Hearings to examine Biden Health Officials and COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals.

Good afternoon. This uh hearing of the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee investigations uh will come to order. Uh I want to first thank uh the witnesses for your time and effort in appearing here today for your and for your testimony. Uh in conjunction with this hearing, I am releasing an interim report titled Unmasked How Biden Health Officials Purposely Turned a Blind Eye Toward COVID-19 Vaccine or I call them injection, uh, injuries, safety signals. I urge everyone tuning in to today's hearing to read the full report, to determine for yourself how the title is as accurate as it is incriminating. To set the stage for what follows, let me remind everyone that Doctor David Morins, uh, now indicted for this, uh, under conspiracy and destruction of records charges, uh, he was an advisor to Anthony Fauci, she emailed to colleagues on how to evade freedom of information requests, quote, " I learned from our FOIA lady here how to make dis emails disappear." And how we wanted, quote, " correspondence on sensitive issues to be sent to me at my Gmail address," unquote. Included in this report is additional evidence of how federal health officials avoided creating a paper trail to prevent transparency in public disclosure. In discussing how they've been warned of a major limitation of data mining system, one senior FTA official wrote, quote, "we should meet internally. Many considerations not suited to email." Unquote. Other federal officials appear to have openly acknowledged that they were actively attempting to avoid transparency. A CDC official discussing the sharing of vaccine safety data stated, quote, " I think because of the FOIAs, we may have asked FTA to stop sending these weekly data mining outputs." Unquote. In spite of their concerted effort to concede Documents we've retained, thanks to Secretary Kennedy's responsiveness to my subpoena and his commitment to radical transparency paint a clear picture of an obvious cover-up by federal health officials. Our report shows how FDA officials were warned and fully aware of their safety s- surveillance system's inability to adjust for a statistical phenomenon called masking, which according to medical researchers occurs when, quote, signals for a vaccine of interest are hidden by presence of other reported vaccines." Rather than using a newer state of the art system that can adjust for masking, Biden health officials purposefully chose to employ the older system that conceals the signals for serious adverse events associated with the COVID injection. Throughout two thousand twenty one, FDA officials received multiple analyses from the state of the art system, showing statistically significant safety signals for adverse events. but made a conscious decision to ignore that data. On uh October twenty two, two thousand twenty, CDC's Tom Shimbab-Bakuro touted VAERS by saying it can quote " rapidly detect safety signals" and can detect rare adverse events unquote. But in email an a year later, when VAERS was reporting worldwide adverse events of eight hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred ninety-five and seventeen thousand, Six hundred nineteen deaths. Doctor stated, quote, it's not a database that should be used for serious surveillance and research. And we have up on the screen um a chart that I produced almost weekly once I started tracking this. And and you'll notice uh it compares different drugs, uh adverse events reported of those things, deaths, deaths per year. Um you'll see at the top of the the the chart,

Mm.

