Cherry-picked data drives proposed kids’ vaccine mandate

Opinion on the Washington Board of Health Technical Advisory Group

I cleared my schedule on Thursday, Feb. 10 to watch the first official meeting of the Washington Board of Health Technical Advisory Group as they begin to consider adding a COVID-19 shot to those shots mandated for children to start school. You can watch the complete recording of this online meeting at TVW (bit.ly/3uJ1MeZ).

As I watched the carefully crafted presentations, it was obvious the data being presented had been carefully chosen. All data presented supported the preferred official outcome of adding the COVID-19 shot to the list of required childhood vaccinations. Any reference to data that didn’t support that outcome, like the VAERS database injury data, was presented in such a way as to diminish the importance or the usefulness of that data set. The bias was almost shocking. You can review all of the presentations at the BOH meeting information page (bit.ly/3LInGFp).

The fact that the presentations didn’t include any information that would raise any doubt on the need for the shot for small children was disturbing, as it’s well known and scientifically documented that small children are not at significant risk when contracting this disease. For information documenting the low risk of harm, the reader can review information from Dr. Robert Malone (bit.ly/3LyKbMQ), and resources provided by the Unity Project Online (bit.ly/3rLg7FE).

In addition, there is information on vaccine-injured children such as this case where the FDA hid information on a vaccine injured child (bit.ly/34ESfej).

From the article: “This story is extremely troubling. Pfizer’s clinical trial for children aged 12-15 included only 1,131 children who were vaccinated and at least one of those children suffered a devastating, life-altering injury which, despite incontrovertible proof … has not been appropriately acknowledged by Pfizer or the FDA. Putting aside that one serious injury in a small trial should alone raise blaring alarm bells, one must ask: what other serious adverse events have been hidden and ignored by regulators?

For a virus that rarely harms children, the need to assure safety of the COVID-19 vaccine is high. A study with only 1,131 children is underpowered.”

Who’s on the Technical Advisory Group, and where are they from? While the Board of Health has provided a list of the type of people included on the board, they have failed to be transparent about the names of the people who are on the board. Based on the roll call from the two meetings I’ve watched so far, I’ve added names and positions to their list, as well as my best guess as to the communities represented by the board members (bit.ly/3GRSbER).

It’s safe to say eastern Washington voices are woefully underrepresented in this group and that it is Puget Sound-focused. In addition, the majority of the board represent institutions that would probably benefit financially if COVID-19 shots are mandated. That in itself should be grounds for disqualification for participation on the Technical Advisory Group.

The fact that many people are suspicious of the motives of these public health officials and the advisory group’s activities is a disaster for future public health policy. If the public doesn’t trust the state Board of Health, they simply won’t cooperate in a future crisis. This might be disastrous.

When data presented to an advisory board is cherry-picked by the Board of Health, rather than unbiased, complete, and extensive, then the public is correct to assume that people with an agenda are working to manipulate public perception. Trust must be earned. It’s clear politicians with a motive are driving this policy debate, rather than true and accurate medical data.

Shame on the policy manipulators, whoever they are.

What can we do to influence this policy debate? The Technical Advisory Group will have at least two more meetings before making a recommendation to the Board of Health. I encourage you to send your thoughts on the proposed vaccine mandate for children to the Board of Health, who will ultimately make the final decision, using the links on their website (bit.ly/3LtFGTJ).

When you write, politely ask the board to consider all of the data available. Assume that the members are good people with bad information. Send them every alternate scientific study that you can find. Your letter will become part of the public record, so they’ll have no excuse for saying “we didn’t know”.

At the very least, the Board of Health should put on the brakes. No decision on a childhood mandate should be made until well after the FDA has released all of the Pfizer vaccine safety data, which should begin on March 1 and continue for another eight months (washex.am/34BFCk0).

The judge on that case “cited a quote from the late Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican and 2008 GOP presidential nominee, that excessive secrecy from a government agency "feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public’s confidence in the government.””

If the Board of Health wants the future cooperation of the pubic, it’s time for an open, honest and transparent dialogue about the actual harms of the proposal. First, do no harm. Show me ALL the data.

Nancy Churchill is the state committeewoman for the Ferry County Republican Party. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own.