How confident was the CDC in its risk/benefit analysis?

Let's take a look at their own slides and see....

One of the things that has always been most stunning to me throughout this pandemic is that so much of the time, we are being given real information, just so few people actually look at it.

Today I want to go over a series of slides from June 18th’s ACIP meeting (available here).

These were some of the last slides being shown to the committee members walking through the supposed risks and benefits for each injection series, along with, most importantly, what ‘GRADE’ of evidence it was, or how confident they were in their findings being ultimately accurate, with 1 being the highest level of confidence and 4 being the lowest level of confidence.

Let us begin with the overview slide for Moderna below:

We can see that the CDC GRADEd two findings at the highest level of confidence, the first being certainty in the effectiveness of the injection preventing symptomatic lab-confirmed COVID-19.

What constitutes a CDC ‘case’ of COVID-19? I’m glad you asked, please see the description below:

Simply put, a symptomatic, lab-confirmed case of COVID-19 consisted of a positive PCR test, and pretty much any symptom known to infant- and toddlerhood, a number of which can be highly subjective, particularly with such young children.

The other finding they had the highest confidence in was the reactogenicity. Again, the GRADE refers to the certainty in their finding, not whether their finding was good or bad.

In fact, the other finding they are highly certain of for Moderna is that the injection had a significantly higher rate of severe reactions over the placebo.

Hospitalizations and MIS-C, two endpoints that are constantly being put out there as reasons to ‘vaccinate’ — well, they had NO data on those two endpoints. NONE.

Finally, their findings on serious adverse events rated the lowest GRADE of 4.

Read that again.

They had no certainty in their findings about serious adverse events.

These are our babies. Our toddlers. The most precious things in our lives that we do everything in our power to protect from the slightest harm. Parents tie themselves into knots over the smallest everyday risks, reading labels, following every product safety recall, buying expensive carseats, and on and on.

But for this product, the ‘experts’ have no idea what the difference in serious adverse events may be.

The CDC didn’t just leave us with this simplified chart, at least, they broke down each of their ratings, and I recommend perusing the following three slides to understand just what the quality of the ‘evidence’ is.

Pfizer’s Summary of GRADE

Now, on to Pfizer’s product. Again, let us begin with the overall GRADE table:

As you can see, NONE of the findings earned a GRADE of 1.

They have little to no confidence in their findings

As with Moderna, there is simply no evidence of any sort in regards to the boogeymen of hospitalizations or MIS-C, nor any data on even ‘asymptomatic’ COVID-19

And just as it was with Moderna, THE most important measure for our littlest and most vulnerable children is highly uncertain.

Again, don’t just believe me, read their own findings:

The whole authorization process for these children has been a sham. A dog and pony show. We all know it. But in the end, the CDC and the FDA can’t force this into our children’s arms (yet). It requires the parents to consent. It requires the parents to believe what they have been told. Right now, most young parents don’t know what to believe beyond what the media tells them, what their pediatrician tells them, that the CDC and FDA are ‘experts’ and that they wouldn’t authorize something without a high degree of confidence in the product. It’s their job to protect people, after all.

But the reality of their confidence is all right there, in black and white. It just requires people to look.