Ivermectin appears to be a pretty safe drug. very bottom, covid vaccines, and again, this is in October of two thousand twenty one. Uh, seventeen thousand six hundred and nineteen deaths. It's important to note that thirty-two percent of those occurred either on the day of vaccination or within one or two days of vaccination. I know VAERS doesn't prove causation, but that is a correlation that uh federal health officials ought to be looked at. In reaction to the skyrocketing number of deaths and adverse events, other Biden administration and federal health officials were also publicly denigrating Vayer's with comments like quote, falsified Vayer's report, potentially misleading Vayer's posts, frequently misused by anti-vaccine activists and quote, conspiracy theorists, science deniers, and anti-vaccine activists can fill out the form. Now this is quite honestly contrary to reports in terms of the high percentage that are actually reported by medical professionals. The federal health a agencies had to be sued twice before a court finally forced them to disclose the results of the VSAfe system, an online self-reporting safety for surveillance system, created specifically for the mRNA COVID injections. Here's why they fought so hard to keep that from public view. Of the ten million people who voluntarily provided information to VSAfe, Seven point seven percent sought medical care for COVID injection adverse events, and twenty five percent lost time at work or couldn't perform their daily routine following injection. Even though I wrote twenty one letters requesting information on what the agencies were tracking, and what they knew about adverse events, I didn't need sophisticated mathematical models to tell me the COVID injection was causing significant harm. The data depicted on these charts Alone should have raised the alert level to DEFCON one. Now, this first chart is showing deaths reported on VAERS since the inception of VAERS. You can see starting nineteen ninety, deaths were approximately a couple hundred per year. Anaphylactic shock, those types of things. In twenty twenty one, deaths spiked to twenty one thousand six hundred thirty one. Now again, I didn't need a mathematical algorithm to tell me there's something going on here. And by the way, a lot of people say, well, that's because we administered billions of doses. One of the letters I wrote to the CDC showed the rate of death per dose, compared it to the flu, which is about point four six deaths per million doses. By the time we calculated this, the COVID injection was twenty five point five. deaths per million doses. That's a fifty five fold increase over the deaths for the flu flu vaccine. So something was going on here. Our federal health officials shouldn't be paying attention. Let's do the next chart. This is the uh the most up to date VAERS chart now. It's showing thirty nine thousand seventy seven deaths worldwide reported to VAERS and and understand and we'll we'll be adding this to the the record, the the Pilgrim Report. An HHS funded Pilgrim study at Harvard University showed that adverse events for vaccines are reported at less than one percent. So this grossly understates the number of adverse events and deaths, and you can see adverse events are almost one point seven million. Multiply that times what, a hundred? Thirty? These are dramatically understated. In spite of these shocking numbers, federal health officials continued to recommend the ejection, claiming it both safe and effective. By comparison, in nineteen seventy six, after approximately twenty five to thirty deaths, and over five hundred cases of Giron-Barre syndrome, the swine swine flu vaccine was pulled from the market. Biden federal health officials were clearly not as vigilant in reacting to what Veers was showing. For over four years, I have wondered how health officials could possibly ignore this overwhelming evidence of harm. Now I know. I'll report details that on March first, two thousand twenty one, less than three months after the COVID injections received an emergency use authorization, Peter Marks, the head of CBER and officials reporting to him were warned by FDA's Doctor Anna Sch- Scharfman and an individual who these officials recognize as an expert in FDA's data mining that the current system would mask safety signals for COVID injection adverse Doctor Sharfman proposed a new model, a new method, invented by Doctor William McG uh Dum M Dumaschel of Oracle, the inventor of the current algorithm, to uncover the saf- the hidden safety signals. On March twenty six, two thousand twenty one, six six twenty six days later, Doctor Sharfman sent Doctor Dumaschel's data analysis to senior FD officials showing that the new analytic analytical method found quote, forty nine of extreme masking and uncovered approximately twenty-five statistically significant safety signals of adverse events associated with the COVID injection, including let's put up the next chart here. Here's the sheet. These are the adverse events that they were showing a safety signal for using the new method. Bell's palsy, sinus rhythm, cardiac failure, Chronic. Acute left ventricular failure. A gonal rhythm, which is severe arrhythmia arrhythmia generally occurred at the at the end of life. Pulmonary infarction. Cerebral artery occlusion. Aortic stenosis. Sudden cardiac death. Hypertensive emergency. Basal ganglia stroke. Now, now, now these aren't minor. Remember, we're always told, you know, f Uh, adverse events are rare and minor. These are not minor adverse events, and this these safety signals were showing and they were strong, but they were being hidden because FTA officials refused to acknowledge that the current system they were using was invalidated. And they had to look at the new system that unmasks these things. Our report goes on to detail how federal officials refused to acknowledge these rev revelations or take action to warn the public. Instead, senior FTA officials repeatedly stopped to stop repeatedly tried to stop Doctor Scharffman from continuing her work or commuting communicating her findings outside of FTA. In September two thousand twenty one, Doctor Mor Marx informed Doctor Patricia Cavazzoni, the then director of CEDAR, that Doctor Scharffman, who was a CEDAR employee, quote, has been asked to cease and desist, conducting her data analysis. Doctor Marx complained that doctor Sharfman work was had become quote a major distraction, that her efforts could create erroneous conflicts that feed to anti-vaccination rhetoric. Doctor Peter Stein, the then director of Cedars office of new drugs, reported doctor Marks at his office had quote made it clear to doctor Sharfman quote that she should not be discussing providing internal analyses ex externally, and needs to focus on her assigned work. Doctor Scharfman, who retired from the FDA in two thousand twenty five after more than thirty five years of service, told PSI staff in a recent interview that she believed her FDA colleagues saw her as a, quote, pest and, quote, persona non grata, unquote, because she was raising concerns about masking. Our witnesses today are medical researchers and experts in scientific data collection. They will help clarify the masking issue and describe why this cover-up was so egregious. I want to thank them for the time and effort they've put I also want to thank Secretary Kennedy for his commitment to radical transparency and for promising to make HHS personnel with knowledge of these events available for interviews with s subcommittee and I also want to give a huge shout out to my staff. Uh, the these are the these are the folks who found a needle in a haystack in a document production from one of the universities that we were investigating two and half years ago found that David Morin's email Where he was talking about being able to, you know, being told how to make emails disappear. And to use as Gmail. So these are the folks who did that, and these are the folks who have combed through eleven million pages to find and discover this egregious cover-up. So thank you guys, and with that I'll turn it over to uh Senator Blumenthal.

