6 facts about CDC denial that deaths linked to vaccines
The headline of a new press release from the Lancet boldly claims that a large study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has found that, “most mRNA COVID-19 vaccine side effects are mild and temporary.”
Does that mean that all the athletes seen collapsing and sometimes dying on live television in various video compilations shortly after their mandatory COVID vaccinations were not suffering adverse events from the vaccinations?
Here are six things you should know about this new study:
1. The CDC did not exclude COVID vaccines as the cause of death in any of the 4,471 deaths reported to VAERS
The CDC’s clinical staff analyzed all 4,496 reports of death that were made to VAERS (The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) after administration of an mRNA COVID vaccine between December 2020 and June 2021 and only excluded 25 reports, each of which were discounted because of “miscoding of death or duplicate reporting.”
None of the remaining 4,471 reports of deaths were excluded as unrelated to the vaccine. In lieu of a case-by-case analysis of the actual cause of death, the CDC funded researchers made a conclusory observation that,
“we found no unusual patterns in cause of death among the death reports received … VAERS data alone generally cannot establish causal relationships between vaccination and adverse events.”
The CDC scientists didn’t mention that the CDC and its supervisory agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, has access to all relevant hospital records and could have established or ruled out causation in those deaths in the nine months that have passed since the June 14, 2021 data cutoff date. Indeed, the CDC report itself concedes that,
“VAERS death reports were individually reviewed by CDC physicians and follow-up is ongoing to obtain additional and missing records.”
Yet no mention is made of finding that any VAERS reported death was made after, but not due to, a vaccination.
As of February 25, 2022, the number of deaths reported to VAERS following a COVID vaccine now stands at 24,827.
2. The CDC did not actively track vaccine recipients to catch all deaths and other side effects
The study attempted to compare the total VAERS reported deaths to general mortality in the adult population. The authors themselves, though, list a significant limitation to their findings, which would make any comparison to general mortality misleading:
“An important limitation of this report is one shared by all VAERS analyses: we used data from a passive reporting system subject to underreporting and variable or incomplete reporting …" Underreporting to VAERS, in general, is expected.
Indeed, many Americans are still unaware of VAERS and, even if aware of it, often do not make the connection between the death of a family member from, for example, a heart attack, stroke or pulmonary embolism, and a recently administered vaccine (particularly if their sources of news repeatedly report that the COVID vaccines are safe while not broadcasting any adverse events).
How many adverse events are missed by VAERS?
Frontline News recently reported on an active surveillance study by Israel’s Ministry of Health (MoH) in which all subjects were contacted 21-30 days after they received a third dose (booster shot) of the Pfizer vaccine. The researchers found that, “COVID vaccine side effects [are] thousands of times worse than reported.”
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care likewise found in an earlier study that, “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported."
3. The CDC found that deaths following COVID vaccines were “concentrated” in the first few days after vaccination
The first question a doctor asks when presented with a new patient is what happened? And the answer is, of course, the most recent out-of-the-ordinary event. If a patient is dizzy and throwing up shortly after suffering a head trauma, the doctor needs to know about the injury. And if a patient is short of breath and suffering chest pain shortly after a vaccination, the doctor needs to know about the injection.
Seeming to acknowledge this fact, the CDC researchers report on the proximity of the COVID vaccinations to the deaths, but then try to diminish its significance:
“The greatest number of death reports occurred on day 1 … and day 2 … following vaccination … The concentrated reporting of deaths on the first few days after vaccination follows patterns similar to those observed for other adult vaccinations.”
In this strained logic, the CDC is essentially arguing that if other vaccines lead to deaths shortly after their administration, then deaths shortly after administration of COVID vaccines must not be significant.
4. The CDC downplayed death and injury rates
The CDC counted each dose separately, so that if 100 people received 3 doses of the COVID vaccines and all 100 died, the death rate would be 33% (100 deaths out of 300 doses)!
They did the same with other adverse events, as they admit in their summary of methods:
“Reporting rates were calculated using numbers of COVID-19 doses administered as the denominator.”
5. The large number of deaths and serious adverse events were small only in comparison to the even greater number of mild adverse events
The expression that, "the devil is in the details" may find applicability to CDC methods. The study provides this optimistic “interpretation” of its findings:
“Interpretation: Safety data from more than 298 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered in the first 6 months of the US vaccination programme show that most reported adverse events were mild and short in duration.” [Emphases added].
Why did the CDC choose to describe the degree of severity of “most” of the reported adverse events and not simply state that serious adverse events were rare? Because they weren’t.
The investigators recorded 22,527 serious (non-death) adverse events and 4,471 deaths. Most events could still be labeled as “mild,” though, since there were far more non-serious side effects, e.g., headache, fatigue, chills, pain, and other non-life threatening illnesses, which amounted to 313,499 adverse events. That huge number of “mild” side effects is used as a reason to diminish the importance of thousands of severe side effects.
26,998 serious and deadly adverse events can’t be ignored altogether, though. They were addressed in the details of the “Discussion” section:
“The predominance of heart disease as a cause of death reported to VAERS warrants continued monitoring and assessment …
“Serious adverse events detected in VAERS and VSD 27 surveillance prompted specific safety evaluations for anaphylaxis, 14 thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, 28 myocarditis, 29 and Guillain-Barré syndrome. 30 After reports of anaphylaxis following mRNA vaccination with both vaccines, clinical guidance and management recommendations were updated. 31 Also during this time period, a safety signal for myocarditis was identified and investigated further in VAERS and other US safety systems. 32 , 33.”
Readers hoping these details are properly addressed by the mainstream media may be disappointed by the study’s coverage on BBC and Forbes.
6. Study’s denial of conflicts of interest does not tell the full story
In the study’s “Declaration of interests,” the researchers wrote, “We declare no competing interests.” The truth may not be that simple.
The research was funded by the CDC and the lead author is David Shay, who works for the CDC on its COVID-19 Response Team and Influenza Division as a “Medical Officer.”
The declaration of interests does not mention the extent of funding of the CDC by pharmaceutical companies, the amount of the CDC budget that comes from vaccine patent royalties or the personal conflicts of CDC officials owning pharmaceutical stocks while voting on advisory committees to approve new drugs, as pointed on in a congressional hearing:
“the CDC grants conflict of interest waivers to every member of their advisory committee a year at a time, and allows full participation in the discussions leading up to a vote by every member, whether they have a financial stake in the decision or not.”
Of course, CDC officials are also not unaware of the career track of previous CDC officials who acted favorably towards pharmaceutical companies only to go on to join those very companies in high paying positions. A Reuters report revealed:
“Former CDC head lands vaccine job at Merck
“Dr. Julie Gerberding, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was named president of Merck & Co Inc’s vaccine division ...”
