VAERS reports on adverse events from vaccines are unverified claims and do not support claims of deaths from vaccines

Activist Misuses Federal Data to Make False Claim That Covid Vaccines Killed 676,000

By Tom Kertscher, PolitiFact 

September 1, 2023

Covid-19 vaccines have killed 676,000 Americans. 

Steve Kirsch in an Aug. 6, 2023, blog post

A blog post shared on Facebook claimed that covid-19 vaccines have killed some 676,000 Americans.

The post was written by anti-vaccine activist Steve Kirsch, who has made other vaccine claims debunked by PolitiFact and other fact-checkers. 

Kirsch’s Aug. 6 post referred to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a federal database.

“VAERS data is crystal clear,” the headline read. “The COVID vaccines are killing an estimated 1 person per 1,000 doses (676,000 dead Americans).”

The blog post was shared on social media and flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about PolitiFact’s partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

The data Kirsch used is from an anti-vaccine group’s alternative gateway to VAERS. VAERS, which includes unverified reports, cannot be used to determine whether a vaccine caused death. Kirsch did not reply to our request for information.

“Statements that imply that reports of deaths to VAERS following vaccination equate to deaths caused by vaccination are scientifically inaccurate, misleading and irresponsible,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which co-manages the database with the FDA, told PolitiFact.

The CDC added that it “has not detected any unusual or unexpected patterns for deaths following immunization that would indicate that COVID vaccines are causing or contributing to deaths, outside of the nine confirmed” thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, or TTS, deaths following the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine, which is no longer offered in the U.S.

TTS, which causes blood clots, has occurred in approximately four cases per million doses administered, according to the CDC.

VAERS helps researchers collect data on vaccine aftereffects and detect patterns that may warrant a closer look.

The CDC cautions that VAERS results, which come from unverified reports anyone can make, are not enough to determine whether a vaccine causes a particular adverse event.

For the covid vaccines, VAERS has received a flood of reports, and they have become especially potent fuel for misinformation.

Kirsch made his claim not by using VAERS directly, but with an alternative gateway to VAERS from the anti-vaccine National Vaccine Information Center. 

That website draws on raw and limited VAERS reports, which can include incomplete or inaccurate information. These reports do not provide enough information to determine whether a vaccine caused a particular adverse event.

 There is no evidence that covid vaccines have killed Americans in large numbers, let alone 676,000. We rate the claim Pants on Fire!

Our sources

Steve Kirsch’s newsletter, “VAERS Data Is Crystal Clear: The COVID Vaccines Are Killing an Estimated 1 Person per 1,000 Doses (676,000 Dead Americans),” Aug. 6, 2023 

Health Feedback, “VAERS Data Don’t Show That COVID-19 Vaccines Are Deadly; Steve Kirsch’s Claim to the Contrary Relied on Flawed Analysis,” Aug. 6, 2023

Facebook, post, Aug. 8, 2023

PolitiFact, “How an Alternative Gateway to VAERS Data Helps Fuel Vaccine Misinformation,” Feb. 28, 2022

PolitiFact, “Federal VAERS Database Is a Critical Tool for Researchers, but a Breeding Ground for Misinformation,” May 3, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Selected Adverse Events Reported After COVID-19 Vaccination,” July 13, 2023

Email, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Aug. 10, 2023

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT This story can be republished for free (details).

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Thinking differently about COVID outbreaks with widespread vaccination and a better understanding of the virus

In an article in the San Francisco Chronicle,  "We need to start thinking differently about COVID outbreaks, says UCSF's Monica Gandhi", 11/11/21, Gandhi is critical of recent decisions that she believes are too restrictive, now that there are areas of the country with high rates of vaccination and evidence that some venues are not conducive to spread of the COVID virus. 