Thanks, Chairman Johnson. Um I mean, everything that's been said. I think we ought to remember what it was like during the height of the covid pandemic. Literally, the fear, the death, the loss. And then the relief. As a result of Operation Warp Speed. Which President Trump ordered. in having a vaccine that gave people hope

Mmm.

and many people life. At the same time, none of the relief or hope enabled loved ones to come back. They lost lives and families had their lives upended. And we can never forget the heroes in our health care system who braved COVID in delivering care to people who needed it in hospitals, many of them for weeks, sometimes months. We are fortunate to have with us Maria Young. Thank you for coming here today. who spent many days in hospital close to seventy days in intensive care uh most lives were forever changed as a result but the vaccine offered a path forward for so many people and we should be thankful for operation warp speed in january twenty twenty one more than twenty thousand americans were dying each week from covid-nineteen between twenty twenty twenty and twenty twenty five more than one point two million americans lost their lives to covid-nineteen that's one point two million parents children friends loved ones and those deaths changed not only their families but their communities and our nation husbands lost wives parents lost children and in addition to those who perished millions were infected and many of them suffered life-changing injuries from the virus and employers suffered economically as did our overall economy and uh the survivors still bear, many of them still bear the scars of that experience emotionally, if not physically. Years of scientific analysis have shown that COVID-19 vaccines saved lives and prevented serious illnesses like the one that Ms. Young suffered. I don't agree with President Trump on a lot, but I have to give him credit for the work that was done to create covid-nineteen vaccines in record time. But instead of talking about the success, and remembering the ones we lost, vaccine opponents have turned one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in our country's history into a fodder for political attack. I I don't get it. Today's hearing purports to discuss a cover-up of side effects of the covid-nineteen vaccine, as if serious flaws in vaccines were purposely ignored. And let me be clear, they were not ignored. They were not disregarded. They were not covered up. The majority's report cherry picks emails and misconstrues an internal debate between scientists who were actively looking for ways to detect side effects to support a predetermined and flawed thesis that COVID-19 vaccines have done more harm then good that's not the scientific method to have a preconceived result and then frame the evidence to fit the outcome the report and documents that the majority has released simply do not support the notion of any kind of cover-up nor do the reports and documents do anything to change our understandings of the vaccines as safe and effective These points are important for the public to understand. And, with all due respect, nothing that Chairman Johnson has released shows the vaccines were linked to any adverse effects beyond the rare ones that health officials have acknowledged. Indeed, the risk of stroke, he claims, was hidden, not only was studied openly, but later shown not to exist. Without objection, I would like to enter into the record the four studies demonstrating the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters saved lives, Mister Chairman.

Without objection.

There is also a really deep irony in the majority's argument, given the current administration's overt effects to skew science and undermine public health. Last week, I wrote to the acting CDC director, Doctor Jay, Bhattacharya about reports that he has blocked publication of a recent study showing that COVID-19 vaccines were extremely effective at preventing hospitalizations last winter. That study still has not been formally released, although I understand that a copy was somehow leaked, literally, hours before this hearing. magically released. But not officially. And therefore, I call on the CDC director to officially release that report again. I asked my letter to him to be entered in the record, if there's no objection.

No objection.

I sincerely hope we never face another pandemic. I think most Americans join in that hope. And w- that we are still able to find dedicated scientists and, yes, pharmaceutical companies willing to work around the clock to find vaccines and cures, and public officials who are willing to support and encourage and to fund them with resources. I fear that this administration's actions to politicize science and slash scientific funding and to expel talented scientists are doing irreparable harm to our nation's ability to counter the next pandemic, the threat remains real and present, and we must respect science and encourage our scientists to continue to do their work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Uh, before we sort out witnesses, uh enter a number of uh records in into the record. Uh first the majority staff interim report. And the five hundred and ninety-six pages and ten spreadsheets uh that support that report. Uh second, my December fifteenth, two thousand twenty-five letter to HHA secretary Kennedy requesting information about an internal FDA memo on deaths of children following COVID-nineteen uh vaccination. Uh then my March twenty-third, twenty twenty-six letter to secretary Kennedy detailing the subcommittee's findings about masking, how federal health officials ignored and downplayed the risk of ischemic stroke, following vaccination of Pfizer's COVID-19 bivalent booster. And finally, a two thousand ten report entitled, the electronic support for public health vaccine adverse events reporting system. Again, this is the uh, what they call the Pilgrim study done by Harvard. So I'd like to end those on the record.

