New ages 5 to 11 year-old CDC study: Proof of bozos at the CDC, NY Times


For 5 to 11 year-olds, the numbers in the latest CDC paper indicate a death rate than is 10X higher than any sane stopping condition. The myocarditis rates in boys are at least 6X normal. The CDC paper is yet more evidence that the vaccines should be stopped immediately.

I just saw this NY Times headline, “Covid vaccines rarely lead to problems in younger children, according to two C.D.C. reports.”

Two more misleading, flawed CDC studies

OK, here we go again. More flawed CDC studies.

I’m going to (briefly) rip to shreds the first one, and then have a contest for the person who does the best job of ripping apart the second one in the comments.

Here’s the first CDC study. My good “friends” Tom Shimabukuro and John Su are co-authors, so that’s a tip off it will be false and misleading. I was not disappointed.

When they use the VAERS numbers, they never multiply by the VAERS under-reporting factor (URF). The URF is 41 this year. They know that and they say nothing. They pretend it is 1.

Metrics from the paper

Here are the key metrics from the paper (and from CDC site):

Time frame: November 3–December 19, 2021 (46 days)
Doses: 8.7 million (I’m guessing 3M got 2 doses; 2.7M got 1 dose, so ~5.7M kids)
Age group: 5 to 11
Death rate: 13.3 per 100,000 people-yr for that age group
# deaths: 2
# myocarditis: 15
Cause of death: Not reported (just that there were 2 females age 5 and 6), but based on data, the vaccine didn’t cause it. Right. Sure. Whatever you say. Did you do the autopsy? Of course not. No way. So you can’t possibly know if the vaccines caused the deaths, can you? Here’s the 5 year-old’s VAERS record so you can see for yourself what happened. She was jabbed Thurs night, released from the hospital (presumably because she was determined to be “cured” of her Mycoplasma pneumoniae) died Sunday night after 9pm, just 3 days after the jab, likely from a cardiac arrest caused by the jab. No autopsy.

Quick analysis

Only 2 deaths?!!? Are you kidding me???

Do the math guys.

To make the math simple, assume an average 3M kids for 46 days.

3M kids*133 /M kid-yr* (yr/365)*46 days = 50 child deaths in that window

In short, the number of deaths they reported in the study is RIDICULOUSLY low because John Su is corrupt (as I’ve noted in an earlier post) and never multiplies the VAERS event count by the VAERS under-reporting factor (URF). This way he defrauds the American people into believing the vaccines are safe and effective.

Let’s do a conservative estimate here based on the limited data we have. The 2 VAERS deaths are an estimated 82 actual deaths since the URF is around 41. Clearly it cannot be 1 as the CDC assumes, because we know that there must be at least 50 deaths. In short, they must be lying.

If we are super conservative and subtract all 50 estimated “background” deaths (which truly is very conservative since background deaths rarely get reported in VAERS), we still get 32 excess deaths which presumably are caused by the vaccine since there is no other explanation. I’d argue the true excess death number is over 80, but I don’t need to go there to prove my point.

To vaccinate 3M kids and get 32 excess deaths is a five-alarm fire that would immediately halt the vaccine in any sane world.

FDA panel member Paul Offit said earlier that a 1 in a million death rate is a clear stopping condition for a vaccine (as I’ve written about earlier). OK, we have 10X the stopping condition. Paul Offit is silent. He never answers my emails.

Myocarditis isn’t slightly higher. It is way higher.

Then we get to the myocarditis rate which was 7.5X the death rate.

So we are looking at at least 15*41=615 cases of myocarditis in 2.8M boys who were jabbed or 1 case per 4,552.

According to this article, “Only 132 out of 3.7 million kids without COVID developed myocarditis.”


So that means we expected to see just 132*2.8/3.7= 100 cases of myocarditis background, but we saw over 6 times more than normal.

Comments (by Luke)

The study was also based on a very short period of time and not all kids had been double jabbed by then. We know the risk increases with the 2nd dose. Additionally, there is a delay between the adverse events and their reporting in VAERS. so the 46 days of data is in actuality more like 30-35 assuming around 7-10 day lag in reporting.

[Editor’s note: the lag time in VAERS can be months for two reasons: the person reporting it doesn’t necessarily do it immediately and there are so many submissions to VAERS that there is a huge backlog in processing submitted reports. Therefore, the number of these reports are clearly conservative making my conclusions on the limited data even more concerning ]

V-SAFE analysis (by Peter Yim)

here 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.

The second study (analysis by Brian Mowrey)

The second study

MMWR reports are always cherry-picked to support a given headline, though at the same time the best criticism is already described in the “limitations” portion of the report:

  1. “First, the data came from **only six hospitals, five of which are in the southern U.S. region**. The proportion of adolescents with obesity in the southern United States is higher than in other regions, which might explain the high rates of obesity described in this report. Therefore, findings might not be generalizable to other areas.
  2. […]
  3. Third, **incomplete or missing data in medical records might lead to underreporting and underestimation of details such as COVID-19 vaccination frequencies**.
  4. Fourth, at the time of hospitalization, persons aged 12–15 years **had only been vaccine-eligible for 2–3 months (9), possibly contributing to the low vaccination rates observed**

So they always show you their (lack of) work. What was the vaccination rate among 12-15 years in these cherry-picked regions in July and August? They don’t know. So what does the rate of vaccinated 12-15 year-olds in the hospital mean, especially since it might not even be accurate? They don’t know.

There’s not much to ever say about MMWR reports except that they aren’t really designed to show what the news says they show.

Bottom line

Once again, a correct interpretation of the CDC report shows the vaccines need to be halted immediately.

It also confirms my earlier hypothesis that the people at the CDC writing these reports are bozos and shame on the NY Times for giving a platform for the misinformation spreaders at the CDC.

This is a dangerous vaccine. Use your critical thinking skills. Even if you don’t believe anything I wrote, you don’t have vaccine victim groups of 250,000 people on Facebook if you have a “safe” vaccine. Open your eyes people. The NY Times should quit covering it up. Now.

Unfortunately, The New York Times is completely captured. They swallow the CDC reports hook, line, and sinker. What’s even worse is that one of their editors, Carlos Tejada, died 1 day after getting his booster and they didn’t even mention it in his obituary. That tells you everything you need to know about The New York Times and the death of honest, objective journalism, doesn’t it? They bias the news they report to you to match the narrative. And nobody at the Times is speaking out about it.

By Steve Kirsch Via