The CDC keeps changing its story on vaccine safety monitoring
First they were, then they weren't, then they were, now they weren't. I don't know about you, but my head is spinning.
This Epoch Times story says it all:
We did do the safety monitoring
We didn’t …
We did …
We didn’t …
If you aren’t already a premium subscriber to The Epoch Times, this story may justify the expense for you.
Or it may make your head spin.
Or maybe you already knew that you can’t trust what the agencies say?
Time to defund the CDC. US life expectancy should rise dramatically immediately afterwards. And while we're at it, assign full liability back to vax manufacturers too. And require them to use placebo in their clinical trials. Require a positive all-cause-mortality outcome for all approvals.
This combo probably results in millions of lives saved per year.
"Show me the incentive, I'll show you the outcome."
Did you ever cover the significance behind the proportional reporting ratio (this is a key part of the epoch times story for those who cannot read it)?
For those not familiar VAERS uses a formula to identify adverse events that identifies side effects from a vaccine that are elevated above the baseline level. Unfortunately, the formula they use (the proportional reporting ratio) only counts an adverse event as a safety signal if it alone elevated in comparison to a standard vaccine (e.g. flu)...so the fact that there is a significant number of cases of myocarditis from the vaccine is not actually deemed significant by the formula since a lot of other things like strokes went up as well.
Being charitable, you could say that this formula was made to ignore noise from something else causing a large increase in reports (e.g. mass hysteria about vaccines or a concurrent deadly virus), while being less charitable, you could also say it was put in to conceal harms from particularly toxic vaccines.
The CDC put out a guidance right after the vaccines entered the market (when adverse events were starting to accumulate) saying the proportional reporting ratio would be used to identify safety signals. I and many others initially interpreted this to mean that the CDC realized how dangerous the vaccine was and then used that formula to hide the events (since by the COVID vaccine being toxic in so many ways, this broad spectrum toxicity would hide its harms). I then did a deeper look to test that hypothesis and found papers stating the ratio had been used to identify safety signals in VAERS long before that.
My current theory is that almost all vaccines cause severe harm through creating autoimmune responses and microstrokes in the body, and the. more dangerous a vaccine is, the more likely it is to cause those and elevate all those harms, so I believe this formula was likely chosen long before the vaccine any extremely dangerous vaccine that entered the market.
For those who are interested in understanding that process (why there is a decent body of evidence that vaccines, particularly COVID-19 commonly cause microstrokes) I tried to sum it up here. Many of these concepts make a lot of sense and play a key role in human physiology, but unfortunately are never taught in medical school:
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/why-does-every-vaccine-often-cause