Mister Chairman, as I indicated previously, I have a judiciary committee hearing, and I'll be right back.

OK, sounds good. Uh, without objection. on my entering records into the So it is the uh tradition of this subcommittee to swear in witnesses, so if you all rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give before this subcommittee will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Please be seated. Our first witness is Doctor David Wiseman. Doctor Wiseman is the president of Synecion. Did I get that close? Pretty close. Synecion. There you go. I I actually practiced that beforehand and I still blew it. Uh, an R and D company focused on fibrosis and pain. He received his PHD from the University of Manchester and has a background in experimental pathology pharmacology and immunology. From nineteen eighty seven to ninety four he worked at Johnson & Johnson, rising to the position of barakah to Adam Mahom, shaykh Ali ibn barakah

hey me distinguished chairman ranking member and committee members With today's stunning revelations, I am humbled to discuss critical flaws in statistical safety signal and potential risk detection in VAS touted by CDC as the nation's early warning system for vaccine safety and credited by former CIBA Director Marx with detecting both potential and actual safety issues and informing vaccine policy decisions. Among limitations undermining detection of statistical safety signals is the problem of Masking occurs when statistical signals for one vaccine in a database are obscured by reports associated with other vaccines for example Moderna's myocard myocarditis signal becomes hidden if it if its comparison baseline is artificially inflated by including Pfizer's myocard myocarditis signal reports. In a simple analogy, hemlock and arsenic appear equally toxic when compared separately, with a non-toxic baseline control such as tea. However, if hemlocks baseline data include arsenic data, hemlock signal is drowned out or masked, appearing innocuous. Today's report shows that senior FDA staff were apprised of the masking problem both prior to COVID vaccine rollout and repeatedly by Doctor Anna Schaffman. Doctor Schaffman is a veteran FDA statistician, lauded for bringing the empirical Bayesian into fda after collaborating with its inventor and developer of the of the associated signal software, oracles doctor william dumichel. shaftman communicated dumichel's findings of extreme masking, including death, myocard myocardial infarction, stroke and dementia, noting that i am not astonished that fda s analysis was was unable to detect these signals. She repeatedly advised colleagues of Dumouchel's improved procedures, not not brand new, they'd been around a while, to address masking in the same empiricus signal software used by FDA and commercially available. Nonetheless, officials attempted to contain Doctor Schaffman, asking her to cease and desist. Elsewhere, officials claimed ignorance on how to address masking, and that developing solutions exceeded FDA's capabilities considering it problematic to use a brand new, possibly unvalidated tool in the context of an EUA. FDA had validated methods adaptable to demask sig signals. In a special data run in the new documents, FDA's doctor doc FDA's doctor Menchik found a muting trend yet to appear in the record. In the related PRR or proportional reporting ratio analyses required of them by the VAS standard operating CDC somewhat accounted for masking. In twenty twenty two, Schaffman and Dumouchel published in the leading journal Drug Safety, their masking concerns and the improved method, unmasking hundreds of statistical signals for the COVID vaccines, consistent with my analysis. Despite possessing both software and in-house expertise, regulators failed to implement the solution to correct for masking, a striking failure given the accelerated deployment by operation warp speed of a novel and most complex class of drugs ever, MRNA. Compounding further, CDC considered that its PRR analyses were rendered basically redundant by FDA's Bayesian work, discarding its responsibility to generate these PRRs. Accordingly, the United States lacked a fully functional early warning system at the time of its greatest need. Separately, statistical signals were trivialized by avoiding the term signal or potential safety signal. These failures are incomp incompatible with the so-called enhanced surveillance required by their standard operating procedures hindering investigation of potential risks FDA was obliged to consider even without having to prove causality. And impugning vaccine injury compensation authorization and approval decisions, principle of which was Cominart's hastened full approval undertaken while Doctor Schaffman was voicing her concerns. Further, they marginalized those apparently injured by COVID vaccines. Not only did the system fail to perform as advertised, but as the drug safety paper presciently warned, the COVID vaccine reporting deluge likely created masking effects that now compromise for other vaccines going forward, and there are several papers that describe this. Regulators must swiftly correct masking and other of theirs deficiencies, heeding earlier warnings of their former colleagues, doctors Marks and Juergen, who said failure to detect and communicate a serious health issue related to vaccines could impact confidence, not only in conf COVID vaccines, but in all all vaccines. Thank you. I welcome your questions.

