Back to Fort Fairfield Journal      WFFJ-TV      Contact Us




Maine CDC Losing the Trust of Objective-Thinking Mainers


By:  David Deschesne

Fort Fairfield Journal, May 18, 2022

   Prior to the media-escalated COVID-19 hysteria, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and various state CDCs conducted basic disease research in the background of society with little to no political influence or motivation.

   That all changed, however, in the pandemic year as the media cooperated with the CDC to amplify select data in order to make the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus appear to be much worse than it actually is.  While the CDC admits to a survival rate of greater than 99.8% for most healthy people, their narrative and focus was only on the most extreme cases of death and despair, thus altering the perception of the disease within the general public—a public who is now shaking the media induced hypnotic sleep from their eyes and beginning to realize they’ve been duped wholesale.

   The Maine CDC has been cooperating in this concerted effort to lie, mislead and deceive people in Maine, many of whom are now growing increasingly skeptical of the agency’s ability to rationally and objectively present unbiased data to the public.  One of the key data sets being called into question by objective researchers is the over-reliance and amplification of COVID “positive case” numbers.

   With the recent “uptick in positive COVID-19 cases” in Northern Maine being reported by the Maine CDC, many organizations are once again making public health decisions based on misleading or hyperbolic data from that now politicized organization.

   From the outset of the “pandemic” Maine was using PCR tests from Westbrook, Maine-based IDEXX labs that featured an excessively high cycle threshold thus making them so sensitive they could detect even the most minute of viral particle and key as a “positive” test. 

   The Maine CDC then used those excessively sensitive PCR tests—which have never been approved by the U.S. FDA, but were allowed under “Emergency Use Authorization” — to diagnose disease in the public.  This, against the advice of PCR test inventor, Kerry Mullis who said repeatedly that his PCR invention should never be used to diagnose someone as actually sick with a particular disease because that is not what it was designed to do.

   The problem with the Maine CDC’s “positive case” data that leads many people to now distrust the agency’s portrayal of events is one based on the difference between quantitative data versus qualitative data.

   Quantitative data, which the Maine CDC uses exclusively, only focuses on the quantity of positive COVID PCR tests.  This tactic causes a skewed perception of reality because every person (and even a person tested multiple times) who tests “positive” then contributes to the total overall case numbers that ultimately get amplified by the media and presented as if every one of those cases are at the same level of disease severity and sickness.

   Qualitative data, however, is much more meaningful information because it differentiates between those who are actually sick from those who are not—and provides a sliding gray scale of disease severity for all in between—among those case numbers.  The Maine CDC does not present that data to the public for their consideration—only the total “positive case” numbers alone.

  Also, since many hospitals are only equipped to handle COVID patients in their Intensive Care Units (ICU), due to the requirements for negative air pressure, many “positive” COVID patients are placed in ICU, even if they have no symptoms, and are subsequently reported as a “COVID ICU patient” by the Maine CDC with no analysis of whether or not the person is actually suffering any symptoms.  Furthermore, any person placed in the hospital for any reason who also has a positive COVID PCR test gets labeled by the Maine CDC as a “COVID hospitalization” even if their reason for being in hospital is completely unrelated to COVID.  These are all problems associated with presenting only quantitative data devoid of any qualitative contextual information.

   This misconstruing and misrepresentation of the data by the Maine CDC appears to be purely for political reasons to make the virus appear to be more “deadly and dangerous’ than it actually is for most people in order to corroborate the Governor’s irrational over response to the pandemic.

   It is for this reason many clear-thinking people who have actually studied the raw data have concluded the Maine CDC is now a purely political organization who can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and objective scientific information in an unbiased way and whose data sets should no longer be considered when making important public health policy decisions.