Did the Biden administration purposefully ignore COVID vaccine side effects?

The effort to promote COVID vaccines to the public has taken many forms. Experts such as Anthony Fauci have suggested that everyone should get vaccinated regardless of youth or the absence of other health risk factors, downplaying the extreme risk difference between age groups.

Former CDC director Rochelle Walensky made completely unsupported claims that “vaccinated people do not carry the virus” and “do not get sick”; these promises turned out to be false at the time and were later found to be insulting.

Former President Joe Biden said unvaccinated people should prepare for “a winter of severe illness and death” in 2021-2022. He also tried to force all private businesses with more than 100 employees to follow vaccination mandates. Vaccination passports, there were universities ordersand of course the peak, the nadir, or COVID nonsense, Stephen Colbert’s “The Vax-scene.”

But the flip side of the relentless push for more Covid vaccine uptake has been the deliberate downplaying or dismissal of potential side effects and their impact on the risk-benefit calculation.

A MAJOR STUDY REVEALS WHY COVID VACCINE MAY TRIGGER HEART PROBLEMS IN A GROUP IN PARTICULAR

One tool to measure these side effects is VAERS, or Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. And Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) released a new report on how that system may have been willfully ignored by a Biden administration desperate to encourage uptake.

VAERS safety signals may have been ignored by Biden administration

Johnson’s new reportReleased last week, it contains some potentially explosive revelations about the behavior of Biden administration health officials regarding potential safety signals.

The report came from an investigation conducted by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which requested documents related to the VAERS system from the Department of Health and Human Services during the height of the pandemic in early 2021.

Some of the documents submitted include Dr., who is described as a “senior medical officer at the Food and Drug Administration and developer of safety data mining.” It included Ana Szarfman. Johnson says Szarfman “used an updated data analysis technique that identified dozens of statistically significant safety signals for adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines.”

The report states that he “immediately shared his findings with other FDA officials,” particularly “those responsible for COVID-19 vaccine safety oversight.”

Of course, the FDA will have some interest in further investigating safety signals, especially knowing that recommendations from other experts will be based on their findings. Instead, the report says, those officials “largely ignored him and eventually told him to stop analyzing the data.”

SCIENTISTS FIND CLUES ABOUT WHY COVID VACCINE CAUSES CHRONIC HEALTH PROBLEMS IN SOME PEOPLE

It’s not what you want to hear. So what did Szarfman actually find?

Johnson’s report says data analysis found there were approximately 50 instances of “overmasking.” Essentially, masking means that a very common signal in the data makes it harder for others to find it. Szarfman and Dr. William DuMouchel found that “overmasking” covers roughly 20-25 instances of “statistically significant” safety signals for adverse effects. These adverse effects were “previously undetected” by the FDA and included “sudden cardiac death, Bell’s palsy, and pulmonary infarction.”

FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research director Dr. Peter Marks delivers an opening statement during the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on the federal response to COVID-19 on May 11, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images)

Johnson, Dr. He says Szarfman went on to share updated findings of similar safety signals several times in early 2021 as vaccine policies and recommendations were being implemented.

WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL CONNECTS BIDEN’S MISINFORMATION TO WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE CONSPIRACY THEORIES

Rather than take these findings seriously and examine them further, Biden-FDA asked him to drop the investigation. The report states that “a senior FDA official wrote to colleagues:[b]We must meet internally before potentially reaching Ana; ‘Many matters are not suitable for response by e-mail.'”

Another expert, Dr. Peter Marks warned that data mining “creates false conflicts that fuel anti-vaccine rhetoric.”

As of June 2021, Dr. Szarfman had emailed another FDA employee about discussions between the FDA and CDC about potential “myocardial events” associated with COVID-19. He included a data analysis showing “statistically significant signals of higher safety for acute myocardial infarction,” adding that they “identified clear signals for other similar events.”

FDA CHIEF INVESTIGATED COVID VACCINE BOOSTERS: ‘DATA INVALID’

What did the FDA do with this information? Actually nothing. It seems correct.

VAERS has limitations because it is a reporting system rather than a controlled scientific study. It is subject to bias and may be misleading. But given such an important question as this, and the known limitations of masked data, it seems absurd that there has been so little interest in further research.

ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. GET THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!

This would be absurd if it did not fit neatly into the patterns of behavior of the FDA and other experts at the time. They downplayed the risk of myocarditis or other health-related side effects, especially for young men; This led to unnecessary risks being taken by, for example, college students or others in that age group for whom COVID had little to no chance of serious illness.

They ignored the almost immediate discovery that the vaccines had little or no effect against infection. Instead, they choose to continue pushing for authorizations and passports based on false assumptions.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APPLICATION

White House chief medical advisor and NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci and CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky arrives for a White House COVID-19 Response Team meeting with the National Governors Association at the South Court Auditorium of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus in Washington on December 27, 2021. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)

There was no interest in further examination of safety signal data because this could undermine their efforts towards universal acceptance. Even though this investigation found that potentially high security signals were exaggerated. This was definitely not a priority because it could feed “anti-vax” sentiment. That’s what interested them, not being able to find the truth.

You don’t have to be “anti-vax” to have all the information available. Concerns about Covid vaccines in particular should not be confused with skepticism or distrust of all vaccines. But as stories and reports of this nature emerge in the post-pandemic period, they show how disinterested many officials are, further encouraging such thinking. It’s their own fault and they refuse to accept it.