Reading this a bit more carefully means the CDC wants up to 8 weeks to have deaths updated.
At the same time, on FluView if it says 100% complete it would still not mean so (or I presume it wouldn't anymore) and I'd have to run all calculations out up to 8 weeks to make sure if changes occur much after that there is a problem and its being done intentionally.
Not that they can't be switching the data during those 8 weeks with intentional manipulation.
Now looking back at the past few weeks I can see how the CDC has many ways to manipulate their data to fit whatever narrative they please.
Even my most recent charts and graphs can be disputed by them although they say 100% complete on fluview per this gray note.
Hence I'd have to revise, and look for data more than 2 months prior to the screenshot on wbm at hand.
8 weeks to update deaths gives them leeway to bullshit and add what they want.
I wonder if you actually went through these death certificates if the number would actually add up to the body count.
>I wonder if you actually went through these death certificates if the number would actually add up to the body count.
What I mean by this is… If the CDC is just adding numbers into this data and there is not real body….. not sure if a death certificate would be there either tbh in that situation… just throw numbers onto their data…. no one will know…. is there a way to audit their deaths?
I mistyped the prior green statement
All right…so let's say we play it safe and accept up to 8 months and change after that is suspicious.
Just from this time range of data, you can see that pneumonia deaths have been increased by 851.
This is an increase in 851 pneumonia deaths within 3 months.
8 weeks, sorry…. taking away 8 weeks with an X with supposed change occurring here being normal hence anything in the boxed cells that changed would be suspicious, AND IT DID. this is happening all over their data.
let's seem I mean 75% complete within 8 weeks of death occurring.
don't know what that means today
hence I played it safe with 8 weeks' leeway
ok after another misreading and spree, I now can look at the same data and realize the CDC SHOULD HAVE A TIME LIMIT TO COMPLETENESS OF DATA AND RECORDS INTO THE SYSTEM.
For instance, I can ask the CDC, why did the week ending in 10/5/29 have18 pneumonia deaths added from at least after 3/19/20 itself because when we have a screenshot on wbm from 3/19/20 for data on 10/5/19 (cells in green circle) which is 5 to 6 months prior and most likely 100 percent complete AND WOULD NEVER NEED TO CHANGE FROM THIS POINT ON…. but as said above 18 deaths added
CDC is manipulating all their data.
They most likely don't have rules for completeness.
They should.
This gives them a range of options to manipulate data and makes detection of manipulation more difficult.
After a certain point, you would not expect any data to change.
100% completeness when?…. or otherwise manipulate as much as you want