If I was the CDC/FDA? My job?

But they aren't even vetting VAERS reports, so we all know V-Safe reports will all die on the vine...

I mean YOU, personally.  Once the V-Safe data is available to the public, as it should be, will you personally download it and try to analyze it?

And yes VAERS reports are being scrutinized.  How do you think the CDC figured out the myocarditis issue?

Lol...because everyone was screaming it at them so loudly it got through the fingers in their ears and the "lalalalalala" coming out of their mouth.

The FDA paused J&J because of VAERS.

[Deleted]

Good for them.   The FDA should have pulled all the vaccines.

J&J must've not paid Fauci enough

Del and the rest of the people at iCAN are doing amazing work

Well ots been 4 days. Did the CDC release the data...are all of us that got the vaccine going to grow tails and turn into lizard people?

Another judge has to declare the CDC in contempt of court...then we will get a massive fire where the data was stored....followed by only half of the data we saved showed lizard DNA...

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/why-did-the-cdc-hide-the-v-safe-data

Guess we know why they tried to hide the data...

The v-safe data shows that 33.1% of the people who got the vaccine suffered from a significant adverse event and 7.7% had to seek professional medical care.

Hmmph. Now Fact Wreckers will be all over unsocial media to "debunk" these numbers and sic FBI watchdogs on people spreading "medical disinformation"...no matter where the numbers came from.

Thanks for the assist. Updated my post...

But they didn't die from covid.

That's interesting since the 6-month follow-up data from the pfraudulent trials were only showing a 0.5% severe adverse effect rate. This would say that the problem rate was much, much higher.

It's about fucking time!

First of all the correct technical terminology is Lizzid People, secondly, well, it's just too early to tell.

I've successfully loaded the V-Safe data (excluding the free-form text fields which have not yet been released) into a Microsoft SQL Server database on my main home/work computer.  It's a beast.  Here are some quick stats:

Number of registrants = 10,094,310
Number of "checkin" records in the main checkin table = 144,856,043
The main "checkin" table occupies 151,009.422 MB on disk.  That's a whole lot bigger than the VAERS data for all time, all vaccines.

There's a separate checkin table with the tag "u3" at the end of the table name that contains 116,294 records.  I don't know what that's all about.  I'm going to ignore it until I figure out what it's for.

Importing the main checkin table sucked up all available RAM on my computer (it has 32 GB with another 52 GB of paging file space on two SSDs) and took over 3 hours to run.  Running any query against it is very memory-intensive, and it's inefficient because I was forced to import most fields as text rather than a VARCHAR() or NVARCHAR() because I had no way of knowing the length of the longest records or what they contained.  To make it practical to query, I plan to create at least one digest table with columns that I care about, using efficient data types, and adding indexes to that.  If I feel inspired I might port the whole table over into a more efficient schema.  That would be several hours of work.

It's unfortunate that the CDC or whoever didn't provide detailed documentation of the database schema.  I'm skilled at reverse-engineering data, but it wouldn't have been hard for the providers to give us something better to work with.

It looks like there are a lot of incomplete records - Many NULLs in most columns.  One column I found to be kind of interesting is called VACCINE_CAUSED_HEALTH_ISSUES.  It looks like that is for the registrant's opinion as to whether or not any reported health issues were caused by a vaccine.  A large majority of those records are NULL.

It's not at all clear how a "serious" event is or should be defined, and as with VAERS there is no reliable way to tell whether a reported event was actually caused by a vaccine, or was coincidental.  As Steve Kirsch noted there are no deaths reported in V-Safe, because there is no data element to capture it (and people who are dead can't use their smart phones anyway.)

Take Steve Kirsch's post at face value and be duly scared if you wish, but it's not anywhere near obvious how the person or people who made those colorful Tableau charts queried the data.  I can probably name close to 100 people who have been fully vaccinated, many boosted, and I don't know a single person who had a bad reaction that was unambiguously tied to a vaccination.

I encourage anyone who has the skills, time, and equipment that's up to the task to download the data and see for yourself what's in it.

