Articles Details - DPF

Article Details

messenger Ask Dr. Patrick Flynn Right Arrow
Home > Articles Details
Article Image

CDC and FDA Withhold Data Used to Make Policy

CDC and FDA Withholding Data At A Glance:

  • FDA asks federal judge to grant until 2076 to release data used to approve Pfizer vaccine.
  • CDC not collecting data on natural immunity used to make policy.
  • Bills before House and Senate to recognize natural immunity.

Following the science has gotten a bit more difficult with the lack of available data to follow. From withholding information to not collecting it, governmental health agencies raised eyebrows last week at the lack of transparency in data. The FDA still hasn’t released any data or information used to determine the Pfizer vaccine’s approval. And the CDC isn’t collecting data on transmission from those with natural immunity. That leaves no data from these two leading agencies for the public in two critical questions raised in recent months regarding the COVID pandemic.

FDA: Nothing to see here until 2076

In August, 30 researchers requested to see the data Pfizer submitted to the FDA through the FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) process. This group of academics, professors, and scientists call themselves the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT). The members of the PHMPT stem from some of the most prestigious universities and are familiar with the processes of research, data collection, and the approval and usage of vaccines. Among them are contributors and editors of numerous medical publications. With a denial from the FDA, the group followed up with a lawsuit. According to the lawsuit, it is required under federal law:

“After a license has been issued, the following data and information in the biological product file are immediately available for public disclosure unless extraordinary circumstances are shown: (1) All safety and effectiveness data and information. (2) A protocol for a test or study . . .” 21 C.F.R. § 601.51(e).

Last week, the FDA asked a federal judge to allow until 2076 to completely release all documentation. The request suggested the FDA would release 500 pages a month of the over 329,000 pages Pfizer handed over for the approval process. To put it into perspective, it took the FDA only 108 days to grant Pfizer the approval license after receiving the total documentation. What the FDA is suggesting is that what took them 108 days to review for approval would take them more than 20,000 days to prepare for release.1

CDC: Nothing to See Here Because We Aren’t Collecting That Data

There is much discussion around breakthrough cases, the inability for the vaccine to stop transmission, and the case for naturally occurring immunity. With all of this in mind, the rules for the vaccinated and unvaccinated differ widely.

On September 2, 2021, the CDC received a FOIA request for:

“Documents reflecting any documented case of an individual who: (1) never received a COVID-19 vaccine; (2) was infected with COVID-19 once, recovered, and then later became infected again; and (3) transmitted SARS-CoV-2 to another person when reinfected.”2

The CDC responded in a letter via email received November 5, 2021, stating:

A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request. The CDC Emergency Operations Center (EOC) conveyed that this information is not collected.2

Hold the Phone -- Doc’s Thoughts:

So Much for Transparency

For all the lip service the FDA gave regarding their “transparency” with these shots, they sure aren’t living up to it. Let’s think about this for one minute. They are saying they reviewed and scrutinized and deliberated over data with a fine-tooth comb with enough critical thought to grant approval for the vaccine to be fully approved within 108 days. I know, they have a lot of scientists but 329,000 pages? That’s a lot of information to process and cross reference to be able to give a confident stamp of approval to.

Now, to go through that same information to prepare for public release is going to take over 20,000 days?! And the data is supposed to be released with licensure three months ago? I understand they can redact proprietary information for patents and stuff like that, but seriously? How much are they planning to redact? And why? I’m starting to question their already questionable approval even more.

Head in the Sand Over Natural Immunity

Let’s take a look at the other side of the story here, the CDC. I’ve been talking about natural immunity since the beginning. I’ve even had my labs done so that I can be sure where my immune system is strong. Studies from all over the world have shown the strength, durability, and longer lasting effectiveness of natural immunity when compared to vaccine induced response.

Yet the governmental health agencies are not acknowledging natural immunity for the unvaccinated and still require them to test, quarantine, mask, and all the things as if they had no immune response at all! That’ not even unscientific, that’s illogical! Do you know what is unethical? Not collecting the data to back up these divisive policies. They are just making stuff up with nothing to back it up. And we’re told to follow the science. It’s pretty convenient when there’s no science to follow.

Let’s follow the science going the other direction. Can vaccinated people become infected with COVID? Absolutely. Can vaccinated people transmit COVID? Absolutely. Same viral load leading to transmissibility? Even higher at times! So once again we are following their very questionable, very unreliable numbers to tell the story they want to tell. Except this time, they’ve just decided not to collect the numbers because it would prove their narrative incorrect and show the absolute failure of these shots!

Plenty of Real-life Data

We could also follow the numbers reveled in VAERS. That would paint a picture for all of the injuries that have been reported from these vaccines. We could also listen to the numerous vaccine injured that Senator Johnson has hosted in Milwaukee and then brought to Washington so that the Senate could no longer feign ignorance.

We could listen to Senator Cassidy as he grills the CDC and Rochelle Walensky for looking the other way regarding natural immunity. Or others who petition the CDC to recognize natural immunity. To be clear, there’s enough data and science to follow, even if the CDC and FDA don’t release anything. But why aren’t they? That should raise huge red flags.

Right now, we should be calling our senators to pass legislation to recognize natural immunity. There’s a matching bill in front of the representatives as well, introduced by Representative Harshbarger.

We need to stand for informed consent and defend natural immunity that so many Americans already have. It is unscientific, irresponsible, and dangerous to allow tyrannical mandates to come down from the executive branch with no regard to personal freedoms and immune response. It’s also very unethical for these government agencies that only pass down guidance, not laws, to not allow the public to see the data, nor even collect it! How are they making these decisions? That should raise some questions. Want some more questions? Where is mainstream media with all of these violations? Take a look at who sponsors their programs and that should tell you!