9 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 31.5 ms ] thread
"The administration has reportedly banned the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) from using the phrases “evidence-based” and “science-based” in official documents.

Senior CDC officials distributed the list of “forbidden” words and phrases to policy analysts at the CDC on Thursday, The Washington Post reported Friday. The list also bans the use of “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender” and “fetus.”"

This has been submitted several times now.
And it's also been not only debunked. It seems like just more intentional disinformation by the handlers of the naive gullible liberal class of self-destructive self-loathing types falling for ideological subversive tactics in the asymmetric war that has been waged against the USA, Europe, and the western civilized world for decades and generations now.
Please refrain from the use of the words ‘submitted’ and ‘several’, as they may indicate providing facts that have later been retracted. Also, ‘times’ has been replaced with side-plus, in accordance with the Improving Education and Freedom in Arimthmetic act of 2018.

Thank you citizen, - Department of Fraternal Homeland Internet Freedom Security

Time to start using “fact-based”.
"Because science!!!" surely ranks among the least scientifically pleasing modes of argumentation.

Nothing bad can come from a ban on stating "because science!!" as a reason for anything, because the natural substitute —where it exists— is just actual real reasons.

> Nothing bad can come from a ban on stating "because science!!" as a reason for anything, because the natural substitute —where it exists— is just actual real reasons.

Well, according to the article, the actual substitute appears to be "CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes." Which is a bit worrying and may indicate this has little to do with how to best communicate scientific recommendations.

Frankly the CDC should be able to say whatever they damn well please. I really don't understand how this isn't protected under the first amendment.