CDC's VAERS Data Handling and Public Health Apparatus Critique

CDC's VAERS Monitoring Failure

• ⚠️ The CDC admitted it never monitored VAERS for COVID vaccine safety signals, despite widespread vaccine uptake.
• 🔍 This admission came in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from Children's Health Defense, highlighting a significant gap in post-market surveillance.
• 📊 The VAERS system is known to collect only a small percentage (1-10%) of actual adverse events, making its monitoring crucial.
• 📈 The COVID vaccines reportedly had an adverse event signal greater than all other vaccines combined over 30 years, yet the CDC was not monitoring this system.

Critique of Public Health Leadership

• 🏛️ The discussion questions the credibility of former CDC directors signing an op-ed with Rochelle Walensky, who is described as a preposterous apparatchik who parroted the party line.
• 📺 Walensky's reliance on CNN for information about public health matters is highlighted as a disqualifier for judging scientific reality.
• 🎣 The concept of "pharma capture" is raised, suggesting the CDC may be staffed with individuals who follow orders rather than scientific principles.

Alternative Treatments and Sabotage

• 💡 The existence of alternative treatments like hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and vitamin D is mentioned.
• 🚫 These alternatives were allegedly sabotaged by the CDC, being considered non-functional or dangerous.
• ☀️ Even sun exposure (for vitamin D) was framed negatively.

Broader Implications of Public Health Messaging

• 📰 The New York Times op-ed by former CDC directors is seen as broadcasting a knowably false picture, effectively co-signing the "madness."
• 🧐 This situation raises questions about whether the "rebels" (like RFK Jr.) are correct about public health hazards, while the established institutions are doing the inverse of their intended purpose.
• 🎭 The narrative suggests a dichotomy: either the New York Times and former CDC directors are correct, or Kennedy and his allies are trying to protect people while the Times doubles down on a false narrative.