09/14/2022 / By Ethan Huff
Government regulators at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) say they will not release any of the agency’s Covid-19 “vaccine” safety analyses for independent review because their findings are allegedly part of internal discussions that are protected by law.
Back in July, The Epoch Times submitted a request to the FDA for all analyses performed using a special method called Empirical Bayesian data mining. This method involves comparing adverse events recorded after injection with a Fauci Flu shot to adverse events recorded after injection with some other non-covid vaccine.
Whatever data these analyses produced was used by the FDA to foist Chinese Virus shots on everyone, including infants and toddlers. (Related: Check out our earlier coverage about the FDA’s suspicious secrecy to learn more.)
The operational procedures laid out by the agency and its partner in January 2021 and February 2022 stipulate that the FDA is to perform data mining “at least biweekly,” if not more often than that, to identify adverse events “reported more frequently than expected following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines.” That data was to come from the official Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
Fast-forward to today and the FDA is now refusing to release any information about this data mining, claiming an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that allows governments to withhold inter-agency and intra-agency memorandums and letters “that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency.”
The FDA also cited the Code of Federal Regulations, which states that “all communications within the Executive Branch of the Federal government which are in written form or which are subsequently reduced to writing may be withheld from public disclosure except that factual information which is reasonably segregable in accordance with the rule established in § 20.22 is available for public disclosure.”
The FDA is refusing to release even redacted versions of the data, which strongly suggests that the agency has a lot to hide. It really, really does not want the public to see these analyses, presumably because they expose Fauci Flu shots as dangerous and ineffective.
“The secrecy is unacceptable for an agency that said it is transparent with the public about vaccine safety,” says Kim Witzcak, co-founder of the non-profit advocacy group Woodymatters, which wants the FDA to be stronger and more transparent.
“What’s the point of having VAERS if you’re not releasing it to the public?”
Witzcak, who also sits on one of the FDA’s outside advisory panels, says her own concerns about the injections are also highlighted in a recent paper from Dr. Joseph Fraiman, which identified higher rates of serious adverse events in people who took the mRNA (messenger RNA) shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna versus those who took a placebo.
“If this data is available, shame on you for not making it known to the public,” Witczak said about that data. “It’s as if they don’t trust the people to make their own best decision for what’s good for them and their families.”
The Times says it is appealing the FDA’s decision to withhold the analytical data, which will hopefully at some point in the future force the agency to comply with the request.
“Hiding the evidence … again,” wrote a Times commenter about the FDA’s shady behavior.
“Didn’t your parents warn you not to trust the government?” asked another. “The swamp is a cesspool. Power corrupts people. Term limits are desperately needed.”
The latest news about the corrupt FDA can be found at FDA.news.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under:
analyses, bad research, big government, big pharma news, conspiracy, corruption, coverup, COVID, deception, FDA, FDA corruption, fraud, medical censorship, Plandemic, science deception, studies, vaccine
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2018 DECEPTION.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. Deception.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Deception.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.