![\"VAERS](\"http:\/\/www.tomgrimshaw.com\/tomsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/VAERS_Categories-300x198.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Finally! Zachary Stieber at the Epoch Times managed to get the CDC to release the results of its VAERS safety signal monitoring for COVID-19 vaccines, and they paint a very alarming picture. The analyses cover VAERS reports for mRNA COVID vaccines from the period from the vaccine rollout on December 14, 2020 through to the end of July, 2022. The CDC admitted to only having started its safety signal analysis on March 25, 2022 (coincidentally 3 days after a lawyer at Children\u2019s Health Defense wrote to them reminding them about our FOIA request for it).<\/p>\n
Like me, you might be wondering why the CDC waited over 15 months before doing its first safety signal analysis of VAERS, despite having said in a document posted to its website that it would begin in early 2021\u2014especially since VAERS is touted as our early warning vaccine safety system. You might also wonder how they could insist all the while that the COVID-19 vaccines are being subjected to the most rigorous safety monitoring the world has ever known. I\u2019ll come back to that later. First I\u2019m going to give a little background information on the analysis they did and then describe what they found.<\/p>\n
SUMMARY
\nCDC\u2019s VAERS safety signal analysis based on reports from Dec. 14, 2020 \u2013 July 29, 2022 for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines shows clear safety signals for death and a range of highly concerning thrombo-embolic, cardiac, neurological, hemorrhagic, hematological, immune-system and menstrual adverse events (AEs) among U.S. adults.<\/p>\n
There were 770 different types of adverse events that showed safety signals in ages 18+, of which over 500 (or 2\/3) had a larger safety signal than myocarditis\/pericarditis.<\/p>\n
The CDC analysis shows that the number of serious adverse events reported in less than two years for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is 5.5 times larger than all serious reports for vaccines given to adults in the US since 2009 (~73,000 vs. ~13,000).<\/p>\n
Twice as many mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reports were classified as serious compared to all other vaccines given to adults (11% vs. 5.5%). This meets the CDC definition of a safety signal.<\/p>\n
There are 96 safety signals for 12-17 year-olds, which include: myocarditis, pericarditis, Bell\u2019s Palsy, genital ulcerations, high blood pressure and heartrate, menstrual irregularities, cardiac valve incompetencies, pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrhythmias, thromboses, pericardial and pleural effusion, appendicitis and perforated appendix, immune thrombocytopenia, chest pain, increased troponin levels, being in intensive care, and having anticoagulant therapy.<\/p>\n
There are 66 safety signals for 5-11 year-olds, which include: myocarditis, pericarditis, ventricular dysfunction and cardiac valve incompetencies, pericardial and pleural effusion, chest pain, appendicitis & appendectomies, Kawasaki\u2019s disease, menstrual irregularities, vitiligo, and vaccine breakthrough infection.<\/p>\n
The safety signals cannot be dismissed as due to \u201cstimulated,\u201d exaggerated, fraudulent or otherwise artificially inflated reporting, nor can they be dismissed due to the huge number of COVID vaccines administered. There are several reasons why, but the simplest one is this: the safety signal analysis does not depend on the number of reports, but whether or not some AEs are reported at a higher rate for these vaccines than for other non-COVID vaccines. Other reasons are discussed in the full post below.<\/p>\n
In August, 2022, the CDC told the Epoch Times that the results of their safety signal analysis \u201cwere generally consistent with EB [Empirical Bayesian] data mining [conducted by the FDA], revealing no additional unexpected safety signals.\u201d So either the FDA\u2019s data mining was consistent with the CDC\u2019s method\u2014meaning they “generally” found the same large number of highly alarming safety signals\u2014or the signals they did find were expected. Or they were lying. We may never know because the FDA has refused to release their data mining results.<\/p>\n