A Senate investigation revealed that federal health officials deliberately suppressed critical safety data on COVID-19 vaccines, choosing to silence internal warnings rather than investigate mounting evidence of serious adverse events.
Warnings Silenced, Analysts Sidelined
In March 2021, Dr. Ana Szarfman, an FDA safety expert, identified a major flaw in the agency’s vaccine monitoring system that masked 49 serious adverse events. These included Bell’s palsy, sudden cardiac death, cerebral artery occlusion, and acute heart failure. When she proposed using an improved detection method that would reveal these hidden signals, agency leadership ordered her to stop. Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA’s top vaccine official, told colleagues that Szarfman’s analysis had become a distraction that could fuel vaccine hesitancy.
Internal emails show Marks instructed Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni to ensure Szarfman ceased her data mining work. The agency blocked her from sharing findings externally and redirected her to other assignments. Senator Ron Johnson, who spent four years questioning how officials ignored overwhelming harm evidence, said the investigation finally provided answers: they buried the signals deliberately.
VAERS Data Showed Unprecedented Death Rates
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System documented more deaths and adverse events from COVID vaccines than all other vaccines combined over its 30-year history. COVID shots proved 55 times deadlier than flu vaccines, reporting 25.5 deaths per million doses compared to 0.46 for influenza vaccines. Despite these stark numbers appearing in the government’s own database, federal health agencies chose not to investigate the safety signals that would have triggered immediate reviews for any other pharmaceutical product.
Protecting Vaccine Programs Over Public Safety
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations found that officials prioritized preventing vaccine hesitancy above addressing legitimate safety concerns. Rather than viewing concerning data as evidence requiring action, agency leaders treated it as a public relations problem. The investigation documented a pattern where employees raising red flags faced professional consequences while leadership avoided confronting data that contradicted their public messaging about vaccine safety. This approach left serious adverse events unexamined during the critical early months of the vaccination campaign when intervention could have saved lives.
My position was clear from the start: give the shot to those who were 65 and older, if desired. Give the shot only to those all those, regardless of age, who had co-morbidities and who would be seriously affected by the COVID-19 flu. Leave everyone else, especially children and young adults, alone and give guidelines that would help people not to be impacted by the flu (stay six feet away from people outside your household; wear a mask to keep yourself safe and others safe; wash hands and face as often as possible). Shutting down churches, businesses, companies, etc., went too far. Of course, when you have people who are just a step down from dictators (i.e., Democrats), you have people who love opportunities to control others. The sooner their tactics are exposed, the better.