Posted on 06/22/2022 2:46:29 PM PDT by george76
In response to a Freedom of Information Request submitted by Children’s Health Defense, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week admitted it never analyzed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System for safety signals for COVID-19 vaccines..
In a stunning development, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last week admitted — despite assurances to the contrary — the agency never analyzed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for safety signals for COVID-19 vaccines.
The admission was revealed in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).
In September 2021, I published an article in The Defender in which I used the CDC’s published methodology to analyze VAERS for safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines.
The signals were loud and clear, leading me to wonder “why is nobody listening?”
Instead, I should have asked, “Is anybody even looking for them?”
After that article was published, I urged CHD’s legal team to submit a FOIA request to the CDC about its VAERS monitoring activities.
Since CDC officials stated publicly that “COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring is the most robust in U.S. history,” I had assumed that at the very least, CDC officials were monitoring VAERS using the methods they described in a briefing document posted on the CDC website in January 2021 (and updated in February 2022, with minor changes).
I was wrong.
The lynchpin of their safety monitoring was to mine VAERS data for safety signals by calculating what are known as proportional reporting ratios (PRR’s).
This is a method of comparing the proportion of different types of adverse events reported for a new vaccine to the proportion of those events reported for an older, established vaccine.
If the new vaccine shows a significantly higher reporting rate of a particular adverse event relative to the old one, it counts as a safety signal that should then trigger a more thorough investigation.
The briefing document states, “CDC will perform PRR data mining on a weekly basis or as needed.”
...
And yet, in the agency’s response to the FOIA request, it wrote that “no PRRs were conducted by CDC. Furthermore, data mining is outside of the agency’s purview.”
The agency suggested contacting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which was supposed to perform a different type of data mining, according to the briefing document.
...
CDC officials repeatedly claimed they have not seen safety signals in VAERS.
...
For example, on April 27, 2021, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky stated the CDC did not see any signals related to heart inflammation.
But a PRR calculation I did using the number of myo/pericarditis reports listed in the first table produced by the CDC obtained via the FOIA request reveals clear and unambiguous safety signals relative to the comparator vaccines mentioned in the briefing document (i.e., flu vaccines, FLUAD and Shingrix).
The table is dated April 2, 2021, almost four weeks before she made those remarks.
In fact, among the 15 adverse events for adults included in that week’s tabulations, PRRs I calculated also show loud-and-clear safety signals for acute myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, appendicitis, Bell’s palsy, coagulopathy, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A), stroke and death.
The actual monitoring the CDC did diverges from the one promised in the briefing document in other ways.
For example, the CDC never created tables of the top 25 adverse events reported in the previous week, tables comparing different vaccine manufacturers, or tables of auto-immune diseases.
And it only began monitoring in early April 2021, even though reports from COVID-19 vaccines had been flooding VAERS since mid-December of the previous year.
To be clear, VAERS is not the only database the CDC uses to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety.
For example, the CDC sponsored several studies of COVID-19 safety using the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which is comprised of millions of medical records from HMO’s across several states.
Those studies do not raise many safety concerns. However, they make many questionable methodological choices.
To give one example, a major safety study based on VSD data published in September 2021, in “JAMA,” compares adverse event rates that occur within 1-21 days of vaccination to the rate of occurrence from 22 to 42 days after vaccination.
It makes no comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, or before vaccination versus after in the same individuals.
Moreover, the VSD is far from infallible, having failed initially to detect the increase in myocarditis rates.
In contrast, although calculating PRR’s is a blunt pharmacovigilance tool and far from perfect, it nevertheless has the advantage of being straightforward and difficult to manipulate with statistical sleight of hand.
PRRs are one of the oldest, most basic and most well-established tools of pharmacovigilance. The calculations are so straightforward that the CDC automated it several years ago, so it could have been done at the press of a button.
It simply beggars belief that the CDC failed to do this simple calculation. Even now, a paper published by CDC staff in March on the safety of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines remains purely descriptive with no PRR calculation.
Meanwhile, a study published by a researcher not affiliated with the CDC in February in “Frontiers in Public Health” analyzes VAERS and EudraVigilance data using a method similar to PRRs, revealing clear and concerning safety signals.
And while it is true that VAERS is not the only database the CDC can use to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety, it is of critical importance because it can reveal signals much faster than any other method — if anybody cares to look for them.
It remains to be seen if the FDA was properly monitoring VAERS. That will be the subject of a future FOIA request.
But even if it was, it doesn’t change the fact that the CDC completely failed in its promise to monitor VAERS for safety signals.
***UPDATE on Death Record of 2-Year Old from Alaska SCRUBBED from VAERS***
from the article:
Based on this one example, we can conclude that it is certainly possible that VAERS is deliberately removing any records from ever being seen by the public that are clearly very incriminating. Is it just coincidence, that the record which the public would never have known about is the record of a 2 year old, who would have been ineligible to receive the Covid-19 inoculations (outside of a clinical trial)? And whom furthermore died within six hours of the inoculation in a horrible manner?
“The briefing document states, “CDC will perform PRR data mining on a weekly basis or as needed.”
So apparently you and the Doctor of Sociology/Criminology are in a position to know what “or as needed” means more than CDC personnel.
