Public health policy requires public data. Why is it being hidden?

From "close your eyes and open your mouth" is no basis for public health policy: demanding real transparency into the data on vaccines is critical. let the sunshine in. by el gato malo.

El Gato Malo has been on top of the Covid-19 data for a long time, American, Israeli, British, Swedish, etc.  He has been bold in formulating hypotheses but also suitably deprecatory and cautious about just how weak the data foundation is.

That is in fact one of his chief, among many, criticisms.  We know what data we need in order to evaluate our public health decision-making.  So why are we not collecting it?

Click to enlarge.

“The FDA repeatedly promised “full transparency” with regard to Covid-19 vaccines, including reaffirming “the FDA’s commitment to transparency” when licensing Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine.  

Transparency regarding this product means, if nothing else, sharing the data the FDA relied upon to license this vaccine.  The definition of “transparency” literally includes “accessibility of information.”  So, when the FDA denies a request to expedite release of this data from a group of highly credentialed scientists from major universities across the country, is that transparency? 

If the FDA is committed to transparency, why must a federal lawsuit be filed to timely obtain this data?   Why has the FDA, weeks after the filing of a federal lawsuit, still not agreed to timely release this data?  Why does the FDA persist in delaying its release when even federal law states that, once licensed, the “data and information in the biological product file [for the licensed vaccine] are immediately available for public disclosure.””

public health should be, well, public, shouldn’t it?

we’ve seen this time and time again all year. some data is sourced, manipulated, analyzed, and possibly outright made up in some quiet cloister somewhere. it gets called “peer reviewed” by 3 likeminded or outright conflicted friendlies, 2 schoolchildren, and their tame mouse “mr whiskers” and then gets passed off to a credulous public as if this is how science is done and as if “peer review” means “proven.”

it does not and never did.

Read the original for a full length discussion and all the links.