I'll assume that those percentages are accurate, but what it really shows is that 33.1% of people had a "significant adverse event" (whatever that means) some time after getting vaccinated, and that 7.1% sought medical care for SOMETHING, some time after getting vaccinated.  Causation is not established in V-Safe records.  People who think the release of V-Safe data is going to lead to some kind of profound revelation are setting themselves up for a disappointment.

In the case of the pfraudulent trial data, there was a specific definition of "severe" adverse event and the 6-month follow-up data showed a 0.5% rate of that. Not clear how that compares to a "significant" adverse event as noted here but one would have thought the definitions would have been common. (Although, that would make far too much sense.) In theory, the whole purpose of the V-safe system is to have the patients themselves do the causation link since they are most likely to do that association. That makes sense in this case since folks might go to CVS for their shot but have to go to their regular doctor for medical care. The fact that over 7% of the people who volunteered to be part of the reporting mechanism had to seek medical attention is saying that the problems are much, much worse than what the pfraudulent trial data was claiming (0.5%). Most likely, when the actual pfraudulent trial data is released, we will see that the problems were at least that bad and they were covered up.

People who think that release of the V-Safe data isn't going to lead to some profound revelation are fooling themselves. It adds more direct evidence to what the FDA/CDC and big pharma have been trying desperately to bury.

So 147 gigabytes of data causes your beast of a computer issues?

If I were to describe something as "a beast" of a computer it would have a terabyte of RAM at the low end.

I'm mildly embarrassed that in 2022 my personal workstation only has 128 GB of RAM.

Attached File

I actually meant that the database is a beast.

Please load it up on your workstation and tell us what you learn.

Issues?  Not sure what you mean.

ETA I tweaked the memory and processor settings on my SQL Server instance, now it's running mo betta.  A few more observations about the data:

- V-Safe data does not include the age of registrants, not even in whole years (which would not be a PII violation.)
- The time of onset of reported events is wacky.  A lot of the records show the event happening BEFORE the vaccination.  The data is weird.
- Events being spun by ICAN, Steve Kirsch, et al as "had to seek professional medical care" are not necessarily that at all.  Reports include telemedicine visits and email exchanges that happened a year or more after the vaccination with no clear connection to the vaccination.

I'm starting to run out of ideas about how to look at the raw data, and so far what I see is a big yawner.  I welcome any suggestions or specific requests for queries.

V-Safe Database Confirms COVID Jab Hazards
Two lawsuits had to be filed over 15 months to get the CDC to hand over this data, which completely nullifies their argument that everyone should get the shot. When you see it, you'll understand why they've done everything in their power to conceal it.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• V-Safe, a database managed and monitored by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is a voluntary "after vaccination health checker" deployed to collect data on those who got the COVID jab. For the past 15 months, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) have fought a legal battle to get the CDC to release the V-Safe data
• The V-Safe data confirms suspicions that the COVID jabs are dangerous in the extreme
• Of the 10 million people enrolled in V-Safe, 7.7% (770,000 people) required medical care after getting the shot and 25% (2.5 million people) missed work or school or suffered a serious side effect that affected their day-to-day life
• The V-Safe data also shows a massive immune reaction signal. Four million people   40%   reported joint pain. Two million, or 20%, reported "moderate" joint pain and 400,000, 4%, classified the pain as "severe"
• The formula the CDC uses to trigger a safety signal is seriously flawed, as the more dangerous a vaccine is, the less likely it is that a safety signal will be triggered. Still, even using that flawed formula, "death" meets all three safety signal criteria and should have been flagged, yet the CDC has taken no action. Congress has a duty to investigate the CDC's failure to monitor safety

In an October 4, 2022, Fox News interview, civil rights attorney Aaron Siri, legal counsel for the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), shared shocking V-Safe data obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after multiple legal demands.

For more than 15 months, the CDC fought to not release any of these data. ICAN had to file two lawsuits and multiple appeals to get the CDC to hand it over, and when you see the data, you understand why.

What Is V-Safe?

