Testy? LOL How about a reality check. If you are going to stand by the CDC as a reliable source, then I would think that it works in both directions amigo. Or is it just the CDC info/stats that support your personal views that are acceptable and considered credible? lol
The "other" sources often used, by yourself & others, Jeff, are links to articles/papers/studies that have yet to be peer reviewed. Those medical preprints aren't always good, or reliable sources of information, hence why people question them when posted. From a previous comment of mine, seeing as some folks apparently didn't understand this the first time around.
What is an unrefereed preprint? | medRxiv
What is an unrefereed preprint?
Before formal publication in a scholarly journal, scientific and medical articles are traditionally certified by “peer review.” In this process, the journal’s editors take advice from various experts—called “referees”—who have assessed the paper and may identify weaknesses in its assumptions, methods, and conclusions. Typically a journal will only publish an article once the editors are satisfied that the authors have addressed referees’ concerns and that the data presented support the conclusions drawn in the paper.
Because this process can be lengthy, authors use the medRxiv service to make their manuscripts available as “preprints”
before certification by peer review, allowing other scientists to see, discuss, and comment on the findings immediately.
Readers should therefore be aware that articles on medRxiv have not been finalized by authors, might contain errors, and report information that has not yet been accepted or endorsed in any way by the scientific or medical community.
We also urge journalists and other individuals who report on medical research to the general public to consider this when discussing work that appears on medRxiv preprints and emphasize it has yet to be evaluated by the medical community and the information presented may be erroneous.