Monica Gandhi is an infectious diseases specialist and professor of medicine at the University of California San Francisco. I heard her on a podcast about a month ago speaking about the COVID pandemic with more nuance and less hysteria than what you hear from most non-experts and political commentators.  Many commentators flail around spouting numbers and terms that most people do not understand (including the speakers themselves) and irresponsibly interpret their misunderstandings to further one skewed political belief or another. I imagine some of Gandhi's thinking is controversial among fellow infectious disease experts, but that is as it should be. Discussion about uncertainties among experts about a contagious disease is what leads to better understanding and better evidence-based public policy decisions.

Her article is well-sourced for anyone wanting to learn more and to follow her reasoning.

My own interest in this is in keeping my sons, who have multiple disabilities, and other residents of their group home from contracting COVID. None of them need or deserve the consequences of sloppy thinking and excessive risk-taking that could lead to the preventable transmission of the virus. The so-called "Dignity of Risk" where many disability advocates see risk as a virtue, does not apply in this situation. 

 ********************

Excerpts from "We need to start thinking differently about COVID outbreaks, says UCSF's Monica Gandhi" by Monica Gandhi, 11/11/21

Gandhi takes issue with the recent cancellation of the University of California/USC football game after 44 students and staff tested positive for COVID despite a 99% vaccination rate: 

"...the cancellation of a highly anticipated game like this one due to COVID-19 has led to online speculation — fueled by scary headlines — about the dwindling efficacy of vaccination and a return to the conditions that led to last year’s deadly winter surge..."

High vaccination rates means that some restrictions can be lifted:

 "But, in truth, clusters of mostly asymptomatic cases among the vaccinated, like what we’re seeing at Cal, are neither cause for concern, nor unexpected with a virus that will become endemic. They are an emerging part of our new normal. And we need to start recognizing — and more importantly — speaking about them as such."

..."Prior to the availability of the vaccines, we employed a variety of techniques to control the virus...But things have changed. In areas of high vaccination, mass asymptomatic testing no longer needs to done for those who are vaccinated, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Even testing for coronavirus exposure should be confined to individuals who were in close contact of a symptomatic person."

Vaccines reduce transmission:

"...A study of symptomatic delta variant breakthroughs from Singapore showed that the viral load by a value on the PCR test (cycle threshold, a test that should not be used to make clinical decisions) may start as high, but quickly comes down in the vaccinated (compared to the unvaccinated). This makes sense, since the immune response in the vaccinated can take a moment to kick in and fight the virus..."

"It’s essential to remember that we only need to take emergency medical or public health measures if there are clinical implications in play...if vaccines reduce the chance of being infected (vaccinated people are 13 times less likely to be infected than unvaccinated) an asymptomatic vaccinated person should not be tested without a direct exposure from someone who is ill."

Different metrics should be used in determining restrictions:

"[Using asymptomatic case counts] public health officials in the Bay Area (except for Marin County) appear to be using this metric to determine the necessity of restrictions such as masks, instead of a more appropriate index like COVID hospitalizations...Young people have been restricted during the pandemic in the United States...to protect others. We owe it to them to return their lives to normal, especially when that was the promise of public health officials in the context of vaccine mandates at many colleges and universities. Football (an outside activity) was shown to be safe and lead to no transmissions in a study from last year, prior to vaccinations and in areas of high community transmission. It is too late for this Cal-USC football game, but we need to think of outbreaks differently from now on in the context of the vaccines and live our lives accordingly." 

***************

See the original article for complete references. 

COVID-19 - It's not a hoax and vaccination is not a plot to depopulate the world.

COVID-19 is still with us and probably will be for quite awhile. Our family is fully vaccinated, including our two boys who have multiple disabilities and live in a group home [they are 36 and 44 years old but I’m their mother and I get to call them "boys"] . None of us had significant side effects, although we have friends and acquaintances who had mild to somewhat severe side effects, such as fever, chills, aches, and pains. None of these effects lasted for more than a day or two. We have had one death in the extended family and friends who have experienced the disease in its most extreme form or continue to deal with long-term COVID symptoms that come and go with frustrating regularity. Our friends and relations are all glad they were vaccinated.

The squabbles over wearing masks to prevent community spread of the virus and assertions that the vaccine is more dangerous than it is beneficial are baffling and tiresome. The extreme view that COVID-19 is a hoax perpetrated by godless evil-doers is contradicted by the assertion (often by the same people) that the virus may indeed exist, but it’s no worse than the flu. The COVID vaccine is sometimes seen as a plot to depopulate the world or as an excuse to impose tyranny on patriotic citizens by forcing people to do things they don’t want to do. I have never bought the idea that “freedom” means getting to do whatever you want. Limits on this kind of freedom are not only imposed by government regulation but by the circumstances of one’s life - I have many stories to tell about how raising two boys with profound disabilities interferes with “freedom” as defined by getting to do whatever you want.

I am against tyranny as much as the next person, but I consider mask mandates in about the same category as the requirement to stop for red lights when I am out driving. Both are annoying at times, but do not restrict my freedom in any important way.

Civil disobedience can be an effective means to resist unjust laws and push for change, but this kind of resistance was never meant to come without consequences and individual sacrifice. Threatening and harrassing public health officials and school boards considering mask mandates is neither free speech nor within the scope of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience or other resistance to following public health mandates may mean that other people may not like you very much, but this is not an infringement of your right to free speech.

Most people with real lives do not have the time, energy, or expertise to refute every argument defending the point of view that COVID is not real or that the vaccine may kill you. Here is an article that may help: “The Backstory: My brother is one of millions who won't get the COVID-19 vaccine. I asked why. Here are his reasons, my responses.” by Nicole Carroll, USA Today, 8/6/21. The article includes numerous links to back up the facts presented by the reporter.

Here is a recent study reported by the Centers for Disease Control that shows that vaccination is more protective against reinfection with COVID-19 than relying on the natural immunities acquired during an initial COVID infection: “New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection” available on the CDC Website, 8/6/21.

“In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections.”…

 

"The study of hundreds of Kentucky residents with previous infections through June 2021 found that those who were unvaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated.  The findings suggest that among people who have had COVID-19 previously, getting fully vaccinated provides additional protection against reinfection."

More summer reading for COVID fanatics: 

“VIRUS - Vaccinations, the CDC, and the Hijacking of America’s Response to the Pandemic” by Nina Burleigh. I confess. I liked this book because it was short at 144 pages with a good overview of the virus so far.

“The Premonition - A Pandemic Story” by Michael Lewis. Michael Lewis is a compelling nonfiction writer who knows how to weave together the personal stories of somewhat obscure characters to make his point. 

This is hot off the internet: "Supreme Court won’t block Indiana University vaccine mandate as Justice Barrett rejects student plea.."

 Don't do this on your summer vacation:

Anti-masked protesters heckled people wearing masks, including doctors and nurses, and chanted “No more masks”.

Misuse of CDC data on vaccine side-effects fuels unjustified fears of COVID vaccination

Some resistance to getting the COVID vaccine is driven by terrifying, but mostly deceptive and inaccurate rumors, spread on social media.

First, the good news: The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been relatively problem free aside from some temporary side effects that many people experience. According to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been highly effective among vaccinated seniors 65 and older.

“In a multistate network of U.S. hospitals during January–March 2021, receipt of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines was 94% effective against COVID-19 hospitalization among fully vaccinated adults and 64% effective among partially vaccinated adults aged ≥65 years.”

This is from the Associated Press: "COVID-19 hospitalizations tumble among US senior citizens" by Matthew Perrone and Carla K. Johnson, 4/22/21.

"WASHINGTON (AP) — COVID-19 hospitalizations among older Americans have plunged more than 70% since the start of the year, and deaths among them appear to have tumbled as well, dramatic evidence the vaccination campaign is working. Now the trick is to get more of the nation’s younger people to roll up their sleeves.

"The drop-off in severe cases among Americans 65 and older is especially encouraging because senior citizens have accounted for about 8 out of 10 deaths from the virus since it hit the U.S., where the toll stands at about 570,000"

Reports of outbreaks among vaccinated people are not surprising. The vaccines were determined to be about 95% effective, meaning that for one out of 20 vaccinated people, the vaccine does not give full protection against the virus. When there is extensive community spread, as there is in Michigan, until the infection rate goes down, there is still a significant risk of contracting or spreading the disease. It is wise to remain cautious, wearing masks where it is not possible to social distance, and avoiding large gatherings, especially at indoor events.

