively on documents that we were able to obtain from within the CDC itself. | |
| Very cool. | |
| And so listen, if you are just as sick and tired of all this censorship as I am on this platform, well, you're in luck, because the Epoch Times has recently extended its awesome sale and subscriptions, just 25 cents a week for the whole year, which, if you do the math, works itself out to just be a dollar a month. | |
| And so if you've been on the fence about subscribing to the Epoch Times, maybe you go to the website, you're hit with a paywall, you don't like it, but you know 100% that you're fed up with this nonstop censorship on this platform as well as many others, and you're looking for a source of honest news, Well, perhaps take this sale as an opportunity to try the Epic Times out for yourself. | |
| I'll throw a link down into the description box below. | |
| It'll be right there at the top. | |
| You can click on that link and head on over to the sale page where you can try the Epic Times yourself for just a single dollar a month. | |
| I'm sure you'll love it. | |
| Now, diving into today's main topic, which I hope doesn't also get censored by the platform, It turns out that the COVID super-spreader event over at the CDC headquarters was actually significantly larger than previously reported. | |
| Because you see, despite the nonstop messaging that's been coming out of the CDC, every once in a while, there's an event that pops a hole in their well-crafted narrative. | |
| With one of the most recent and perhaps most ridiculous examples being the CDC event that was held over by the CDC headquarters, which experienced a massive COVID outbreak, despite the fact that nearly everyone in attendance was vaccinated. | |
| But as ridiculous as that was in and of itself, it gets even wilder. | |
| Because here at the Epoch Times, we were able to successfully file a Freedom of Information Act request through which we obtained internal documents from within the CDC itself, and they showed something surprising. | |
| They showed that for one, the outbreak was significantly larger than the CDC had previously reported, and that secondly, despite what the CDC said, people were actually hospitalized. | |
| They said no one was hospitalized, but that wasn't true. | |
| However, in order to explain what's really going on here, let's start at the very beginning. | |
| About three months ago, there was a conference held for staff members of the CDC over at a hotel in Atlanta, Georgia. | |
| It was called the 2023 Annual Epidemic Intelligence Service Conference. | |
| And here was how the Washington Post described this conference as well as who was actually in attendance. | |
| The CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service officers and alumni, the disease detectives deployed to identify and fight outbreaks, met on April 24th through the 27th at an Atlanta hotel. | |
| The conference drew 1,800 in-person attendees, the first in-person Epidemic Intelligence Service gathering in four years. | |
| Like many conferences, it was crowded, with much face-to-face contact, many events held in small rooms and lots of socializing. | |
| And so, in total, 1,800 CDC staff members wound up going to this event. | |
| And the specific staff members who went were exactly the people at the CDC who were part of the Epidemic Intelligence Service. | |
| They're the ones who worked to get people vaccinated and track down the pathway of spread for COVID-19 and other viruses. | |
| They're basically these guys right here, who investigate different viral outbreaks across the country. | |
| Now, taking a quick glance at the agenda for the event, there were sessions titled Monkeypox, Public Health Surveillance, Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, COVID-19 Surveillance and Response, and so on and so forth. | |
| So you kind of get a picture of the type of event that this was. | |
| However, on April 27th, which happened to be the very last day of the conference, well, something unusual happened. | |
| Several of the people in attendance began notifying the event organizers that they had tested positive for COVID-19. | |
| And naturally enough, because this was a conference of CDC epidemic intelligence officers, this alarm set off, you can say, a chain reaction. | |
| What wound up happening was that the CDC, alongside the Georgia Department of Public Health, they worked together in tandem to conduct a survey of all the attendees to try and figure out how many people in total had actually tested positive for COVID. They essentially saw this as a great opportunity to test their ability to track transmission. | |
| In fact, here was how the CDC themselves described the goal of the survey that they undertook. | |
| "The goals were to learn more about transmission that occurred and add to our understanding as we transition to the next phase of COVID-19 surveillance and response." Okay, so that was the goal of the survey. | |
| Then, in terms of the results, here's what the CDC initially reported, again, three months ago. | |
| 80% of the attendees wound up filling out the survey, which is about 1,440 attendees. | |
| And among the respondents, the CDC said that 181 of them tested positive for COVID. So when you do the math, that's about a 12% positivity rate. | |
| And as you would imagine, the researchers found that the more seminars a person attended, the more likely he or she was to contract COVID. Here's in fact what the official CDC statement said on the matter, again, released three full months ago. | |
| But here's the kicker. | |
| Every single person who tested positive was vaccinated. | |
| Every single individual who wound up contracting COVID at the CDC event had already received the vaccine. | |
| Which makes sense, given the fact that this was a CDC conference, after all. | |
| And according to a CDC spokesperson, quote, And there were few unvaccinated attendees in general. | |
