Ronald Kostoff has given an outline, with some expected technical details, of the emerging crisis of Covid-19 vaccine-induced cancer. I have a personal story here, as one Australian Covid activist friend, who does numerous critical videos, had a friend who attended the protests. But he one day heard a voice in his head telling him to get vaxxed. And he did. He rang my friend to say that he did this, and now had an aggressive cancer. And now he is dead.
Kostoff ascertains the frequency of COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancers by examining the US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database for reports of cancers. VAERS has the limitation of vast under-reporting, with one estimate by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, finding that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” And, the situation could be even worst for cancer. But, given that severe limitation, it was found that there was for the US, so far, a total of about 83,000 cancer-related events post-COVID-19 vaccination. That alone would have been reason to halt the vax rollout, and this adverse effect is but one of many, such as fertility and neurological effects. And, it becomes real when you know some of the people dying. So, yes, the Covid issue is still vitally important.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/are-covid-19-vaccine-induced-cancers-rare-events-806312db
“BACKGROUND
COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancer has been judged a “rare” event by the major promoters of these vaccines (caveat: these injections prevent neither infection nor viral transmission, so they are not vaccines in the classical sense). To ascertain the frequency of COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancers, we have examined the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database for reports of cancers. Since cancers tend to have a long latency period, we have also addressed the issue of Early Warning Indicators that could identify COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancers on or over the horizon. Finally, we have compared cancers reported following COVID-19 vaccines with those reported following influenza vaccines for similar numbers of vaccine doses delivered.
While imperfect (as are most publicly-available vaccine adverse events reporting systems), VAERS is a reasonable system for identifying safety signals related to vaccines. One major VAERS deficiency is that only a small fraction of vaccine-related adverse events is reported to VAERS. A study by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, using electronic tracking, showed that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”. This is an average value over all adverse events; it may be far worse for cancer.
The Harvard Pilgrim Health Care study tracked reporting habits to VAERS for thirty days. Therefore, the 1% number should be termed a thirty-day reporting fraction. For adverse events that tend to occur rapidly, like headache, fever, chills, rashes, anaphylactic shock, blood clots, etc., a thirty-day study may offer a reasonable window. Cancer, however, typically takes decades to emerge, and a thirty-day window would be grossly inadequate for accurate reporting. The numbers shown in the present analysis should be viewed as a low “floor” of what the real-world numbers are. To get a more complete picture of the total cancer-related adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, these numbers should be supplemented by cancer Early Warning Indicators whose abnormal values could emerge shortly after the injection, and allow some prediction of what lies on or over the horizon.
METHODOLOGY
The VAERS database was initially accessed on 20 December 2022. The vaccines were limited to COVID-19 vaccines from all manufacturers, and the VAERS reports were for the USA. All adverse event types (termed Symptoms in VAERS) were retrieved. There were ~17,000 adverse event types retrieved, including ~5,000 with zero entries (the latter were not analyzed). A comprehensive query (consisting of myriad synonyms of cancer) was used to search the VAERS database, and retrieve cancer-related adverse events.
On 10 February 2023, the VAERS database was accessed to get similar information for the influenza vaccines from all manufacturers, and the VAERS reports were for the USA. The time period for the latter was selected to cover similar numbers of doses for the flu vaccines and the COVID-19 vaccines.
RESULTS
Before presenting the numbers, we need to define what is a cancer-related event reported in VAERS. Is it 1) a biomarker associated with the eventual emergence of cancer, 2) a group of biomarkers reflecting pre-clinical cancer, 3) a newly-diagnosed cancer, 4) a cancer that has been exacerbated, or 5) a cancer death? While all five are valid candidates, the present study concentrates on items 3) and 4).
