CDC's VAERS Safety Signal Analysis
Hundreds of safety signals for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines
Wow! The CDC has (finally) released its safety signal analysis based on VAERS reports from December 14, 2020 - July 29, 2022. They’re alarming. Also alarming is that the CDC waited 15 months before doing its first safety signal analysis. The CDC didn’t want to release it either - this data is ONLY available because of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Zachary Stieber at the Epoch Times.
The number of serious adverse events reported for mRNA vaccines is 5.5x more than all serious adverse event reports since 2009. And VARES is underreported.
The proportion of deaths (for adults) was 15.4% higher after COVID-19 vaccination vs 2.5% after traditional vaccines.
What is a Safety Signal? Per the CDC it’s the “nation’s early warning system” for vaccines.
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.
CDC’s VAERS safety signal analysis based on reports from Dec. 14, 2020 – 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.
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.
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).
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.
There are 96 safety signals for 12-17 year-olds, which include: myocarditis, pericarditis, Bell’s 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.
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’s disease, menstrual irregularities, vitiligo, and vaccine breakthrough infection.
The safety signals cannot be dismissed as due to “stimulated,” 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.
In August, 2022, the CDC told the Epoch Times that the results of their safety signal analysis “were generally consistent with EB [Empirical Bayesian] data mining [conducted by the FDA], revealing no additional unexpected safety signals.” So either the FDA’s data mining was consistent with the CDC’s method—meaning they “generally” found the same large number of highly alarming safety signals—or 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.
Daily Clout wrote a great article on it here. Josh Guetzkow (the Author) does a great job of explaining the analysis.
If anyone wants to download the data the links are below. They are in Excel format.
7.29.22 Table 3 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Pfizer Compared to Moderna
7.29.22 Table 4 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Moderna Compared to Pfizer
7.29.22 Table 5 PRR of PTs for COVID19 mRNA Compared to Non-COVID
7.22.29 Table 3 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Pfizer Compared to Moderna
7.22.29 Table 4 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Moderna Compared to Pfizer
7.22.29 Table 5 PRR of PTs for COVID19 mRNA Compared to Non-COVID
7.15.22 Table 3 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Pfizer Compared to Moderna
7.15.22 Table 4 PRR of PTs for COVID19 Moderna Compared to Pfizer
7.15.29 Table 5 PRR of PTs for COVID19 mRNA Compared to Non-COVID
The Swine flu vaccine in 1976 had 1 serious adverse reaction per 100,000 people and it was withdrawn. Source
The Rotavirus vaccine in 1999 had 1-2 serious adverse reactions per 10,000 people and it was withdrawn. Source
A re-analysis of the phase 3 trial data from Pfizer and Moderna shows 1 adverse event per 800 people. 1 in 800 with hundreds of safety signals. It is still promoted. Here’s Joe Biden’s tweet from yesterday:
Luckily most have gotten the message. Data from the CDC shows only 15.1% of people have gotten an updated booster.
Clearly, we have a problem here. The CDC and FDA have completely ignored safety signals. They have rushed these trials, pushed misinformation about safety, and efficacy. They have told people they would be protected if they took this drug and clearly that’s not the case. You were never doing this for Grandma, you were doing this for Pfizer and its shareholders.
Just like they lied about the vaccines - they withheld this data until most of the country was vaccinated.
Thanks for reading everyone!
Dr. Panda's Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
I wrote the CDC inquiring as to why the Swine Flu vaccine was pulled after only 53 associated deaths, but the covid mrna injection was still on the market and being promoted by the CDC/NIH after 30,000 associated deaths. "The VAERS system is voluntary and does not represent verified statistics." My next question was "If even 10% of the reports are accurate, why has the product not been pulled, and if the VAERS system is less than 10% accurate, why are you still maintaining it at taxpayer expense?" No response as of today...
I can't count how many times I've been thrown off Facebook for saying these very same things. And don't forget, VAERS is typically under reported by a factor of 10. And you wonder why professional athletes are dropping like flies?