| Furthermore, even with these initial numbers that were released by the CDC, it was obvious that the number of people who contracted COVID at this event was probably larger than reported. | |
| Because for some reason, according to this initial report, there were 360 attendees, which is about 20% of all the people at the event, who did not fill out the survey at all. | |
| And of course, among them, there are very likely people who contracted COVID as well. | |
| Which just kind of makes you wonder, why wouldn't they fill out the survey? | |
| I mean, this was not a random conference. | |
| This was a conference of people who track contagious diseases. | |
| Filling out these types of surveys and doing this type of real-world contact tracing research should be right up their alley. | |
| But yet still, one in five of them chose to not respond. | |
| Regardless though, setting that anomaly aside, Dr. | |
| Eric Topol, who is the director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, he said that given the numbers of infected, just according to the CDC's own statement, this made this conference a quote-unquote super-spreader event. | |
| However, the best part of the story is the framing that the CDC used when presenting these survey results, because the CDC did not concede anything regarding the vaccine's effectiveness at protecting people against infection. | |
| But instead, their only conclusion in their initial statement was that they cited the fact that no one was hospitalized as a major victory for the vaccine. | |
| Here's specifically what the CDC wrote, again, three months ago in their official statement. | |
| findings underline the importance of vaccination for protecting individuals against severe illness and death related to COVID-19. | |
| Nearly every respondent reported receiving at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose, and none of the 181 people who reported testing positive were hospitalized. | |
| The CDC continues to recommend that everyone ages six months and older stay up to date with all COVID-19 vaccines, including receiving an updated vaccine. | |
| COVID-19 vaccines are effective at protecting people from getting seriously ill, being hospitalized, and dying. | |
| However, here's the thing. | |
| This statement of theirs is not actually true. | |
| We here at the Epoch Times, we filed a Freedom of Information Act request to get the actual documents from inside of the CDC. The actual survey results. | |
| And once we got them, well, they paint a much different picture from what the CDC said in their summary. | |
| Because for one, even though the CDC claimed that none of the people who reported testing positive for COVID were hospitalized, well, that's not true. | |
| According to the documents, the CDC failed to mention that one of the vaccinated people suffered such a severe case of COVID that they had to go to the emergency room, which ostensibly was inside of a hospital. | |
| And so the CDC's claim that, quote, none of the 181 people who reported testing positive were hospitalized, well, that is just not accurate. | |
| Furthermore, according to the actual documents, the number of people who said that they had tested positive for COVID was not 181. | |
| It was actually 183. | |
| Now, of course, that's a minor change, although it's kind of weird that the CDC reported one number, but the actual number was slightly off. | |
| But by far, the most egregious thing that the CDC decided to not disclose to the public was that out of the 1,440 respondents to the survey, 601 of them said that they never took a COVID test, and so they had no idea whether they were positive or not. | |
| And that makes a huge difference, because if we go back and look at the numbers, according to the CDC's original statement, we get about a 12% positive rate. | |
| However, if we change the number of positive cases from 181 to 183, and then we account for the fact that out of the 1,440 respondents, 601 of them did not actually get tested for COVID, that changes that number significantly. | |
| It means that at this event, realistically, Out of the total number of respondents who actually got tested for COVID, 21.8% of them had tested positive, which is not only double the initial estimate, but it's also a great reminder to always be critical of the narratives that are coming down to us from these three-letter agencies. | |
| It's also a good case study for why it's important for the public to have access to all the underlying data rather than trust the government's interpretation of that data. | |
| You never know what they're leaving out. | |
| Now, we here at the Epoch Times, we of course did reach out to the CDC for comment on why they misreported the number of positive cases, why they failed to mention the hospitalization, and why they failed to mention the fact that over 600 survey respondents never took a COVID test. | |
| However, As of right now, the CDC has not gotten back to us with a comment. | |
| As soon as they do, I'll let you know right away. | |
| Otherwise, if you'd like to go deeper into the story for yourself, I'll throw several links down into the description box below this video for you to peruse at your own leisure, which I'll mention is that description box right below those like and subscribe buttons, both of which I hope you take a quick moment to smash. | |
| And then lastly, as I mentioned at the top of the episode as well, if you would like to try the Epoch Times and get unlimited access to everything, all the articles, all the infographics, all the shows, movies, and documentaries over on Epoch TV, basically everything we publish, well now's a great time with the awesome sale that we're running. | |
| I'll throw a link to that sale page down into the description box below this video for you to check out. | |
| You can use it and try the Epoch Times again for just a single dollar a month. | |
| I think you'll love it. | |
| Again, that link is right there at the top of the description box below. | |
| Hope you check it out. | |
| And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times. |
Export Selection