TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Explosive revelation: CDC's vaccine claims based on a fabricated study!

Fact Check: Explosive revelation: CDC's vaccine claims based on a fabricated study!

Published June 25, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✗
VERDICT
False

# Fact Check: "Explosive revelation: CDC's vaccine claims based on a fabricated study!" ## What We Know The claim that the CDC's vaccine claims are b...

Fact Check: "Explosive revelation: CDC's vaccine claims based on a fabricated study!"

What We Know

The claim that the CDC's vaccine claims are based on a fabricated study lacks credible evidence. The CDC has a robust framework for evaluating vaccine effectiveness, which includes observational studies and data collection from various health surveillance platforms (Vaccine Effectiveness Studies). These studies are designed to minimize bias and account for confounding factors, such as age and underlying health conditions, ensuring that the data is reliable and scientifically valid.

Historically, vaccines have undergone rigorous testing and monitoring. For instance, the CDC's historical overview highlights various vaccine safety concerns, such as the Cutter Incident in 1955, where contaminated polio vaccines caused paralysis. This incident led to improved safety regulations and oversight in vaccine production (Historical Vaccine Concerns). Additionally, the CDC continuously monitors vaccine safety and effectiveness, adapting its policies based on new evidence and findings.

Analysis

The assertion that the CDC's vaccine claims are based on a fabricated study appears to stem from a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the CDC's processes. The CDC employs a variety of methodologies to assess vaccine effectiveness, including observational studies that compare health outcomes in vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations (Vaccine Effectiveness Studies). This systematic approach is backed by extensive research and peer-reviewed studies.

Moreover, the CDC's historical record shows a commitment to transparency and safety in vaccine administration. For example, the agency has responded to past vaccine safety concerns by conducting thorough investigations and adjusting recommendations as necessary, such as the withdrawal of the RotaShield vaccine after it was linked to intussusception in infants (Historical Vaccine Concerns). This history of responsiveness and scientific rigor undermines the claim that the CDC relies on fabricated data.

The sources cited in the claim do not provide credible evidence to support the assertion. Instead, they often originate from anti-vaccine narratives that lack scientific backing. For example, claims regarding thimerosal and its alleged effects have been thoroughly debunked by multiple studies, including those conducted by the CDC (Thimerosal and Vaccines).

Conclusion

The claim that the CDC's vaccine claims are based on a fabricated study is False. The CDC utilizes a rigorous, evidence-based approach to evaluate vaccine safety and effectiveness, supported by historical data and ongoing research. The assertion lacks credible evidence and misrepresents the CDC's established scientific practices.

Sources

  1. Historical Vaccine Concerns
  2. Vaccine Effectiveness Studies | COVID-19
  3. Thimerosal and Vaccines
  4. Vaccine Injury
  5. Viewpoint: RFK's reckless firing of CDC vaccine advisors not ... - CIDRAP
  6. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
  7. Social media posts misrepresent CDC data on the effectiveness of COVID ...
  8. Presentation for CDC advisers appears to cite nonexistent study to ...

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Supreme Court to hear explosive challenge on political spending limits.
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Supreme Court to hear explosive challenge on political spending limits.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Supreme Court to hear explosive challenge on political spending limits.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Federal agents blasted door off Huntington Park home in explosive raid.
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Federal agents blasted door off Huntington Park home in explosive raid.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Federal agents blasted door off Huntington Park home in explosive raid.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Is Olympus Mons the most explosive volcano in the solar system?
False

Fact Check: Is Olympus Mons the most explosive volcano in the solar system?

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Is Olympus Mons the most explosive volcano in the solar system?

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Is Olympus Mons one of the most explosive volcanoes in the solar system?
False

Fact Check: Is Olympus Mons one of the most explosive volcanoes in the solar system?

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Is Olympus Mons one of the most explosive volcanoes in the solar system?

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Federal agents blasted into Huntington Park home with explosive force.
False

Fact Check: Federal agents blasted into Huntington Park home with explosive force.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Federal agents blasted into Huntington Park home with explosive force.

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks