Login
By Jeffrey A. Tucker
The month was January 2021, only a few weeks into the mass rollout of the injection called a vaccine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had outsourced its collection of data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — designed to monitor vaccine safety — to General Dynamics Information Technology (GDIT).
GDIT wrote the CDC a memo dated Jan. 15.
“The number of incoming COVID-19 reports has significantly exceeded the estimated maximum of 1,000 reports per day,” the memo to the CDC said.
The memo continued:
“As a result, GDIT is unable to meet processing and other timeframes (data processing, telephone inquiries, clinical inquiries, etc.). GDIT has reache [sic.] out to the Pogram [sic.] office and OAS for guidance and support.”
Indeed, the floods of reports were many times the “worst-case scenario” that GDIT had anticipated, so it admitted that it could no longer process them.
The five-alarm fire should have been obvious. At that very instant, if not long before, the shots should have been pulled. Banned immediately for all groups. Apologies should have been offered.
Industry executives should have been put on trial because later document releases proved that they knew the dangers. Victims should have been compensated from industry profits, with payouts in the many tens of billions.
After all, this is how dangerous pharmaceutical products had been treated in the past, after only a few reports. But in this case, it was different.
Everything that had happened since March 2020 had led to this moment: all the closures, the stay-at-home orders, the smashed small businesses, the supply-chain breakages, the multiple trillions in spending and money creation, the capacity restrictions and the censorship.
Without an effective and safe shot, all of this would have been a waste. There would have been civilization-wide fury. Neither the politicians, nor bureaucrats, nor media, nor industry, could risk that.
Plus, by law, the companies that made the shots and the institutions that started forcing them on people bore no liability for harms. This was due to the special status called emergency use authorization, enabled by the PREP Act, that even bypassed normal testing standards at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The agency receiving this alarming communication was the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC has a newsletter. It’s called the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
On Feb. 19, 2021, now two months into the shot release, and hundreds of thousands of VAERS reports pouring in — so many that they could not process them — the MMWR released its first report on the shots.
The primary author was Julianne M. Gee, an epidemiologist in the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office, part of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases. She still works there today.
The senior author is Tom Shimabukuro, currently deputy director of the Influenza Division in the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.
In this report, they wrote a conclusion after examining 6,994 reports:
“Monitoring, conducted as part of the U.S. vaccination program, indicates reassuring safety profiles for COVID-19 vaccines.”
The trouble is that at that point, there were already 107,000 reports, so her report only examined 6% of the total on that date. GDIT had already told the CDC that they could not process beyond their “worst-case scenario” of 1,000 reports per day.
VAERS analyses depend on reports being processed — coded, reviewed for seriousness and made available for statistical screening and clinical follow-up. When intake substantially exceeds processing capacity, the analyzed dataset lags the raw reports.
They knew this. They lied anyway.
The CDC’s Gee continued:
“The initial postauthorization safety profiles of the two COVID-19 vaccines in current use did not indicate evidence of unexpected serious adverse events. These data provide reassurance and helpful information regarding what health care providers and vaccine recipients might expect after vaccination.”
Nothing unexpected. Reassurance.
These were also lies.
Even from the small number of reports analyzed, Gee writes that 90.8% were not serious injuries. She neglects to say that this would also mean that 9.2% were serious.
That would mean that on the day this MMWR was filed, 9,000 Americans had already experienced serious harm from the shots. This is by her own data.
We now know from VAERS data alone that approximately 966 people had died from taking the shots by mid-February 2021. The report in question mentions 113 deaths only, “65% among LTCF residents; available information … did not suggest any causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and death.”
You surely see the trick here. If they die of anything else, they are tagged as a COVID-19 death, which is helpful for scaring people into vaccination. If they die of the shot, they are tagged as anything but a shot death.
Another lie follows:
“During December 14, 2020-January 13, 2021 … VAERS received 6,994 reports.”
That’s not true. GDIT had already notified them that their 60,000 reports had already blown through their maximum “worst case scenario.” (This is an extrapolation from the GDIS chart.)
Indeed, the date Jan. 13, 2021 might have been strategic because injury and death reports soared days later, all the way up to the full 2.74 million reports, including 39,000 death reports and countless debilitating injuries people still carry around today.
OpenVAERS offers this chart:
The reports of injury and death only slowed once Americans grew skeptical, and that’s also when the shot mandates went into effect, causing hundreds of thousands to lose their jobs. This is pure sadism, unthinkable given what we know from so many documents.
In all this, keep in mind that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services admits that VAERS captures only a “small fraction” of actual injuries.
The CDC never sounded the alarm, not early, not late, not anytime in between. We now have evidence that they were being notified the entire time by their contractor, who could not even process all the reports because there were too many.
The CDC said nothing. They said the opposite. They said that nothing unusual was happening, that the shots were safe, that all reports were reassuring. The CDC never corrected the record. The people who did this still work there.
The compilation from a different reporting system, V-Safe, called “Cries for Help,” sets the record straight.
Do you see now why so many people are screaming for accountability and justice?
The shots are all still on the market and mandated by many schools and institutions.
Originally published by Brownstone Institute.
Jeffrey A. Tucker is the founder, president and author at Brownstone Institute.
