Comment on Hause et al; the CDC assessment of vaccine safety in children
This is a re-posting of a comment I made on Steve Kirsch’s Substack that raises questions about the seriousness of CDC COVID-19 pharmacovigilance as presented in their study. Please see link to Steve’s article for context. This is getting into the CDC weeds, but these weeds are at the center of US COVID policy. Here’s the comment:
There are two V-Safe data points in the CDC study that limit CDC conclusions on myocarditis:
a. "Fourteen (0.02%) children reportedly received care at a hospital"
b. "...information regarding reason for hospitalization was available for five children"
In other words there were 9 children hospitalized post-vaccine with unknown hospitalization diagnosis. The denominator is not clear as V-Safe enrolled 42,504 total and 29,899 for 2nd dose.
Conservatively, CDC cannot rule out a rate of myocarditis as high as 9/42,504 (V-safe enrolled 2 doses), 1 in 4722 .
Also, let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees: the stipulated astronomical hospitalization rate: 14/42,504: 1 in 3036.
One other thing that is troubling: "Parents and guardians of all hospitalized children were contacted". Say what? The parents reported the hospitalization, V-Safe contacted the parents to discuss the hospitalization .... and they didn't ask for hospitalization diagnosis during that conversation?
Remember - there are two equally important claims of the CDC vis a vis the COVID vaccines:
1. Vaccine adverse events are sufficiently rare.
2. A reliable pharmacovigilance system is in place - V-Safe.
Inability to establish hospitalization diagnosis in 9/14 patients raises pretty serious questions about #2.