Dear Editor:

In his Oct. 22 letter, “There’re limitations to free speech,” Frank Waxman took exception to my Oct. 12 letter, “Why is HRRMC mandating vaccines.” All I did was “follow the science,” quoting government statistics. For this I must be silenced?

While vaccines are a boon to humanity, there have also been many fatal incidents: What is wrong with healthy skepticism/debate about research vaccines using new technology, which were rushed into widespread use without full FDA approval? 

Instead we incessantly hear COVID-19 vaccines are “safe and effective.” Does this mean they are 100 percent safe? 100 percent effective? No vaccine ever created met this criteria. 

So is mass COVID-19 vaccination of everyone, regardless of age and health status, still indicated by data accumulated from vaccinating over 50 percent of the U.S. population in the last year? We may never know. Outside of the HHS Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there is no widespread effort to tabulate adverse reactions. VAERS is an optional (not mandatory) system and certainly underreports adverse reactions.

When comparing the fatality rate of COVID-19, disease vs. vaccination, we must first evaluate data quality.

VAERS currently lists 8,284 people who died after COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. (, including 69 deaths in Colorado. In the meantime, Mr. Waxman assures us (without citation) only three people have died from the vaccine. 8,284 versus three? Online investigation reveals why many VAERS deaths are currently not being attributed to vaccination. Many in the VAERS database were old and/or sick. We are told they were high risk and therefore discounted from the vaccination death total.

But wait, the COVID-19 death total is proclaimed to be over 750,000, and most of these people were similarly old and sick. Yet they were included in the COVID-19 death total. 

Can you compare data collected using two divergent sets of rules? This either inflated the numbers of COVID-19 deaths, grossly underestimated numbers of vaccine-related deaths, or both.

One problem with both data sets is the difficulty evaluating whether either COVID-19 infection or vaccination is a primary cause of death, a major/minor contributing cause or no cause. Subjectivity dominated data creation, resulting in numbers skewed in favor of the medical establishment’s desired outcome: universal COVID-19 vaccination. Maintaining this singular message is ongoing and seemingly relentless. Why is no re-evaluation allowed, based on new data?

Do you want to sway those hesitant about COVID-19 vaccination? Remove mandates, end coercion. These actions, along with biased messaging, hardened resistance. Start reporting vaccine deaths along with COVID deaths. Tell the full truth, acknowledge there have been more adverse reactions than anticipated. Then make your case, if you can, that despite the downside, vaccination is still the best option. Stop telling only one side of the story.

And please watch the following video: When asked in a congressional hearing how many CDC employees are vaccinated, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky refused to answer. If the CDC is not following their own advice, why should anyone else?

Vince Phillips,