in ,

Hiding The Truth: Federal Judge Orders CDC To Release Covid-19 Vaccine Safety Data That Details Vaccine Injuries

The CDC has refused to release the data claiming ‘confidentiality’

The Defender

(The Defender) In a “huge win for transparency,” a federal judge this month ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to disclose the entirety of a critical COVID-19 vaccine safety database to independent researchers and the public.

The ruling requires the CDC to produce more than 7.8 million free-text reports detailing adverse reactions submitted by COVID-19 vaccine recipients through the V-safe monitoring app. The agency must release the texts according to a strict schedule over the next year.

 

The judge rejected the CDC’s claims that confidentiality concerns and resource limitations prevented the agency from publicly releasing the trove of first-hand testimonies.

Instead, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division, embraced arguments from the plaintiffs — the nonprofit watchdog group Freedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice — that obscuring the data enabled potentially misleading safety conclusions by hindering full understanding of the vaccines’ impacts.

Prior lawsuits forced the CDC to release superficial, check-the-box summaries of common symptoms generated by the V-safe system. However, the free-text fields that the CDC is now required to release represent the lone channel for reporting serious conditions like myocarditis, blood clots or strokes.

The CDC so far has analyzed data only from the first one to two weeks after vaccination, painting an incomplete picture of the long-term dangers of the mRNA shots. The release of the full qualitative accounts offers the public the opportunity to undertake more detailed and accurate safety assessments.

In his ruling, Kacsmaryk wrote:

“If ‘some scientists’ — sponsored or platformed by Defendants — ‘have chosen to use’ only the first week or two of data to report the vaccine is safe and effective, then other scientists should be permitted to access the data to ‘pierce the veil of administrative secrecy,’ ‘open agency action to the light of public scrutiny,’ and ‘promote the disclosure of information.’ …

“With billions of taxpayer dollars expended to develop, distribute, administer, and fund messaging campaigns, Plaintiff assumes a hefty and viable public interest in examining the raw clinical data.”

“This is a huge win for transparency,” Aaron Siri, attorney for the plaintiff, told Del Bigtree on the Jan. 11 episode of The Highwire. “It’ll be an incredible opportunity to actually see what was being told to the CDC by the public.”

“There is substantial public interest in the data that supported, and continues to support, the government’s promotion of the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters,” Kacsmaryk wrote, adding that the data should be provided to “treating physicians, researchers, parents, [vaccine] recipients, and non-recipients.”

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender, “It is criminal that the CDC would not make this information public automatically.”

“It belies the fact that they don’t want the American people to know the extent of the damage from the COVID-19 vaccine,” Hooker added. “The judge’s order represents a clarion call for transparency around vaccine harms and stands to impact pivotal decision-making processes for future public health emergencies.”

“I think this is going to be the death blow to this cover-up,” speculated Bigtree. “This may change this whole conversation forever.”

The first tranche of nearly 400,000 free-text entries, which the judge ordered to be released by Feb. 15, will be available for public viewing and analysis on the Informed Consent Action Network’s (ICAN) V-safe data page.

Details on lawsuit and court ruling

The legal effort to unseal the V-safe data originated with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the free-text entries and associated registration codes filed Jan. 3, 2023, by the Freedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice.

The Texas-based group was formed specifically to procure and circulate the V-safe’s user-reported vaccine impacts to enable outside evaluation.

Despite acknowledging that some redaction of respondents’ identifying details could prove necessary, the CDC refused to produce any records, citing confidentiality concerns and resource limitations.

“The non-exempt information within the Free-Text Responses is not reasonably segregable, because having to review and redact 7.8 million Free-Text Responses to segregate non-exempt information would impose an unreasonable burden on the agency,” the CDC contended, according to court documents.

The plaintiff coalition pushed back on those claims in follow-up appeals, arguing the urgency of understanding the vaccines’ complete safety profile justified the effort to supply the raw narratives.

Coalition attorney Siri specifically called the single week of data the CDC wanted to disclose “misleading,” adding, “Those free text fields and the data in those free text fields are so critical,” because “those 10 million individuals [who took the COVID-19 vaccine] could write in whatever they wanted.”

The 10 million who signed up for the V-safe were “clearly all fans of the vaccine,” who were “not forced” to get the shots and “wanted the vaccine to work for them … [and] to track [their] health,” Bigtree said.

The fact that 7.8 million entries were made “should be troubling, because I don’t think people are writing in, ‘Thank you,’” Siri said. “They’re writing in symptoms, they’re writing in issues of concern.”

Siri shared what one V-safe user reported, without receiving any response from the CDC:

Read More

Leave a Reply

Loading…

Video: Trump Is Exactly Right, E. Jean Carroll’s Is A Nutcase And Here Are The Receipts

Video: TikToker Goes On Rant About Increased Costs Of EVERYTHING Since Joe Biden Took Office