Source: Johns Hopkins – Side Effects and COVID-19 Vaccines: What to Expect

The CDC issued a report on an adverse event, anaphylaxis, with the Moderna vaccine:

Allergic Reactions Including Anaphylaxis After Receipt Of The First Dose Of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine — United States, December 21, 2020–January 10, 2021, CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 22 January 2021

The report used data from CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The VAERS website says:

It is not possible to use VAERS data to calculate how often an adverse event occurs in a population.

But the CDC calculated anyway:

VAERS detected 10 cases of anaphylaxis after administration of a reported 4,041,396 first doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (2.5 cases per million doses administered).

VAERS is good at generating hypotheses but because it underreports it’s not good at calculating rates. The two papers below support this:

Electronic Support for Public Health – Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS), CDC Grant Report, 2010

Fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported [to VAERS]. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed.

Safety Monitoring In The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), Vaccine, July 2015

VAERS data interpreted alone or out of context can lead to erroneous conclusions.

Using VAERS to calculate rates is like, say … out of all the people in the US born with eyes, 7 reported having green eyes … 7 green-eyed people out of 328 million? Or, out of everyone in the state of Pennsylvania licensed to drive a car, 3 reported having an accident in the year 2020 … 3 accidents out of 10 million drivers? You might say that you know more people have green eyes or have had accidents, but that’s not in the database you’re using.

I can understand the drug industry trying to downplay side effects. But it’s the government’s job to counter industry, to regulate them, to stand with the public not the private. That doesn’t seem to be what’s happening here but I don’t know. The only reason I can figure the CDC used VAERS to calculate an adverse event rate is because VAERS underreports. There were other databases they could have used that are more aggressive (“active” instead of “passive”) in documenting vaccine effects. V-safe actually sends messages to your phone, post vaccination, asking “How are you feeling today?” VAERS sits there waiting for people to find it, then take the time and energy to use it.  (After your vaccination, did you or your healthcare worker sign in to VAERS with information about your sore arm or headache?)

These mRNA vaccines (Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna) have never been on the market. They weren’t tested long enough or with enough people to produce a comprehensive safety profile, let alone reveal long-term effects. Why is the CDC making these vaccines appear safer than what they’re known to be? Where’s CNN on this? The New York Times? Don’t journalists ask these questions anymore?