So if they aren’t routinely performing tests that you think need to be done it’s because “the CDC won’t do PRR analysis on their VAERS system”.
Not because they know enough about what’s posted on VAERS to recognize when PRR data mining is needed. Because what would they know.
Got it.
You got nothing.
Apparently, what you're saying is that, after two years of lockdown, masking, double shots and double boosters, and three or more variants, teen heart ailments, and sudden adult deaths, the CDC still didn't find any "as needed" reason to do PRR analysis?
I don't know why I waste my time with you.
-PJ
yelostar- Regarding the potential scrubbing of VAERS data of the 2 year old who died in Alaska, I am not surprised. I ran several reports on the updated data today. Specific to Deaths for Babies, there was one 5 month old breastfed infant who died the day after her mother received her 2nd dose of Pfizer at work on 3/17/2021. I am thinking it was a cumulative effect from the first dose (The Narrative description states the 2020 for the date of inoculation and date of death. Event detail says 2021.) The State/Territory was listed as unknown, so didn’t show up in my 50 STates+DC analysis. The other Death for a Baby (1.08 years old) had Unknown State/Territory and was reported as “death by suicide, self-inflicted gun shot wound; found deceased by family member.” So, we know something is wrong with entering the age for that individual.
With the CDC Mgt. constantly changing the rules, definitions, how many times you’ve been jabbed, timing between, etc.,so what constitutes a Covid Vxx Injury will provide a conflicting message. Covid inoculates accounted for 9,991 deaths, 69% of the 14,000+ VAERS Deaths since counting started in 1990 thru June 17th, 2022 & 60% of the nearly 150,000 Serious Events in that same 30+ years.
It breaks my heart how some here on FreeRepublic downplay the dangers of the 100% unnecessary Covid inoculates. No curiosity at all about why our Government “Watchdogs” have the Data and are obligated by Law to use it for our protection and don’t even pretend to care. But then, this has been a Planned BlackOp since the beginning, so never did expect anything from Fauci, et.al. (including Mr. Operation Warp Speed).
The Covid wars here on FR opened a lot of people’s eyes. It was difficult to comprehend how, on a forum dedicated to human freedom, there was such an acrimonious, harsh and bitter debate. Those who recognized the underlying deception and dishonesty early on were immediately attacked and insulted - justifying why many of us were not only against the vax but also the hand-in-hand psychological operation that so obviously went along with it. That operation was carried out here by many. I went back and looked at some old posts. These were some responses I got after posting a link to an interview with David E Martin, ”mRNA vaccine injects an “operating system” into your body called “The Software of Life” - this is ‘not’ a vaccine!”
Did you sign up for Free Republic so you could give air to paranoid delusion?......../ Not more of this crap. What is the motive that drives the anti Covid Vaccine people into this?...../ Get a life, and get vaccinated!..../ If you are concerned by the more modern technology of mRNA, go ahead and opt for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. It is an old school Adenovirus vaccine. But going through life as ignorant, doesn’t help anything...../ The song of the common cuckoo...../ This is as fake news as anything Alex Jones has ever said..../ The kook is strong in this one...../ This mutated virus technique is well understood and is used in other therapies to treat genetic diseases where the body doesn't produce certain needed proteins. Stop scaremongering...../ More anti-vaxxer pseudo-scientific crapulence..../Go away, yelotroll!..../ Got the second dose of Moderna a month ago. I feel fine. Your article is total psy-op kook fuel. Don’t fall for it
The pro-vaxxers sought to undermine and compromise VAERS data by consistently attacking it. They never let up, and it continues to this day.
The safeguards that societal institutions used to have that protected citizens are no longer operative. They not only don’t protect us, they actively seek to do harm.
Well said- I couldn’t agree with you more.
The deception was apparent from the beginning. Finding any open criticism or discussion of risks associated with novel mRNA therapies was difficult. No one was allowed to openly discuss how mRNA therapies have been studied for years without making it to phase 3 trials. (Because they were deemed unsafe).
That was the first red flag for me re the gene therapies.
Lab leak suppression and cover-up was a red flag too.
Then after the vax rollouts, seeing how stridently VAERS reporting was criticized by vax shills as being unreliable was another big red flag. It was obvious that VAERS was deliberately broken — CDC and Pharma could have established effective monitoring years ago but they have chosen not to.
CDC/FDA are completely captured by the entities they are supposed to regulate. It was breathtaking to see how most healthcare professionals abandoned their oaths and deceived their patients.
Before covid, medical ethicists considered offering bribes (free donuts and lotteries, yay!) to be unethical coercion (positive coercion) — but without any debate we got punitive coercion and positive coercion to encourage people to take an experimental, unsafe and ineffective medical treatment.
Thanks for your insights.
"The admission was revealed in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by Children’s Health Defense (CHD)".
"In September 2021, I published an article in The Defender in which I used the CDC’s published methodology to analyze VAERS for safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines.
The signals were loud and clear, leading me to wonder “why is nobody listening?”
Instead, I should have asked, “Is anybody even looking for them?” (EmphasisMine)
Does “criminal negligence” count as an acceptable excuse for ignoring all the VAERS signals?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.