Thank you, Doctor Wiseman. Our next uh witness is Doctor Carl Jablonowski. Doctor Jablonowski is the Director of Science and Research at Children's Health Defense. He holds a Master's Degree in Computer Science from the University of Chicago, and a PHD in Biomedical and Health Informatics from the University of Washington School of Medicine. His research focuses on bringing about an end to childhood health epidemics. Uh, Doctor Jablonowski.

Thank you, Chairman. Pharmacovigilance is absolutely necessary. Our knowledge is limited, even of a vaccine that passes clinical trials of a few thousand very healthy people. We simply do not know what adverse events look like in a diverse large population, until they're administered to a diverse large population. We had better be watching very closely, which is pharmacovigilance. The vaccines, by honest accounting, were pathetically testifying. Pre-EUA, no drug-drug interaction study, no cardiovascular toxicity, central nervous system toxicity, other organ toxicity, blood toxicity, genotoxicity, carcinogenicity. Had they actually turned out to be safe, it would have been serendipitous, a happy accident. Luck is not a pillar of public health. Pharmaco-vigilance behind closed doors should give everyone pause. It is simply too important to not do it correctly. Lapses can be, and were, catastrophic. The vigilance heavily depends on three sources of data, the passive surveillance of VERS, the active surveillance of VSAFE, and the VSD, an active system linked to medical records. VSAFE was designed to collect inconsequential data. One of the first papers to publish was a mortality and adverse event study. The only figure in the entire paper was a time series comparison for both Moderna and Pfizer for both dose one and dose two of adverse events no one cares about. Injection site pain, fatigue, headache, myalgia, chills, and joint pain. Doctor Renata Engler is distinguished in the study of vaccine-induced myocarditis among US military, with four public On the CDC, not including myocarditis in V safe, she asked. If you do not ask, you will not see it. But does that mean it does not exist? Within fifty days of that meeting, Doctor Engler would start adding four more publications on COVID-19, vaccine associated myocarditis. The CDC already had in hand Israel's slides. The V safe system had ten million volunteers. About One third entered free text. Perhaps there is some horror found in the three hundred and sixty-six individuals who typed in myocarditis, a condition requiring medical diagnosis. That is amplified by the nearly fifty thousand people who typed in chest pain. The Vaccine Safety Data Link is a collection of thirteen health care organizations covering fifteen and a half million people. It can detect safety issues within a few weeks. most frequently used as rapid cycle analysis, which can miss delayed onset events. Better and timely options, like the vaccinated versus unvaccinated, or pre-post, is rarely used. And they would need the well-practiced extra step of considering differences in healthcare seeking behavior. By the time the CDC's web page was updated to warn of inflammation of the heart, three hundred and thirteen million doses were administered to one hundred and seventy-three million people. I do not see vigilance at work. With VAERS, the CDC chose to ignore its own standard operating procedure and not run proportional reporting ratios in favor of the FDA's, what Walensky calls more robust and Shima Bhaskara calls the gold standard. VAERS had been grossly under-reported for the first thirty years, maxing out at fifty-eight thousand reports. In its thirty-first year alone, VAERS logged eighteen times that number. Because of this disproportionality, the FDA's disproportionality analysis was washed out. Since both vaccines were the same platform and same adverse events, the comparison was muted. This isn't a blind spot. The FDA was completely blind to adverse events, and the CDC wasn't even looking. There was a savior in the ranks of the FDA who correctly identified the problem. appropriately worked with the inventor of EB data mining to create a solution, communicated the fix to everyone who would listen. The problem is, no one listened. Luck was not on our side. The CDC failed to look. The FDA failed to fix a broken system that the CDC touted as the gold standard. The HHS failed to protect us, especially after our freedom of choice was assaulted by the president threatening us all with our patience is wearing thin. Foyer evasion was well practiced and discovered obviously not through a foyer. Simply put, during the largest pharmaceutical rollout in human history, pharmacovigilance did not exist. That is the betrayal of our time, so vast that we cannot even count its casualties.

Thank you, Doctor Jablonski. Our final witness is Miss Maria Young. Miss Young will discuss her severe COVID-19 illness,

Thank you. My name is Maria Young.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you to the committee members for inviting me to share my story today. Survivor, warrior, miracle. These are all words that have been used to describe me over the last five years. They aren't words I would have chosen for myself. For me, I was just trying to regain the life I had lost to COVID before we had vaccines or any possible treatments. In twenty twenty, I went from being a healthy, active woman with a full career to being sedated, paralyzed, and placed on life support within days. I became a survivor of severe COVID-nineteen, ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome, after spending sixty-nine days on ECMO, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation, and seventy days on a ventilator. I am here because survival is not the end of the story. For those unfamiliar, ECMO is a rare form of life support, used when the lungs can no longer function on their own. Blood is removed from the body. oxygenated by a machine, and returned. It is invasive, complex, and used only when all other options have failed. ECMO does not heal the lungs. It buys hope and a little time. But that hope comes with significant risks. Stroke, neurological injury, blood clots, infections, limb loss, organ failure, and of course death. I spent more than four months in the hospital, most of it in the intensive care unit, ICU, most of it in a medically induced coma, and most of it alone. When I finally woke up, I had no memory of the time that had passed, and no understanding of how much I had lost. During those months, my family lived through trauma that still echoes today. My mother was told repeatedly that I was not expected to survive. My sister wrote my eulogy. My family prepared themselves for the unimaginable, all without being able to see me in person. Day after day, my mother waited by the phone for a call for a call from my doctor with the update for to that day. They carried grief and hope at the same time, a burden that families of critically ill patients know all too well. While I was unconscious, my body endured a long list of complications that many ECMO survivors face. Multiple inflec- infections, including one that almost took my vision, blood clots, collapsed lungs, severe muscle wasting and deconditioning, delirium and hallucinations, prolonged sedation and sedation drug withdrawal, blood transfusions, a tracheostomy, a feeding tube, pressure wounds, a deep neck wound from cannulation, and long-term cognitive and physical impacts. These complications are not footnotes. They are the reality of surviving critical respiratory illness. They shape recovery for months and often years. They are especially hard when the diagnosis and treatment lack understanding and support. When I finally woke up, I had to relearn how to breathe, how to swallow, how to sit up, stand, and walk. I had to rebuild my life from the ground up. And while I'm deeply grateful to be alive, gratitude does not erase the trauma. Survival comes with weight, the weight of knowing how close I came to dying and that many others weren't as lucky. When I was discharged, my list of diagnoses included dysautonomia, cognitive impairment, demoralization, severe body deconditioning, Long COVID, partial vocal cord paralysis, and post-intensive care syndrome, among others. But alongside that weight is profound gratitude, gratitude for the nurses who spoke to me even when I was unconscious. Gratitude for the respiratory therapists who taught me how to breathe again. Gratitude for the physical and occupational therapists who celebrated every inch of progress. And gratitude for the doctors at Johns Hopkins who made bold decisions to save me, including placing me on my stomach while on ECMO to try to improve my lung function and oxygenation, something that had never been done before at Johns Hopkins on a patient on ECMO with a tracheostomy. They believed my life was worth fighting for. And gratitude for my community. who held my family up when they could no longer do it on their own. My experience led me to advocacy. Over the last several years, I have connected with hundreds of survivors, people living with long COVID, families who lost loved ones to COVID-19 or while on ECMO, and ECMO survivors who carry scars, both visible and invisible. These communities are full of people who taught, who fought for their lives or for the loved or their loved one's lives. And emerged in a world that often moved on without them. Many feeling abandoned by systems not built for long-term recovery, by insurance structures that don't recognize the complexity of a post-ICU life, by a public narrative that treats survival as the end of the story. My work is to make sure they are seen, heard, and supported. That's why I stay up to date on my COVID boosters and other vaccinations. I also continue advocacy with organizations like your family to share my story through them, through my personal connections, and encourage everyone to continue to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and other diseases in the hopes of helping people avoid the same traumatic experience I and my family went through or worse. Survival should not be followed by fear. It should be followed by support, protection, and a chance to rebuild a life with dignity. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for sharing your story, Miss Young. I would, I would love to connect you with Brian Dressen. Uh, many of the things you said are exact same words I've heard from the COVID injection injured. These people were healthy, they were active, now they're permanently disabled. Uh, when I first met them, held held our first event in Milwaukee. All they wanted was to be seen, heard, and believed. That was their third, you know, seen, heard, and believed, so they could, they could get treatment. They still can't get treatment because they are not being acknowledged. I I wanna, once I introduce this video, I wanna start my Q and A with with a one minute video. Uh, but to set it up, this is a video of recordings of Zoom calls between the vaccine engine. By the way, React nineteen, I think I read, they've got something like forty thousand active members. Uh, they probably would have more if Facebook wouldn't, Facebook hadn't been shutting down their support groups, leading to suicides among those, lack of that support. But this is actually a a a note in terms of what this video describes here from Brea Andresen. She writes, " Beginning in March, twenty twenty one, seriously COVID-nineteen vaccine injured patients were flown to NIH, and this is March, twenty twenty one, the same time they were made aware of the fact that they were gonna mask the safety signals using the algorithm. Vaccine injured patients were flown to NIH headquarters for extensive testing and evaluation and treatment. Study participants, and I think there are about twenty-three of them. Study participants received credible diagnoses, including quote, post-vaccination neuropathy. Not again, they were diagnosed as vaccine injured. And specialized treatments, the participants say, saved their lives. They were incredibly grateful. That the NIH, people like Doctor Nath, were were paying attention to them and in treating them and in improving their severe injuries. That same month, NIH researchers began promising participants that the study and their injuries would be made public. And apparently email where that promise was made was also uh uh copied to Peter Marks and Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock. The NIH then asked participants to remain quiet. Say nothing. And tell the disclosed to study themselves. They complied. They feared if they were to go public, they'd lose the treatment. That all the thousands of other injured that were counting on them to be studied, to develop cures, wouldn't receive treatment either. So they stayed silent. Holding onto the promise that help is coming for the many others nationwide. That study and the injuries were never disclosed to the public. They were lied to. And this video, again, read my report, Senator Bluma, I c- I cannot believe you read my report based on your opening statement. Read my report. It is irrefutable. But the video is of Peter Marks, head of CBIR, the man who was notified on March first, two thousand twenty one, that the the safety surveillance system that they were gonna use to detect those rare and mild safety signals was invalid. It was gonna mask those, it was gonna hide those very safety signals. Again, twenty six days later. An, as say the art system showed twenty five safety signals and I read how severe those adverse events were. But just listen to what Peter Marks, with the knowledge that he was treating vaccine injured injur and they weren't mild injuries. These were life-threatening injuries. These were total dis- disability type of injuries. So he knew it. He was treating them. He knew that his service safety surveillance system was masking these signals. They lied to them. listen to what peter marks had to say it's about a minute long video