By now, many know about the existence of the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), a publicly available database for vaccine adverse event reports, jointly managed by the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

V-Safe1 is another database managed and monitored by the CDC. It's a voluntary "after vaccination health checker" deployed to collect data on those who got the COVID jab.

Anyone in the United States can enroll in V-Safe, using their smartphone, after receiving any dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Parents can also enroll their underage children to keep tabs on health effects. During the first week after each dose, V-Safe will send you a daily text message asking for details on your health and well-being. After that, check-ins are sent out on an intermittent basis.

What Does V-Safe Show?

So, what does the V-Safe data, which the CDC was so reluctant to release, actually show? Are the COVID jabs as harmless as they're claimed to be? Far from it.

As detailed by Siri, out of the 10 million people enrolled in V-Safe, 7.7% (770,000 people) required medical care after getting the shot and 25% (2.5 million people) missed work or school or suffered a serious side effect that affected their day-to-day life.




As noted by Siri, these numbers are extraordinary. One of the key messages we were given was that while COVID was not a significant threat to all people, getting the shot would limit the number of hospitalizations, deaths and days missed from work due to infection.

Well, we now see that 25% of those who got the shot ended up missing work or school because of the side effects, and 7.7% needed medical care. That's staggering, and completely nullifies the CDC's argument that everyone should get the shot, whether they're in a high-risk category or not, and whether they've already had COVID-19 or not.

Massive Immune Reaction Signal

The V-Safe data also show a massive signal with regard to the jab causing an adverse immune reaction. Four million people, out of the 10 million   40%   reported joint pain. Two million, or 20%, reported "moderate" joint pain and 400,000, or 4%, classified the pain as "severe."

As noted by Siri, joint pain is often a sign of an immune reaction and could be cause for concern when it occurs after vaccination, especially when you consider that the shots were supposed to protect the elderly, who already tend to have joint problems.

The V-Safe database also reveals that even though fewer doses of Moderna were registered, it's mRNA shot accounts for a larger portion of negative effects, compared to Pfizer's jab.

ICAN has now built a searchable dashboard of this V-Safe data.2 In the video below, Albert Benavides (who goes by the name Welcome the Eagle 88), an RCM expert, data analyst and auditor, provides a tour and overview of how to use the dashboard, including some of its strengths and weaknesses.

Why Did the CDC Fight to Keep V-Safe Data Hidden?

In an October 5, 2022, Substack article, Steve Kirsch commented on the V-Safe data dump:3



As noted by Kirsch, side effects could be either under- or overestimated in V-Safe, or both, as some might ignore V-Safe requests to answer questions, and others may only sign up or be incentivized to fill out the questionnaire if they suffer a problem.

Additionally, the options for reporting a side effect are predefined and very generic, so people might be experiencing effects that didn't fit any of the predefined categories of injury. Importantly, death is not reportable to V-Safe, as dead people cannot use their phones. So, we have no way of knowing how many of these 10 million registered V-Safe users have died.

However, "Whether the rates in V-Safe is over-reported or under-reported is a red herring," Kirsch says. "The issue that should concern everyone is the CDC concealed all the V-Safe data from everyone the entire time."

In addition to spending taxpayer dollars to prevent the release of this information   which we have every right to   the CDC also stopped promoting use of V-Safe around May 2021, mere months into the COVID jab rollout. As noted by Kirsch, this was probably because "it became crystal clear that it was accumulating data that showed the vaccines were unsafe."

CDC Ignored Clear 'Death' Signal

In an October 3, 2022, article,4 Kirsch also points out that the formula the CDC uses to trigger safety signals   described in its VAERS standard operating procedures manual5   is "seriously flawed." Could that be intentional as well?

In July 2021, Matthew Crawford published a three-part series6,7,8 on how the CDC was hiding safety signals. In August 2021, Kirsch also informed the agency of these problems, but was, of course, ignored. Still, "even using their own flawed formula, 'death' should have triggered a signal," he writes. Yet the CDC did not notify the public of what they'd found. Here's an excerpt from Kirsch article:9











A Fictitious Example

Using a fictitious vaccine as the example, Kirsch goes on to explain how an exceptionally dangerous vaccine will fly under the radar and not get flagged, thanks to the CDC's flawed formula:12



Calculating Death Signal for COVID Jab

Next, Kirsch calculates the PRR (proportional reporting ratio) for death for the COVID jab, using VAERS data and the CDC's definitions and formula.



