While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is only one example of an administrative federal agency run by unelected bureaucrats, it is one charged with ensuring Americans receive truthful health and safety information, a daunting role for an organization now engulfed with concerns about its credibility.
CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky wrote in a letter made public this week her agency did not conduct a type of analysis on reports made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) regarding COVID shots during 2021. Her agency, however, indicated otherwise in its documents and through some of its other representatives.
The Epoch Times reported that, in a letter sent by Walensky earlier this month to Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), she noted CDC performed PRR (proportional reporting ratio) analysis on reports to VAERS for COVID vaccines “between March 25, 2022 through July 31, 2022.
Walensky said the PRRs were performed “to corroborate the results of EB (Empirical Bayesian) data mining,” which she referred to as “a more robust technique used to analyze disproportionate reporting.”
“Notably, results from PRR analysis were generally consistent with EB data mining, revealing no additional unexpected safety signals,” she wrote to Johnson.
Additionally, Walensky appeared to be informing Johnson that her agency had clarified to The Epoch Times that “PRR were not run between February 26, 2021, to September 30, 2021.”
As the Times noted, CDC created at least two documents, beginning in January 2021, that indicated the agency would be conducting PRR analysis on VAERS reports.
In both “Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for COVID (as of 29 January 2021)” and “Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for COVID (as of February 2, 2022),” CDC stated in its executive summary:
CDC and FDA will perform routine VAERS surveillance to identify potential new safety concerns for COVID-19 vaccines. This surveillance will include generating tables summarizing automated data from fields on the VAERS form for persons who received COVID-19 vaccines (e.g., age of vaccinee, COVID-19 vaccine type, adverse event).
The Times reported, however, “the agency said in June that it did not perform PRRs. It also said that performing them was ‘outside th[e] agency’s purview.’”
Roger Andoh, CDC FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Officer wrote to Divyanshi Dwivedi of Children’s Health Defense on June 16:
[P]rogram staff within the Immunization and Safety Office inform me that no PRRs were conducted by CDC. Furthermore, data mining is outside of the agency’s purview; staff suggest you inquire with FDA.
The Times next heard from Dr. John Su, another CDC official, who reportedly said in August the agency “performed PRRs from March 25, 2022 through July 31, 2022.”
Yet another CDC spokesperson assured the Times, “At no time have any CDC employees intentionally provided false information.”
On September 12, Johnson wrote again to Walensky, clearly expressing his frustration with the inconsistencies in statements regarding the VAERS data analysis and how such contradictions are affecting the safety of the American people when it comes to the COVID shots:
You have failed to explain why the CDC made inconsistent statements about the data it generates to track these adverse events. Moreover, even though I clearly asked CDC to provide the data that it supposedly generated to track vaccine adverse events, you failed to do so. This data should be made public immediately to better inform the American people about risks of specific adverse events relating to the COVID-19 vaccines. Your lack of clarity calls into question whether CDC has and continues to sufficiently monitor COVID-19 vaccine adverse events.
“You also provided no explanation as to why Dr. Su’s assertion … completely contradicts the CDC’s [initial] response … as well as your September 6, 2022, response to me,” Johnson added.
The discovery of CDC’s contradictory statements about its analysis of VAERS COVID vaccine data is just the latest concern Americans are hearing as the agency continues to urge them to get mRNA shots for themselves and their children.
Just one month ago, Walensky announced her agency needed an overhaul – one that she was hoping would “restore public trust.”
At the same time, however, CDC was recommending that children of six months and older get a COVID vaccine when young children are the least likely to suffer from serious COVID disease.
A week after the announcement about a CDC makeover, Walensky began promoting the “updated” vaccine boosters for the new variants, authorization for which had been sought by submitting data on mice, not humans.
“If we wait for those data to emerge in human data, not just mice data, we will be using what I would consider to be a potentially outdated vaccine,” Walensky said on “Conversations on Health Care.”
“We have now given over 600 million doses of this vaccine in this country so we have an extraordinary safety profile, probably unlike any we’ve seen with any vaccine in history,” she said.
In late March, Walensky’s agency appeared to be involved in yet another scandal as House Republicans revealed a committee report that contained a CDC official’s testimony confirming the health agency coordinated with teachers’ unions at an “unprecedented” level to craft school reopening guidance despite the CDC’s earlier claims that its collaboration with the unions was routine.
With multiple incidents of inconsistency, questionable practices, and a dominant interest in pushing the mRNA shots the government refers to as “vaccines,” it is unclear whether any overhaul can “restore trust” in the CDC.
The Star News Network reached out to CDC for comment and is awaiting a response.
– – –
Susan Berry, PhD is national education editor at The Star News Network. Email tips to [email protected].
Background Photo “CDC Building” by CDC.
