🚨 BREAKING: Here’s What Happened to Flu
🚨 BREAKING: Here’s What Happened to Flu
How the CDC’s flu diagnosis algorithm is structurally susceptible to, and encourages, group think.
Short story here is, CDC’s protocols for doctors deciding whether their patient has the flu are strongly biased away from their test result, and instead strongly biased toward whatever the consensus is within the community concerning whether flu is circulating.
So, suppose I get a positive test for flu for my patient. I then put my thumb in the air and check the prevailing social winds as to what other doctors think their patients have. If they think their patients don’t have flu, then I probably should say mine doesn’t have flu either, despite the positive test.
And now, my decision to say it’s not flu has made the consensus even stronger that flu is not circulating, giving even greater pressure for doctors to conclude it’s not flu for their next patient.
And so on.
Here is the article by Norman Fenton, Martin Neil and Jonathan Engler I refer to in the video that motivated this video:
Amazing that as a "scientific"agency they would subscribe to the notion of "settled science," meaning they are actually political, not scientific! Any attempt to displace scientific inquiry and scientific scepticism with anything that encourages groupthink is antithetical to the actual rigorous process of scientific inquiry and further ongoing developments in science.