Are Adverse Reactions Rare?
Understanding VAERS, the Harvard Pilgrim Study, and the Truth About Reporting.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a surveillance program co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Its primary function is to detect potential safety concerns with vaccines by collecting and analyzing reports of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) from healthcare providers, manufacturers, and the public.
VAERS - The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System:
Purpose: VAERS serves as an early warning system to monitor vaccine safety and identify potential adverse reactions that may not have been detected during pre-market testing.
How it Works: Healthcare providers, vaccine recipients, and others can report adverse events to VAERS, which collects data on symptoms, timing of onset, vaccine type, and patient demographics. Reports are reviewed and analyzed to identify potential safety signals.
Limitations: VAERS relies on voluntary reporting and may include incomplete, inaccurate, or biased information. Additionally, it cannot establish causality between a vaccine and an adverse event, only potential associations.
The Harvard Pilgrim Study:
The Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in 2011 aimed to evaluate the performance of the VAERS system. Led by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute researchers, the study revealed significant underreporting of adverse events following vaccination.
Objective: The study sought to assess the accuracy and completeness of VAERS by comparing it with data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), a comprehensive electronic database.
Findings:
The study found that "fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported" to VAERS.
Dr. Lazarus, one of the study's authors, stated,"We know that VAERS captures only a fraction of vaccine adverse events."
The underreporting rate suggests that the actual number of adverse events following immunization is substantially higher than what VAERS records.
Implications: The findings underscore the importance of improving surveillance systems to enhance vaccine safety monitoring and to provide more accurate data for public health decision-making.
Harvard's Offer and CDC's Response:
Following the publication of the Harvard Pilgrim Study, researchers offered to collaborate with federal health agencies to improve vaccine safety surveillance. However, their offer was declined by the CDC.
Harvard's Offer: The Harvard Pilgrim researchers extended their expertise to help enhance vaccine safety surveillance, recognizing the importance of more accurate and comprehensive data collection methods.
CDC's Response: Despite the significant findings of the Harvard Pilgrim Study and the potential benefits of collaboration, the CDC declined Harvard's offer to assist in improving VAERS and related surveillance systems.
Extrapolating Underreporting Numbers:
Given that the Harvard Pilgrim Study found that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported to VAERS, we can extrapolate potential underreporting figures:
If VAERS receives 1,000 reports, the actual number of adverse events could be closer to 100,000.
If VAERS receives 10,000 reports, the actual number of adverse events could be closer to 1,000,000.
It’s frightening to say the least and even more concerning that our public health system was content with the findings and the system that is in place. It really makes one question IF they really wanted to know and if there are hidden motives, financial ties and agendas when it comes to the vaccination program.
“Adverse Events are Rare” is a False Claim
VAERS serves as a vital tool in overseeing vaccine safety, but acknowledging its limitations, notably underreporting, is crucial. The Harvard Pilgrim Study shines a glaring light on the necessity for more comprehensive surveillance mechanisms and demonstrates the willingness of experts to enhance public health protocols.
When healthcare providers claim adverse events are exceptionally rare, it prompts scrutiny regarding their data sources, especially considering the revelations of the Harvard Pilgrim Study. The lack of subsequent actions or adjustments to the surveillance system reflects a concerning indifference toward public safety.
Sources:
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. "Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS)." American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 174, Issue 3, 1 August 2011, Pages 308–318.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)." Accessed January 30, 2024. [https://vaers.hhs.gov/](https://vaers.hhs.gov/)
- Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. "VAERS Surveillance: Limitations and Cautions." Accessed January 30, 2024. [https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/vaccine-safety/](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/vaccine-safety/)