how do you miss the most blatant safety signal in vaccine history?

the trick, it would appear, is to ignore your own guidelines and never even look for it

what’s worse than not having a helmet when playing football?

thinking you have one when you don’t.

it’s the worst of all worlds: the illusion of safety where there is none. you are trusting in protection that does not exist.

you will tackle head first and the be shocked when you spill your brains all over the gridiron.

this is why actually following safety procedures is so vital and why our public health regulators have lost so much credibility:

the CDC has become a helmet made of cheap, walmart easter bunny grade chocolate.

and it’s getting us all hurt.

THIS is a dazzling story and a great find using FOIA to force the CDC to disclose its process. if cats wore hats, i would doff mine to josh. this is even more stunning than when the CDC admitted (also under FOIA) that they did not have a single RCT supporting mask use to stop covid.

josh published THIS piece back in sept 2021. it uses the CDC’s own published methodology to assess the VAERS data for covid vaccines. the results were unequivocal.

josh writes:

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 crux of the issue is this:

the CDC uses PRR (proportional reporting ratio) itself a questionable and limited method of acting as canary in the vaccine coal mine to seek out safety signals.

this is their own text.

but, when asked about it under FOIA, this was their response: (red box mine)

not only did they not perform the safety monitoring they were supposed to. at all. but they go on to claim that doing so is outside their purview and suggest asking the FDA instead. (who does not do this work, it’s supposed to be the CDC.)

this is just stunning.

what a complete and total fail and abrogation of duty and diligence.

either “most robust in US history” was a complete and total fabrication or wow have we been running around totally unprotected for decades. which one fills you with confidence?

fake politicized health agencies providing fake political science and selective safety practice tailored to suit industry and policy are killing us. literally.

claiming to have missed this is like pretending not to have heard a bad bunny concert going on right behind you in a library.

quite literally any other vaccine in history would have been pulled off the market for 1/100th of this.

this is either egregious dereliction of duty or and outright lie in FOIA response.

they either did not do the analysis because they knew what they’d find if they did

or

they did do the analysis and are hiding it because of what it showed and the fact that they could never justify inaction in the face of it.

there is simply no plausible case that they “forgot” or “did not think it was important” or “saw no reason to use resources on it.”

this is brass band in your bedroom kind of obvious.

and it means we cannot trust these agencies.

and that means something has to change.

FOIA is a great and useful check on government, but it is FAR too limited and far too slow. you not only need to know exactly what you’re looking for and the responses are often incomplete and redacted, but the delays can run into months and years. as we have so often seen of late, a great deal of mischief can be worked in that time.

it’s time we did away with the need for FOIA in science because FOIA is a sign of closed cloisters, not open inquiry. the deliberations of the CDC, FDA, and public health agencies should ALL be open and open source.

the data should be available to everyone and the studies, surveys, models, and methods should all be public. this is “we the people’s” science, not the private preserve of a technocratic clerisy.

we need to see in real time what’s happening, not pry bits and pieces of it out a year later. that’s how you generate and assure the best information to inform policy and choice.

i understand how those weaned on credentialism and deference to authority and authorities may be hesitant to trust their safety to swarm sourced public analysis, but consider the alternative:

the agency whose specific purview and policy was to monitor this data just told you that everything was fine and their diligence the most robust in history while failing to do even the most rudimentary first pass work they were supposed to. they not only missed but misled about what is probably the single most severe safety signal in pharmaceutical history.

and then they said “not my job.”

the real responsibility for safety must always reside with us and to enable the citizenry to make good choices, they need full and unfettered access to the data.

let the sunshine in.

the society you save may be your own.