Even using the CDC's flawed formula, 'death' meets all three safety signal criteria and should have been flagged, yet the CDC has taken no action. Congress has a duty to investigate the CDC's failure to monitor safety.
As of December 31, 2019, there were 6,157 deaths and 918,717 adverse events total for all vaccines other than the COVID shot. As of September 23, 2022, there were 31,214 deaths and 1.4 million adverse events total for the COVID jabs. Here's the formula as explained by Kirsch:13



1.PRR>2 [PRR greater than 2]: It was 3.32

2.Chi-square>2 [Chi-square greater than 2]: It was 18,549

3.3 or more reports: There were over 31,214 death reports received by VAERS   which is more than 3



CDC Cannot Claim It Didn't Know

The CDC is responsible for monitoring both VAERS and V-Safe, and between these two databases, there's no possible way they could ever say they didn't know the shots were harming and killing millions of Americans.

The CDC also has access to other databases, including the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), which (before it was intentionally altered15) showed massive increases in debilitating and lethal conditions, including a tripling of cancer cases.16

The findings in these databases have never been brought forward during any of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meetings or the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meetings, at which members have repeatedly voted to authorize the jabs to people of all ages, including infants and pregnant women.

If the CDC was in fact monitoring these databases, as required, there's simply no way they could have continued to authorize these shots based on the data. Is that why these data were never reviewed? Probably. ACIP and VRBPAC members, for whatever reason, simply didn't want to know the truth. But the CDC has known all along, and there's no excuse for not sharing and acting on that data.

Help Spread the Word

The media are ignoring all of this   the V-Safe data and the CDC's failure to act on a clear safety signal (and the signal being death, of all things!), even when using a formula that was flawed from the start. So, spread the word. Everyone needs to know these facts. It's not speculation, it's the CDC's own data.

The CDC needs to explain why they spent our tax dollars to fight the release of the V-Safe data for 15 months, and why they didn't halt the shots when a "death" signal was evident. The mainstream press, members of Congress, the medical community and Universities also need to explain why they refuse to investigate these CDC data. To that end, here are a few suggestions for how you can help:



Originally published October 18, 2022, on Mercola.com

Sources and References

• 1 CDC V-Safe
• 2 ICANdecide.org V-Safe Database
• 3 Steve Kirsch Substack October 5, 2022
• 4, 9, 12, 13 Steve Kirsch Substack October 3, 2022
• 5, 10, 11 CDC VAERS Standard Operating Procedures January 29, 2021
• 6 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 1
• 7 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 2
• 8 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 3
• 14 Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety August 2004; 13(8): 519-523
• 15 WISPolitics February 10, 2022
• 16 Steve Kirsch Substack February 5, 2022 DMED

Reasons to hide/delay this info:
- The data reveals potential willful & wanton negligence/misconduct? (Acting with reckless indifference to the consequences of an agencies own actions when the agency/leaders are aware that their actions would likely result in injury to others).
- Data did not match the narrative & exposes material misrepresentations/negligence on a global scale?

Yet, despite the red-flags that appear to warrant suspension of the vaccine, they continue to push this vaccine on children and low-risk individuals? Hmmm. What could be the motive?

Is this why Pharma wanted to delay release of their data/safety studies for decades?

Why continue the vaccines under an emergency order (protecting from lawsuits) since the vaccines are said to be safe?

The answer is painfully simple and so ignorantly ignored. In decades, the damages are done. The billions of dollars have been made and the new guard can claim they have corrected the problem.

Well stated.

Kimberly Biss, MD an OB/Gyn explains in her hospital she is seeing a huge rise in infertility and miscarriages as well as a 25% increase in irregular cervical cancer screening pic.twitter.com/v0nJhkaHdz

— Janey (@_Janey_J) October 16, 2022

Looks like her.

