The government's vaccine safety data that show deaths following covid vaccination cannot, for scientific reasons, be trusted by the public, a top CDC official asserts.
Dr. Michael McNeil was responding to a physician's query about a study based on government data in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) that showed a surge in deaths following vaccination for covid. McNeil is acting director of the Immunization Safety Office at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
McNeil's letter was published by Steve Kirsch on his Substack blog.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/here-is-the-official-response-from
As "CDC was not involved with the work you mentioned in your correspondence, which used limited information from a publicly accessible VAERS database," the agency is, McNeil wrote, "unable to comment on this analysis conducted outside of the agency."
Even so, McNeil implied that the study was no good by saying, "Statements that imply that reports of deaths to VAERS following vaccination equate to deaths caused by vaccination are scientifically inaccurate, misleading, and irresponsible."
A problem with the government's public databank is that healthcare providers must report deaths after vaccination even if they don't think vaccination was the cause, McNeil said. Also, he said, only 10 percent of VAERS reports are of a serious nature -- tho that fact would seem to have little to do with the matter at hand: the serious reports.
He cites a CDC statement that more than the VAERS databank are used to detect vaccine "safety signals" and seems to suggest that the CDC's experts are the only ones competent to analyze vaccine safety data.
McNeil writes,
Dr. Michael McNeil was responding to a physician's query about a study based on government data in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) that showed a surge in deaths following vaccination for covid. McNeil is acting director of the Immunization Safety Office at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
McNeil's letter was published by Steve Kirsch on his Substack blog.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/here-is-the-official-response-from
As "CDC was not involved with the work you mentioned in your correspondence, which used limited information from a publicly accessible VAERS database," the agency is, McNeil wrote, "unable to comment on this analysis conducted outside of the agency."
Even so, McNeil implied that the study was no good by saying, "Statements that imply that reports of deaths to VAERS following vaccination equate to deaths caused by vaccination are scientifically inaccurate, misleading, and irresponsible."
A problem with the government's public databank is that healthcare providers must report deaths after vaccination even if they don't think vaccination was the cause, McNeil said. Also, he said, only 10 percent of VAERS reports are of a serious nature -- tho that fact would seem to have little to do with the matter at hand: the serious reports.
Around 90% of reports to VAERS after COVID-19 vaccination have been non-serious. Healthcare providers who administer COVID-19 vaccines are required under the provider agreements for the CDC COVID-19 Vaccination Program and Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to report certain serious adverse events, like deaths, to VAERS regardless of whether the reporter thinks the vaccine caused the adverse event. This required reporting is one reason why many reports to VAERS do not represent adverse events caused by the vaccine.McNeil does not discuss statistical methods used by his office that might tend to rule out correlation by random chance nor does he say categorically that the CDC has never detected anything more than weak correlations between covid vaccine and deaths.
He cites a CDC statement that more than the VAERS databank are used to detect vaccine "safety signals" and seems to suggest that the CDC's experts are the only ones competent to analyze vaccine safety data.
McNeil writes,
CDC has been publicly presenting and openly discussing data from our vaccine safety monitoring systems regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations at meetings of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and we have also regularly published analyses of these data. Statements that imply that reports of deaths to VAERS following vaccination equate to deaths caused by vaccination are scientifically inaccurate, misleading, and irresponsible. We continue to monitor these and other adverse events using our safety surveillance systems.The CDC statement asserts,
The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can often quickly detect an early hint or warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. VAERS is one component of CDC's and FDA's multifaceted approach to monitoring safety after vaccines are licensed or authorized for use. There are multiple, complementary systems that CDC and FDA use to capture and validate data from different sources. VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also referred to as "safety signals." If a possible safety signal is found in VAERS, further analysis is performed with other safety systems, such as the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project, or in the FDA BEST (Biologics Effectiveness and Safety) system. These systems are less impacted by the limitations of spontaneous and voluntary reporting in VAERS and can better assess possible links between vaccination and adverse events. Additionally, CDC and FDA cannot provide individual medical advice regarding any report to VAERS.
No comments:
Post a Comment