I do believe the most likely reason is that it subverts the WH dominant paradigm, but there's really no evidence and it's possible, albeit I think less likely right now, there is a sound public health, epidemiology or policy reason to push back on publication. What we see in comments is vituperation. I guess if I understood better I might be vituperative too, but I don't.
So rather than add to the hobby horse parade around the table, can I ask if a data scientist in public health can state what might be reasonable concerns? Are there any? Is it common, or apolitical for things like this to be held back, or is it always brain worm people?
Let's face it, stacking advisory committees with anti vaxx bodies bodes ill for this, as does RFKjr as the voice of authority. But that's ad hom on my part too.
I do believe the most likely reason is that it subverts the WH dominant paradigm, but there's really no evidence and it's possible, albeit I think less likely right now, there is a sound public health, epidemiology or policy reason to push back on publication. What we see in comments is vituperation. I guess if I understood better I might be vituperative too, but I don't.
So rather than add to the hobby horse parade around the table, can I ask if a data scientist in public health can state what might be reasonable concerns? Are there any? Is it common, or apolitical for things like this to be held back, or is it always brain worm people?
Let's face it, stacking advisory committees with anti vaxx bodies bodes ill for this, as does RFKjr as the voice of authority. But that's ad hom on my part too.