Did she say infertility dropped 50% while miscarriages increased? Did she misspeak?

Kimberly Biss, MD, is a board-certified ob-gyn in Tampa Bay and St. Petersburg. During her time at Bayfront Health, Dr. Biss has held numerous positions within the hospital's committees, including serving on the Board of Trustees, Physician's Technology Council, and Chairman of the OB-GYN department. She was named chief of staff in January 2020.

Dr. Biss is a Fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. She is a member of the Florida Obstetrics and Gynecology Society, Pinellas County Medical Society, and the Florida Medical Society. Dr. Biss also has sat on the committee for the March of Dimes Signature Chefs Annual Auction for the past eight years.

Oops wrong thread

This is a steaming crock of spit.

The cute, colorful dashboard that ICAN produced for exploring the V-Safe data completely ignores one very important data element:  The time elapsed between a vaccine dose and the onset of a reported event (NOT necessarily a "side effect.")  It also lacks some data that is extremely relevant to the symptom of joint pain, i.e. the age of the person who reports it.  The interface allows you to select under three years of age or everyone, but that data is not present in the material published for V-Safe.  It's baloney.

My analysis of the V-Safe data shows that some incidences of joint pain that are flagged as "severe" and requiring medical attention are reported as occurring more than 500 days after a vaccination.  How could that happen?  It's very simple - One feature of V-Safe is that it automatically solicits occasional "health checks" from people who have been vaccinated.  Basically the participant gets an email asking how they are feeling right now, and whether they have experienced any of a set of selected events, one of which is joint pain, and whether they sought medical attention for it.  A person who is experiencing a flare-up of arthritis for which he or she sought medical attention is going to appear in the statistics cited by ICAN, Steve Kirsch, etc.  But that is nowhere near sufficient information to attribute the joint pain to an effect of a vaccine.  Joint pain caused by arthritis or other issues is very common in older people.

I don't doubt that the COVID-19 vaccines can cause joint pain.  I experienced it myself after my first dose of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine and reported it to VAERS - See VAERS report 1474241.  It's not particularly surprising considering my age and the fact that I have some old injuries and have been diagnosed with arthritis.  I had trouble getting out of bed and walking on that morning.  It was pretty shocking, actually.  I had to use a cane until 600 mg of ibuprofen (yes, I have a prescription for that dosage) knocked it down, and I've been just fine ever since.  In fact, joint pain or "arthralgia" is a common effect from many other kinds of vaccines - You can look it up in VAERS.  It is an indication that a person's immune system has lit up and is working on something that it sees as a problem.

A person having joint pain (or any other symptom) bad enough to cause him or her to call a doctor, miss work or school, etc. a year and a half after getting vaccinated is not an indictment of the vaccine.  But ICAN, Steve Kirsch, et al won't tell you that.  As is the case with the VAERS data, and clearly explained in the VAERS data disclaimers, none of the reports in V-Safe can establish causation.  The fact that Event B happened some time after Event A doesn't prove that A caused B.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Here's a bonus question for our smarter students:  What do ICAN, Steve Kirsch, the Epoch Times, the Rounding the Earth newsletter, and WisPolitics all have in common with Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson?

Kid - are you still engaged in the professional services area of data analysis in the medical field ? If so, and being in California, then we can presume that your analysis falls under the auspices of Newsom's Covid Misinformation bill, which forces your stated opinion to be aligned with the CDC and other govt entities.

I work as a consultant to a company that hosts a specialty electronic medical records system.  I get an annual software royalty payment from the company.  The company has no connection to the CDC or any drug manufacturer.  Our specialty is cardiac electrophysiology.

Nothing I do is covered by Newsom's stupid misinformation bill.  I am not a doctor.  I have never given out any medical advice, nor have I criticized anyone for his or her personal medical decisions.  I am a database engineer and administrator.  I have no connection to the CDC or any other government entity, other than being restricted under HIPAA laws from releasing peoples' personal medical information.

If you don't agree with my analysis, please download the V-Safe data yourself and explain why you think I'm wrong.

https://www.icandecide.org/v-safe-data-files/