CDC purposefully refused to investigate serious adverse events from the mRNA shots
This is not negligence, this is planned ignorance on a criminal level
The CDC knowingly and purposefully found a way to ignore the most serious adverse reactions to the mRNA shots.
Way back in November 2020, the CDC developed a system called V-safe to track the reactions of vaccine recipients. Nearly 10 million people signed up for this simple survey taken on their cell phone.
On its face, this was fantastic. Patients would check in at specific intervals and click boxes that might describe their symptoms and their severity.
But….
(and there is always a but with the reporting isn’t there?)
While the protocol they developed for V-safe specifically lists severe outcomes, the survey did not include them among the choices.
These “Adverse Events of Special Interest” are listed on the last page of their V-safe protocol.
It is important to note that this list - symptoms like anaphylaxis, blood clots, myocarditis, stroke, death, and even c19 infection, among many others - was a direct result of potential issues discovered during the clinical trials.
That is, even the carefully constructed Pfizer and Moderna trials had indicated that these severe outcomes were possible adverse events.
Instead of listing any of these symptoms as options to click on, the CDC’s V-Safe listed only much less serious events:
Notice that there are specific boxes for things like fatigue and headache, but not for anaphylaxis and stroke.
The only way to report any of the more serious adverse events is that little line at the bottom: “Any other symptoms or health conditions you want to report ______”
In other words, if you developed a heart issue or went into anaphylactic shock, the only way to report it was by typing it in.
By not having an event in a checkbox, it becomes nearly impossible to run accurate statistics on it. For example, a person will have to interpret what is written and assign it into a category of their choosing - or exclude it entirely - based upon unknown criteria. This alone would minimize its statistical influence.
But, you say, at least they were recording the events.
Unfortunately, what the CDC did next proves they purposefully avoided even looking at the serious issue.
The protocol clearly states that, even if someone typed their symptom - say, “myocarditis” into V-safe - it would only be evaluated if a report was also made to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System).
It seems clear this means that, even if someone types in “myocarditis” into their survey on V-Safe, that report will only be evaluated if there is also a report in VAERS. (Note that reports in VAERS are almost universally performed by professionals - and may take 30-60 minutes to input all the desired information.)
Again, this alone would massively reduce the number of severe reactions recorded.
It was not enough to report it to VAERS.
It was not enough to report it to V-Safe.
You either reported it to both or, apparently, it was ignored.
As if that is not bad enough…. throw this into the mix:
The CDC admitted that it did not check VAERS.
In fact, in response to a FOIA request about this, the CDC describes searching VAERS as ‘data mining’ and declares that it is “outside of the agency’s purview”.
Doesn’t this mean that they are ignoring VAERS?
And if they are ignoring VAERS, that there is no reason for them to ever evaluate the “other” symptoms typed into V-Safe?
And if they don’t evaluate the typed-in symptoms (i.e., the serious ones), they can declare that their data show virtually no serious symptoms to the vaccine????
This is malfeasance and data manipulation of the highest order - all to try to convince the public to take the experimental mRNA shot.
Oh. And one final thing.
When outside researchers asked via FOIA for this typed-in V-Safe data they were denied.
The CDC denied the request on the basis that the 6.8 million entries might include personally identifiable information (that is someone typed their name into the box instead of “crushing chest pain”).
I wonder what they are hiding?
(Well, I really don’t wonder what, I just wonder how bad it really is.)
Much of this post is based on this article by Zachary Stieber and this Substack from El Gato.