US CDC to strengthen vaccine injury reporting so that it can selectively hide/unhide problems for political reasons

According to today’s press release, the HHS said that it:

  • Opened a new National Institutes of Health (NIH) clinic dedicated to studying and caring for patients experiencing health problems following vaccination;

The NIH previously studied vaccine injury under Avindra Nath. However, due to the politics at the time, they misreported what happened because the executive branch was pushing the ‘safe and effective’ narrative. The Nath paper claimed that many of the patients recovered; 4 of the patients publicly disputed this in a public interview available on Rumble.

I expect that the NIH will continue to be politicized, and that’s a problem. Right now, the executive branch (under Trump, not Biden) has become friendlier to the vested interests in Washington and the pharma lobby. The FDA is shifting away from clinical trials and allowing drugs to hit the market without collecting unbiased data on whether the drug is safe and effective. They call this “real-world evidence”.

This allows unsafe drugs to hit the market, which gives the FDA the power to burn down a pharma company’s business by pulling its authorization. So, the pharma companies are held captive and they must keep the lobbying dollars flowing. While this benefits the pharma companies and politicians, what’s happening is not medicine.

  • Proposed reimbursing physicians for reporting suspected vaccine-related injuries to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) through a new Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) policy, bringing vaccine reporting in Medicare in line with typical Medicare reimbursement policies;

Physicians are far less likely to report if they don’t get paid for it and if they might lose their job for reporting.

  • Will require electronic health records to capture vaccine-related adverse events so that information can follow patients across the health care system; and

Presumably there will be ICD codes so that vaccine injuries are tracked as such???

  • Is modernizing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) VAERS to make reporting simpler and improve the tools available to researchers and medical professionals investigating potential safety signals.

Previously, the CDC has been spending a lot of money on VAERS so that it can detect problems. It has also invested a lot of its manpower into doing the opposite- covering up problems that it found. FOIA requests uncovered the CDC actively discussing the case of a 2-year old Alaskan who died hours after vaccination. They ‘found’ reasons to deem the report not credible.

The bottom line? They want VAERS to work. They also want to hide the safety signals until they want to shake down some pharma company for money.

A NIH press release has provided more details on the new clinic. The new clinic will be operating a study that will focus “on individuals experiencing the most serious adverse effects following vaccination or long-term symptoms post-infection”.

The study “will not accept walk-in patients or offer routine appointments to the general public”. However, for those who want to participate in the study, you can contact them to be on their list.

I believe I have a vaccine injury or long-term symptoms after infection. How can I learn about participating?

Contact the NIH Clinical Center’s Office of Patient Recruitment at 800-411-1222 or ccopr@nih.gov for information while NIH finalizes the protocol. Contacting the recruitment office does not guarantee eligibility or enrollment.

Politics

The press release tries to balance current narratives about vaccines with ‘responsibly’ investigating potential harms.

Investigating potential harms is part of responsible science. Vaccines prevent serious illness and save lives, and they can also cause adverse effects like any other medical product. Understanding those effects can help improve patient care and vaccine safety.

Public institutions earn trust by listening to patients, asking difficult questions, reporting findings transparently, and acting on the evidence.

They kinda gloss over the past where they didn’t listen to patients and forced Avindra Nath (NIH) to misreport what happened in his study. No apology. No investigation into what went wrong.

They say that public institutions should earn trust by “asking difficult questions”, but of course they won’t ask those questions because the executive branch is politicizing the NIH- and that politicization continues today. That’s really problematic because the NIH will continue what it has always done. They spend a lot of resources on finding problems and then they get paid to hide what they found.