This restriction to items 3) and 4) substantially under-reports the COVID-19 vaccine adverse events that may eventually result in cancer, because it excludes abnormalities in cancer risk biomarkers. These abnormalities in the appropriate cancer risk biomarkers would provide an Early Warning Indicator for potential cancers to emerge in the near or far future. A few potential Early Warning Indicators for cancer are shown in the following: “Cancer biomarkers, particular those associated with genetic mutations or epigenetic alterations, often offer a quantitative way to determine when individuals are predisposed to particular types of cancers. Notable examples of potentially predictive cancer biomarkers include mutations on genes KRAS, p53, EGFR, erbB2 for colorectal, esophageal, liver, and pancreatic cancer; mutations of genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 for breast and ovarian cancer; abnormal methylation of tumor suppressor genes p16, CDKN2B, and p14ARF for brain cancer; hypermethylation of MYOD1, CDH1, and CDH13 for cervical cancer; and hypermethylation of p16, p14, and RB1, for oral cancer.” Most of the cancer risk biomarkers listed above did not appear in the VAERS output for Symptoms, even for the events that have zero entries. A brief survey of the literature shows that many more cancer risk biomarkers have been identified.
The results for items 3) and 4) follow. There were ~330 different cancer-related adverse events reported in VAERS for the COVID-19 vaccines, with ~2500 total number of events. Converting these VAERS entries to real-world numbers of COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancers requires three major assumptions, and some minor ones. The major assumptions are 1) the cancers reported in VAERS following the administration of COVID-19 vaccines are in fact caused in part or in whole by the COVID-19 vaccines, 2) the under-reporting factor (URF) to be used for cancer scale-up to real-world numbers can be approximated for very conservative estimation purposes by the Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare URFs, and 3) the fraction of the VAERS entries to which the URF should be applied can be approximated by autopsy results for fraction of post-COVID-19 vaccine deaths that can be attributed to the COVID-19 vaccine.
Assumption 1) is based on mechanistic studies that show the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (those distributed most widely in the USA) destroy the innate immune system, including those components that surveille and control the growth of cancers. One of the specific mechanisms demonstrated in very recent mechanistic studies (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798 and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36713457/) is that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines increase the fraction of IgG4 antibodies and decrease the fraction of IgG3 antibodies, and the effect increases as the number of vaccine doses increase. This IgG3/IgG4 ratio shift is favorable for increasing tolerance to allergens but can also support increased malignancy. Based on the above and many other recent study results, the question we should ask about the COVID-19 vaccines should not be i) why would we expect that these vaccines contribute to cancer development, but rather ii) why would we expect they would not contribute to cancer development, given their demonstrated destruction of those components of the innate immune system responsible for controlling the development of cancer!
Assumption 2) is based on the Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare thirty-day window URF study for all post-vaccine adverse effects, and is probably a very conservative number for cancer URFs because of the long latency periods typically associated with the emergence of cancer. Ideally, we would have a thirty-year window for estimating cancer URFs, not a thirty-day window!
Assumption 3) is based on the observation that autopsy results for COVID-19 vaccine-induced deaths showed about 1/3 of all the VAERS entries for deaths could be attributed to the vaccine. Whether this fraction is applicable to vaccine-induced cancer is unknown.
Applying the URF of ~100 from the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care study, and the 1/3 fraction from the autopsy results to the post-COVID-19 vaccine VAERS cancer-related numbers yields a total of about 83,000 cancer-related events post-COVID-19 vaccination (so far). The accuracy of this estimate is completely unknown, and a separate study would be required to generate more accurate numbers. It should be re-emphasized that the pre-clinical factors (Early Warning Indicators) were not included, and a URF based on a thirty-day window would be far too low for new cancers at a minimum, and even for exacerbating existing cancers. Multi-year window studies would be far more appropriate and accurate for assessing potential incidence of COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancers!
The cancer-related events identified from VAERS, and their frequencies of occurrence, are listed in the Appendix. All the major cancers are represented, with breast, lung, prostate, brain, and colon cancers being the most frequent. Placing these results in context is a separate study in itself. We do a simple comparison of the highest frequency cancers reported here with their counterparts for the influenza vaccines reported in VAERS. We selected influenza, since it is a respiratory viral disease and has a number of features in common with COVID-19.
