New York Times Complains CDC Victimized by ‘Imperfect Science’

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been victimized by “imperfect science,” the New York Times complained Monday.

While the establishment media throughout the pandemic have urged Americans to “trust the science” because it is the “only method we have of understanding the world,” the Times acknowledged that science is imperfect.

The revelation about the fallibility of science was a reason for the Times to scapegoat President Biden’s failing coronavirus response. In an article titled, “The C.D.C.’s New Challenge? Grappling With Imperfect Science,” the publication warned readers that federal government mandates, recommended by health experts, cannot keep pace with the CDC’s science.

“The Omicron coronavirus variant is moving much faster than researchers can, worsening a longstanding problem: The agency (CDC) must make tough decisions with scant data,” the article read.

The Times suggested there is urgency for Biden’s CDC to recommend mandates at “breakneck” speed yet admitted the decisions are prone to problems because science is revealing “insufficient evidence”:

Because decisions must be made at a breakneck pace, the agency has issued recommendations based on what once would have been considered insufficient evidence, amid growing public concern about how these guidelines affect the economy and education.

The paper continued to assert the CDC’s medical decisions, based on its scientific method, have become “demoralizing” for a “bureaucracy staffed primarily by medical professionals” due to the shifting scientific evidence.

“The most recent example, the isolation advice, left turmoil within the agency over the way in which it was established and announced,” the paper wrote about the CDC’s ever-changing coronavirus health guidelines.

The Times‘ warning that the CDC’s science is imperfect comes as Biden’s top medical advisor, Dr. Anthony Fauci, claimed in November to be synonymous with science.

“If they get up and really aim their bullets at Tony Fauci, well people can recognize that there’s a person there, so it’s easy to criticize, but they’re really criticizing science because I represent science,” the doctor defended himself against accusations of fallibility.

Last week, scientific health experts defended Fauci’s credibility and professed their “unreserved respect and trust as a scientist and a national leader.”

“His advice has been as well informed as data and the rapidly evolving circumstances allowed,” the letter continued. “And importantly, he has given his advice with humility, being clear about what we know and what is unknown, but requires judgment.”

Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø