The CDC announced Thursday that they would be hosting an emergency meeting to address the higher-than-expected side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine in children.
The meeting will be held in one week on June 18.
Just 18 days ago, I reported that the CDC had eight reported cases of heart inflammation reported in children and youth after receiving the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine. At the time, that data was already a week old before it had reached the public.
They also weren’t very specific about which particular age group was affected.
Now they are scurrying to gather and discuss the hellacious increase of cases since that time.
I don’t use that word lightly, either.
Since then, they’ve now reported 285 cases, which is an increase of a whopping nearly 3500%!
Of the 285 cases, 226 meet all the CDC’s criteria for a working case definition for myocarditis or pericarditis. The vast majority have recovered, but 41 had ongoing symptoms, 15 are still hospitalized, and three are in the intensive care unit.
They expected to have reports of adverse reactions. Still, the reality of the situation is that almost 9% of the doses administered to youth ages 12-24 years old resulted in a myocarditis or pericarditis reaction, aka inflammation of the heart.
While this age range only makes up 8.8% of the vaccines administered, they make up 52.5% of the adverse reactions reported.
The most common adverse reaction was dizziness.
In the CDC’s slideshow, it’s odd that they switch the demographic ranges to end on either 24 or 25, which can convolute or skew the statistics if one is not paying attention.
Their agenda has been released in slideshow format and contains all the data they will be discussing during their meeting next week.
To say that it is poorly constructed is an understatement. The data sets are inconsistent at best.
Page 12 uses the age ranges 12-15 and 16-25, while page 17 groups everyone ages 30 and younger together. Then page 18 decides to use the age groups 12-15, 16-17, and 18-24.
That’s not all, either. Several other pages present data with different ranges as if they are purposefully trying to confuse the reader.
I’m not sure why they use varying age ranges when looking at the data, but one can see that it can easily be misunderstood or misconstrued.
The Tatum Report will continue to keep you up to date with the latest on the reported safety and efficacy of the newly minted vaccine.