There have been about 670 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines administered in the USA since late December 2020, and about 717 million doses of influenza vaccines administered in the USA since the beginning of 2019. Thus, the number of doses is relatively similar for the influenza vaccines and the COVID-19 vaccines over the time periods selected. Thus, for similar dose numbers, and an even longer average tracking times for the flu vaccines, the VAERS cancer entries for the flu vaccines are about two orders of magnitude less than for the COVID-19 vaccines. While the number of cancers induced by the vaccines could be vastly different for the two cases, one would expect the background levels of cancer (the numbers of cancers expected based on extrapolation of historical trends) to be roughly similar. If anything, they would be larger for the flu vaccines because of the increased time period over which they were administered relative to the COVID-19 vaccine administration period.
The miniscule number of cancers reported for the flu vaccines would suggest 1) most of the COVID-19 cancer entries were vaccine-induced, and 2) the cancer onsets following injection were accelerated sufficiently by the COVID-19 injections that the cancer could be linked to the shots and would motivate reporting to VAERS by the healthcare provider! Conversely, in the case of the flu vaccines, almost all cancers that occurred post-vaccine may have been sufficiently far removed in time from the injection that the healthcare provider was not motivated to report them to VAERS.
Additionally, I have seen many videos of testimonies by healthcare providers that they were heavily discouraged from reporting post-COVID-19 vaccine adverse events to VAERS, while I have never seen or read of similar discouragement for flu vaccine reporting. This deliberate suppression of reporting post-COVID-19 vaccine adverse events to VAERS lends further argument for increasing the URFs of COVID-19 vaccine adverse events.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL TRIALS
Cancer is a disease that typically has latency periods measured in multi-years or decades. Therefore, clinical trials of a substance for which carcinogenic effects are desired would require years of testing in humans, if not decades, to gather credible safety data. Historically, vaccines required a 12-15 year period of development, with much of the time devoted to clinical trials of humans. Figure 1 in this link shows the milestones of the myriad clinical trial phases. Even under those multi-year clinical trial conditions, carcinogenicity was excluded from the testing/reporting, as every vaccine insert I have read has emphasized. The COVID-19 vaccines received Emergency Use Authorization after a few months of clinical trials (which could not begin to address carcinogenic effects), and the approved bivalent boosters were tested on a limited number of mice, with no human trials conducted. From the results presented in the present OpEd, it appears that cancers are appearing post-COVID-19 vaccination in relatively copious numbers. Under these conditions, it is extremely high risk to dispense these vaccines to the public with minimal or no human clinical trials. The cancer numbers presented here, which may represent only the tip of a massive iceberg, are the “canary in the coal mine” of what to expect in the future. The policy of excluding carcinogenic effect testing of most/all vaccines needs to be re-thought, and especially for the COVID-19 vaccines, whose cancer consequences seem to swamp those of the non-COVID vaccines (as exemplified by the comparison to the flu vaccines).
CONCLUSIONS
About 2500 cancers were reported in VAERS following COVID-19 vaccinations. This may be a gross under-estimation of actual cancer-related damage since biomarkers that could reflect pre-clinical cancer were not assessed. Those cancer types that had the highest VAERS entry numbers were about two orders-of-magnitude higher than their flu vaccine counterparts. Scale-up from VAERS entry numbers to real-world numbers is unknown with any degree of accuracy at this point, but has the potential to result in large numbers of COVID-19 vaccine-induced cancer deaths over time.
Tracking of cancer cases over the next few years would help indicate any significant increases caused by the administration of the COVID-19 vaccines. The latest actual cancer numbers reported by the CDC and ACS are for 2019, and their projections for the future are based on the pre-pandemic 2019 numbers.
Finally, the paucity or absence of human clinical trials before approval of the COVID-19 vaccines is completely incompatible with the potential for emergence of cancers following COVID-19 vaccination, as indicated by the results in the present OpEd.”