FDA Asks Court To Delay First 55K Batch Of COVID Docs

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Does anybody here have even the remotest idea of how long it takes to prepare 55,000 documents for release, or how chronically under funded and under staffed the departments that process these documents are.

Let me guess you're going with 75 years because there is no conspiracy anywhere they simply do not exist?

Am I right?

You should be fired for this one.

Last week I was accused of being in Big Pharma, now you think that I'm doing FOIA requests for the CDC?

Sorry to disappoint you, but I have no professional involvement with vaccines at all. I don't make them, I don't study them and I don't approve them. I'm also part of the CDC.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

So you're a spy then? Don't take me to seriously my prolific amigo.

a reply to: Randyvine2

The irony here is that if I were to tell people that I was with the CDC, or that I was with Pfizer or any of the other companies that make a vax, I doubt that anyone would believe me.

The would demand proof and no matter what I said I doubt that I wouldn't be able to convince them that it was true.

Yet, in so many words, this is what people have been calling me on this forum.

Well, I have no professional involvement in this field, and no financial stack either.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: nugget1

28 reviewers isn't remotely enough people.

Imagine if you were a parent and you're child's medical records were accidentally released to the entire world because someone got sloppy and dragged and dropped the wrong file into the wrong folder.

55,000 / 28 is 1924. 1924 / 30 days in a month is 64. You're telling me you cant redact 64 pages in a day? How long does it take to redact a page? 5 minutes max? That's 5.33 hours a day.

Also, why are you so worried about keeping medical records private when you want to see my vaxx papers? You're the one asking for private medical information. That's hypocritical af.

Just stop.

you broke it down in 30 seconds to show just how much of a workload it isn't, and this person completely ignored you, but then continues telling other people that this is an insurmountable task.

then you call them out on the fact that you've already broken it down and they claim you never did so. It's people like this that make dialogue nauseating. Makes claims, ignores very straightforward responses, continues saying the exact same talking points.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Well, I have no professional involvement in this field, and no financial stack either.

And I have no reason to doubt what you say.

But you should realize the oddity of your unmeasured persistence on these
boards is indicative of some great importance. You might even agree yours
is a view with no honor in defending.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: underpass61

OK, then tell me, how long will it take 28 people to release all of those documents. Do the math.

I just did the math and you disappeared after getting owned.

I notice that you said that you did the math, but haven't actually included the math.

Feel free to post it here.

You replied to every single message except for the message he's referring to. It's on page one, but you already know that because you replied to every other message which means you check your messages. Instead of acknowledging the very simple and straightforward breakdown of what the workload would be for 28 people to handle 55,000 pages you ignored and when confronted said it wasn't ever said, and invited him to say it again. Why would they waste their time saying it again when you ignored it the first time? Perhaps you needed enough time to come up with a response that you were proud of lol hopefully it's been long enough 😅

V1rtu0s0 says in response to you :
"55,000 / 28 is 1924. 1924 / 30 days in a month is 64. You're telling me you cant redact 64 pages in a day? How long does it take to redact a page? 5 minutes max? That's 5.33 hours a day.

Also, why are you so worried about keeping medical records private when you want to see my vaxx papers? You're the one asking for private medical information. That's hypocritical af. "

----reply over-----

do not reply to me, reply to V1rtu0s0 who you willfully ignored, and when confronted about ignoring, claimed the message didn't exist instead of checking your messages. You wilfully ignored the message. You happened to reply to everyone else except him when you came back, and then when confronted about it just said the mesaage didn't exist. That's just Cherry picking .

come on, go back to the thread from page one, you know where it is, and continue the conversation that you willfully ignored. Don't reply to me, I do not exist, just like there's no attempt to block the FOIA requesr as long as possible, that doesn't exist and neither do I, so reply to V1rtu0s0 where you willfully ignored his response to you. All of your fans are waiting. Theyre relying on you. I know you've got the ability to spin the message, so go on, spin it.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

In the UK even most of our classified stuff is released after 35 years..
Except for the really heinous # which is classified up to 100 years.

With this vaccine data-who wants to bet they release all the "clean" stuff for the first 89 years,then in year 90 they release all the stuff they should be imprisoned for.

I wonder if anyone will be around to even read it at this point.

That number isn't how long they want to keep the data under wraps for, it's how long they estimate that it will take them to release all of the hundreds of millions of pages of data at the current staffing levels.

This is a mammoth undertaking for a small and under resourced team.

why don't they put about half the 87,000 new irs agents to work on that ? then they could go back to snooping our bank accounts.

a reply to: Acknt

If you'd read what they did you'd notice that they only did a single document request, included weekends as being days when people were supposed ot be processing documents, and didn't actually come up with a final number.

That's not remotely "doing the math".

If you look at the Texas lawsuit, it involved over 300,000 pages.

