We were told, repeatedly, that the COVID-19 vaccines were “safe” and “effective.” But there has never been any persuasive evidence that they were effective – either in reducing transmission or the virulence of the virus. As for the “safe” claim, that has been falling apart piecemeal, in study after study.
The latest revelation is a new Senate report on a series of internal email exchanges among FDA executives concerning the work that Dr. Ana Szarfman – appointed by the FDA – was doing in tracking the negative side effects of the vaccine.
The story is simple once you strip out the jargon. Let me walk you through it.
What the Government Had
When the vaccines rolled out, the government put into place a reporting system to evaluate the results. This is standard protocol. What is also standard is that the selection of Szarfman wasn’t entirely at arm’s length. She wasn’t an outsider. She wasn’t an “anti-vaxxer.” She was a career scientist who helped build the very methods the agency used to spot “safety signals.”
And she found a problem – a flaw in the system.
Typically, the system works by comparing one vaccine against others, to determine the relative risk. That protocol worked well enough – most of the time. But by 2021, COVID-19 cases and reports on the vaccine were so common that they had swamped the database. The system was essentially comparing COVID vaccines against other COVID vaccines. When everything you’re measuring against carries similar risks, the risks get harder to see.
Szarfman corrected the study results accordingly, and guess what? Suddenly there were warning lights blinking for all sorts of serious side effects, including heart attacks, blood clots, sudden cardiac death, even categories labeled “death” and “sudden death.” All told, about two dozen safety signals that the agency’s preferred reporting system had missed.
What They Did with It
Alarmed, Szarfman took her findings to the senior FDA executives in charge. They thanked her and said they would get back to her. When she didn’t hear from them, she brought them more data. Again, they thanked her, but again they did nothing about it.
It was as if they were trying to quash the information. As if they knew they had something to hide.
And that brings us to the internal emails that have just been revealed. A few excerpts:
* “Before we potentially reach out to Ana, we should meet internally – many considerations not suited to email.”
* “… hold off on creating and sending data mining reports and analyses.”
* “Szarfman’s findings might create erroneous conflicts that feed into anti-vaccination rhetoric.”
That last one pretty much says it. The worry wasn’t about whether she was right. It was about managing what they wanted the public to know.
Eventually, Szarfman was told to discontinue her research.
Was It a Conspiracy? No. But It Wasn’t a Conspiracy Theory Either.
The Senate’s report doesn’t prove that every safety signal Szarfman flagged was cause for alarm. That is not what vaccine protocols are meant to do. They record complaints of injury from one vaccine and compare them to complaints of injury from other vaccines. And when, as in this case, the number of complaints from one vaccine is extraordinary compared to the rest, it tells the FDA that it calls for further examination.
But that didn’t happen this time. Instead, the FDA continued using a protocol that it knew was providing false results, despite being notified, time and again, by the scientist they had hired to identify potential problems.
A respected FDA scientist finds serious safety signals. She spends more than a year trying to get her bosses to look. She develops a better tool to detect those signals. And she’s told to stop. Then come the delays, the withheld records, the sudden “methodological” objections.
At the Senate hearing, two FDA officials testified that they had tested Szarfman’s new reporting system themselves and admitted that it was far more sensitive than the one the agency had used during the rollout. They kept using the old one anyway.
Will Anyone Listen?
Here’s what I said in 2022: This was the play all along. Push the official line hard, knowing the truth might surface someday. And when it does, just shrug and say, “We gave you the best information available at the time.” That’s the escape hatch. It always is.
So now that the truth is leaking out, the question is whether it will change any minds.
I’d love to believe that the folks who spent years mocking vaccine skeptics will wake up and say, “Hey! Maybe you were right!” I’d love to believe that this latest exposure will finally open the eyes of the Woke world that smugly knew better.
But I don’t think it will. Memory of the pandemic has faded. People have moved on. I doubt that any official involved in the cover up, from Fauci on down to the FDA execs that buried Szarfman’s findings, will have to answer for their crimes.
