- Health authorities are apoplectic that people would use the CDC’s adverse reaction database to inform themselves about covid vaccine adverse reactions.
If there is one thing the medical establishment cannot tolerate, people use publicly available information on adverse reactions to their recommended treatments to make personal health decisions. This came to a head when people began using the CDC’s VAERS system to observe the very high number of adverse effects of the covid vaccine.
Our References for This Article
If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.
The Medical Establishment Resents the Calculation of Risk Using VAERS
In the article A Calculation of the Relative Risk of Pharmaceuticals Versus Nutrition Supplements, I used the WHO’s online adverse reaction database to show that nutritional supplements that the medical establishment often warns the public against taking are enormously more safe times than items that are recommended by the medical establishment, including the covid vaccines or Remdesivir. Some people have done a similar risk analysis as I performed by analyzing the high number of adverse reactions from the covid vaccines. And this has naturally increased “vaccine hesitancy.”
However, an article in Science, which is firmly part of the medical establishment, has instructed people not to perform these types of analyses.
In this article, I will review some of the critical quotes from this article to observe how Science twists itself into a pretzel to try to make the case that only people that agree with the vaccines or who are on the pharmaceutical company’s money train should be using the CDC’s adverse reaction database to come to any conclusions.
Quotes from Science
On 5 May, Fox News host Tucker Carlson delivered a 10-minute monologue casting doubt on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines on his show, Tucker Carlson Tonight. He announced that almost 4000 people had died after getting COVID-19 vaccines, and added that those data “comes from VAERS,”—the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a U.S. government program that collects reports of side effects possibly caused by vaccines.
It was a misleading statement. The reporting of a death to VAERS indicates nothing about what caused it, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) subsequent investigations have found no indication that deaths were caused by COVID-19 vaccines, save in a small subset with an extremely rare clotting disorder linked to one vaccine. – Science
Well, the CDC has repeatedly lied throughout the entire pandemic, so how credible is the CDC? I certainly don’t use the CDC as a source and know that the CDC is just an organ through which pharmaceutical companies make their views known. Pharmaceutical companies have repeatedly pushed back on the deaths that come “out of the blue” after getting a covid vaccination. This includes young and very healthy people that don’t just drop dead for no reason.
The quote continues…
But the TV segment pulled VAERS, a 31-year-old early warning system widely relied on by scientists, even deeper into the culture wars over vaccination. – Science
This is curious, what does the age of VAERS have to do with anything? Secondly, is VAERS the same system when introduced 31 years ago, or has it had technology upgrades? Most likely, it is the latter. This seems to be an attempt to undermine VAERS without saying the system is bad.
The quote continues…
After the broadcast, a new phalanx of antivaccine activists began plumbing VAERS for data to scare the public about vaccination, says Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters for America, a left-leaning nonprofit that is monitoring anti–COVID-19 vaccine activity on social media. “We have been tracking these attacks since February and this one resonated in a different way after Tucker hit it,” Carusone says. – Science
Why is this worded this way? Don’t we want informed people doing their research? Looking into VAERS takes effort. Personally, I’m not too fond of VAERS because it is difficult to use, and I used the WHO’s adverse effect system for my analysis instead.
Also, why are “antivaccine” or vaccine detractors any less credible than pro-vaccine supporters? And why is publishing what they found called “scaring the public.” The medical establishment has been exaggerating the deaths from covid, as I cover in the article How The Covid 19 Mortality Rate Was Irresponsibly Exaggerated since the pandemic began. Is the medical establishment in a position to accuse others of scaring the public?
This video shows CNN (major recipient of pharmaceutical advertising) making up a false case of a person dying from Omicron without mentioning that the person was immunocompromised.
The following quote describes a Zoom call at a hospital in the SouthEast of the US where the administration was actively promoting the idea of both faking covid statistics and scaring people into getting vaccinated by telling them they would die if they didn’t.
National File has obtained a recording of a Zoom video conference call between physicians and a marketing director at Novant Heath New Hanover Regional Medical Center, a group of 20 hospitals, clinics, and offices that treat patients in North Carolina and South Carolina.
In the recording, Mary Rudyk, MD tells Director of Marketing Carolyn Fisher and another hospital employee that she wants the hospitals to become more “scary to the public” by inflating the number of COVID-19 patients, and by using messaging that falsely tells individuals “If you don’t get vaccinated, you know you’re going to die.” – National File