there is incredible bs out there uh uh about like thousands of people dying etcetera that just ain't true

no one's denying that adverse events can occur that doesn't mean that any given individual might not have had something related to the vaccine i'm not i'm not denying anything the issue is that the you couldn't really tell uh you you just couldn't tell whether there was a signal or not

yeah

it's something that's been reported but not as something that is clearly uh vaccine related.

You guys know we exist. We know that you know that we exist. But the public doesn't think that you guys know that we exist.

That was Brian Dresen at the very end there. Again, they were pleading with the officials at the FDA NIH that knew they were severely injured by the vaccine. Counting on them to make that public, to study their results so that others could get treated. To this day, they have not done so. Put put up a chart number two here. Doctor Wiseman. Again, I I know you you've looked into this in a great deal of depth. You know, the the in the part of the very complex mathematical models of and algorithms of empirical Bayesian analysis. I'm not a statistician. I'm I'm just a lowly account. How in the world Could the people who were touting VAERS, Tom Shimabukuro in October of twenty twenty, this is, you know, this is a system that can really detect even small safety signals. They had to hire the contractor that was putting VAERS, you know, the VAERS reports into VAERS. They had to hire thousands more people because the overwhelming numbers of reports. Did did you did you need a if a fancy statistical algorithm to tell you that something was going wrong here with these injections?

Yeah, clear clearly there's some big alarm bells that are going off there, but um I I I I do wanna point out that you know, one of the criticisms of VAERS is that, you know, that's stimulated reporting and anyone can report and all that sort of thing. The point about these disproportionality analyses is that it actually removes that from from the equation because in the way the mathematics are done so so obviously there is red flags in that in that sort of chart that you are showing there but but but the key point about the these disproportionality analyses the Bayesian data mining the PRR and others is that it actually removes that from the equation because of the niceties of how the mathematics are done so it's really important so the in the in the uh list of uh forty nine uh events that that you've listed there um these are all showing uh uh signals for for the for the the basium beta mining and also not only that, in the PRR method, which is masked, they're showing they're showing signals. So so whichever way you look at it, there's signals. And and the key point, Senator, is that um for the purpose of the EUA, the FDA will require to consider not only actual proven risks, but potential risks, and potential risks are represented by signals without necessarily having to prove causality. But in all the decisions that the the law is very clear, it says the FDA has to consider actual and potential risks. And by hiding the potential risks in the various ways that you've described, um, the the the the public would deprive of of this knowledge, the doctors would deprive of their knowledge, the ACIP and the Verb Act committees would deprive of this knowledge. So so every way you look at it, there's a problem.