300,000 pages, 2 minutes per page to sort, redact and catalogue each page (Some pages will take much less, others will take much more). that's 600,000 minutes or 10,000 hours. or 1,428 days presuming that you do nothing but processing documents from 9 am till 5 pm, with an hour for lunch. No toilet breaks.

If all 28 people did nothing but processing 2 documents a minute for 7 hours a day it would take them 51 days.

But of course they will be dealing with more than one FOIA request at a time, and will have other things to do such as non-Covid related FOIA requests.

Now multiply this over several hundred million pages of data in total.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

It's not remotely that simple. For a start, they're not simply redacting documents. Redacting is only one part of it.

Plus you're suggesting that all 28 of those people will be redacting documents on Saturdays and Sundays?

There are literally millions of documents draw from thousands of sources and written in multiple languages. Different documents will contain different data that has to be redacted for both privacy reasons and for reasons of commercial confidentiality.

These documents need to be collected, sorted and catalogued. Some will need to be translated. There are literally millions of pages that will need to be checked and then double checked. Documents are also still being generated.

We're also talking about FOIA requests, not batch document dumps. So the people in charge will need to collect together all of the relevant documents from multiple sources and then compile them in a meaningful way that meets the letter and the spirit of the FOIA request.

Depending on how complicated the request is it might take several days for a small team to put it together. And that's just one request.

Plus they've got all sorts of non-covid related requests to deal with as well.

a reply to: sarahvital

Different department, different budged.

If you would like more of your taxes to go towards people responding to FOIA requests then maybe you should discuss this with your senator.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: shooterbrody

Every time someone on the trial had some kind of reaction that might have been due to the vax it would have generated a whole load of documents, which would need to be searched through to ensure that no identifiable personal information was in them.

No
Do you think people are that stupid?
The information compiled contains NO personal identifers.
THIS IS NOT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Big pharma does not want to pay for its mistakes, big government is attempting to cover.
It really is that simple.

a reply to: shooterbrody

If there is no identifying or personal information how can things be followed up. At the very least there would be an individual identification number that links back to a person's history and contact information on another database, which itself might be subject to a FOIA request.

FOIA requests also exclude commercially sensitive information, which would have to be edited out as well.

Some of this data might come from outside of the US, and therefore would be subject to additional protections.

This isn't a conspiracy, it's just a long and laborious task being done by an underfunded team who is also trying to get other things done as well.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: shooterbrody

If there is no identifying or personal information how can things be followed up. At the very least there would be an individual identification number that links back to a person's history and contact information on another database, which itself might be subject to a FOIA request.

FOIA requests also exclude commercially sensitive information, which would have to be edited out as well.

Some of this data might come from outside of the US, and therefore would be subject to additional protections.

This isn't a conspiracy, it's just a long and laborious task being done by an underfunded team who is also trying to get other things done as well.

No
This is taxpayer info
Period

NO PERSONAL INFO IS COMPILED WITHIN THESE STUDIES.

a reply to: shooterbrody

How do you perform a study without personal information, it's essential to know who is actually participating in the study, or who is performing it. Not everything is double blind.

Do you even have the remotest idea of what information IS included?

There's also the possibility that documents from outside of the study will be misfiled with study documents by accident. Simply by someone saving a document to the wrong folder of putting the wrong document in a file of papers to scan.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

You do a superb job of regurgitating pharma and government talking points.

a reply to: Salander

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Not everything is a conspiracy, and even when it is a conspiracy it's more likely to be about keeping stock prices high than it is world domination.

IF the vax were bad big Pharma would be rushing around with version 2.0. If they continue to cover it up it will cost them more in the long term than fixing it now.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Acknt

If you'd read what they did you'd notice that they only did a single document request, included weekends as being days when people were supposed ot be processing documents, and didn't actually come up with a final number.

That's not remotely "doing the math".

If you look at the Texas lawsuit, it involved over 300,000 pages.

300,000 pages, 2 minutes per page to sort, redact and catalogue each page (Some pages will take much less, others will take much more). that's 600,000 minutes or 10,000 hours. or 1,428 days presuming that you do nothing but processing documents from 9 am till 5 pm, with an hour for lunch. No toilet breaks.

If all 28 people did nothing but processing 2 documents a minute for 7 hours a day it would take them 51 days.

But of course they will be dealing with more than one FOIA request at a time, and will have other things to do such as non-Covid related FOIA requests.

Now multiply this over several hundred million pages of data in total.

Just to prove what an absolute shill you are, you just proved yourself wrong about it taking 55 years to redact those documents. You do a better job arguing with yourself than ever making a single factual point to anyone else about anything.

What makes it worse, is that there is software that will automatically redact ALL of that information IN A DAY. It's been around over a DECADE.

info.onetrust.com...


You're fired.