OK, so. So again, so so my sophisticated mathematical model, when people push back on this, well yeah, Sanders, because we had So so we calculated deaths per million doses, compared that to the flu. Again, that's disproportionate, right? Disproportionality. So flu averaged about point four six deaths per million. And we did the calculations, twenty five point five, that that's pretty disproportionate to me. Th throw on,

Right.

you know, combining with that, again, I, you don't need, they didn't need.

Well, well, the

And and and again, then they they had the vaccine injured in front of them. They were

Um, several years ago, Doctor Brian Hooker and I did an analysis of VARs when we tried to pinpoint when enough VARs reports had existed to identify myocarditis. And that dates all the way back to the week of February nineteenth. of twenty twenty one, which is well before even Israel contacts the CDC saying we're seeing a whole lot of myocarditis we wanna speak with the relevant expert at CDC it is way before anyone in the United States was that the CDC admitted to them on May twenty eighth.

OK. Uh, I actually they didn't start the clock right away, so I'll reel to my ranking member now.

thanks mr. chairman um i um would like to enter into the record a twenty twenty four study from fda and cms which concluded there there was quote no statistically significant association between either mrna vaccine and stroke i'd also like to enter into the record a letter from the american heart association stating that there is a quote substantially elevated risk of stroke from covid nineteen infection there's no objection mr. jim

without objection

um there's no clear let alone convincing evidence that covid-nineteen vaccines have caused adverse effects beyond the rare ones that public health officials have acknowledged. There is clear evidence that COVID-nineteen itself is linked with many worse adverse events, including stroke. And there are signs that the administration is regretting its implied or explicit opposition to the use of vaccines in America today, because they are so contrary to what people across the country really believe and correctly believe that vaccines actually do save lives. Uh, I'd like to ask, uh, Ms. Young a couple of questions, but first I wanna thank you again. Obviously, this moment is a very, very difficult one. for you as it would be for anyone recalling almost seventy days in a coma two hundred plus days in a hospital in intensive care near death um at the time you entered the hospital there were no vaccines available by the time you finished life support there were multiple vaccines and millions of people had been inoculated and so in a sense your story is about re-entering the world, a different world, a better world, that would have saved you from this horrific ordeal. Um, but this basic truth, this miraculous outcome, during the time that you were unconscious, became tarnished when opportunists began raising false alarms and warned of hidden harms from vaccines while hawking untested supplements, fearmongers attacked the scientists and public health officials who had brought us out of one of the darkest hours in our nation's history, and people angered by measures taken to contain the virus claim the threat that it posed was never real to begin with. So, I guess my first question is, uh, do you remember when you first learned that a vaccine against COVID-nineteen had become available and how did you feel?

Um, when I woke up, my first question was, um, who did I get sick? Because I assumed, you know, everyone I had been near, um, had gotten sick and nobody had. But I remember laying in my hospital bed, I was kind of waking up and still going through delirium, and they had the TV on. And, um, I was watching the news and it felt really surreal because people were getting vaccinated, health care workers were starting to get vaccinated. And I just remember feeling like a little sense of relief that like nobody else will like this will stop life will go back to what it was before potentially. Um, and my family, my parents and my sister were actually able to get vaccinated the day they picked me up from the hospital. By coincidence, there was, um, availability and they also felt just a sense of relief and hope.

And, uh, you look great, if I may say. Uh, I've seen some of the pictures of how you looked when you were in the hospital and I wouldn't recognize you, uh, which attests to, I think, the quality of care that you received at Johns Hopkins. And thanks to those docs and all the specialists and the nurses and, uh, all the heroes uh, not just there, but all around the country who believe in vaccines, who believe in science. Um, how has the experience of battling for your life against COVID-19 affected, um, how you feel about vaccines?

I don't think I thought about vaccines much before. Um, we just had them. They kept us safe. They had eradicated several diseases. And then, um, afterwards it kind of was like why didn't it happen sooner, why wasn't why couldn't I have benefited from it and for a long time I thought like why me why did I get this sick and then as I learned more about covid and about all the um data that came out of it I said well why not me I was forty one I was healthy I didn't have pre-existing conditions I was the reason that we needed a vaccine