One source of horror stories about vaccine side effects comes from misinterpretation and misapplication of data from VAERS, the CDC Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.  

From the CDC Website: “Established in 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S. licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS is a post-marketing safety surveillance program, collecting information about adverse events (possible side effects) that occur after the administration of U.S. licensed vaccines. This online database provides a nationwide mechanism by which VAERS reports are made available to the public and may be reviewed and analyzed…”

No specific conclusions can be drawn from the VAERS reports on whether the COVID vaccines actually caused the reported side effects. The CDC issues a strongly worded DISCLAIMER to prevent it being used to prove causation:  

"VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind. [Emphasis added]

"The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can quickly provide an early warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. As part of CDC and FDA's multi-system approach to post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring, VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also known as 'safety signals.' If a safety signal is found in VAERS, further studies can be done in safety systems such as the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) or the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) project. These systems do not have the same limitations as VAERS, and can better assess health risks and possible connections between adverse events and a vaccine."

These are additional warnings on the limitations of VAERS data:

Review the limitations and interpret VAERS data with caution:

The data are unverified reports of health events, both minor and serious, that occur after vaccination.

•VAERS data are from a passive surveillance system. Such data are subject to limitations of under-reporting, reporting bias, and lack of incidence rates in unvaccinated comparison groups.
• Reports show the simultaneous administration of multiple vaccines (making it difficult to know to which of the vaccines, if any, the event might be attributed).
• VAERS occasionally receives case reports from U.S. manufacturers that were reported to their foreign subsidiaries. Under FDA regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and unexpected (in other words, it does not appear in the product labeling), they are required to submit it to VAERS. These case reports are of variable data quality and completeness, due to the differences in country reporting practices.
• In some media reports and on some web sites on the Internet, VAERS reports are presented as verified cases of vaccine deaths and injuries. Statements such as these misrepresent the nature of VAERS. [Emphasis added]
• Establishing causal relationships between vaccines and adverse events requires additional scientific investigation. The CDC and FDA take into account the complex factors mentioned above, and others, when monitoring vaccine safety and analyzing VAERS reports.
• VAERS staff at CDC and FDA follow up on all serious adverse event reports to obtain additional medical, laboratory, death certificates, and/or autopsy records to help understand the circumstances. However, VAERS public data do not generally change based on the information obtained during the follow-up process.
• See also the Disclaimer at Summary above. 

When you read assertions on social media that the COVID vaccines have caused thousands of deaths and injuries, the source may have inadvertently or deliberately distorted information from VAERS.

Washtenaw County COVID-19 Vaccine Clinic for the Disability Community, 4/23/21



March 2021: COVID-19 Update

The best place to follow COVID-19 numbers in Michigan is through the on-line magazine “Bridge Michigan, Michigan’s nonpartisan, nonprofit news source”. The Bridge's “Michigan coronavirus dashboard: vaccines, cases, deaths and maps” uses clear graphics and maps to explain where the virus is most prevalent, vaccination rates, and other statistics that help assess the effects it is having on our population .

As of March 23, 2021,

“Michigan is amid a steep increase in weekly cases, which have tripled in a month. The state has the fourth-highest rate of new confirmed or probable cases per 100,000 in the country.

“On Tuesday, the state reported that 12 percent of tests came back positive, up from 10 percent the day before. The state now has the fourth-highest positive rate in the nation.

“Michigan also reported 16 additional COVID-19 deaths, eight of which followed a review of medical records. All of the deaths occurred in March.”...

Where vaccinations are having a dramatic effect:

According to USA Today, “’Safest place in the city': COVID-19 cases in nursing homes drop 89% as residents get vaccinated” by Ken Alltucker and James Fraser, 2/28/21,

“The number of COVID-19 cases and deaths at America's nursing homes has dropped significantly since December as millions of vaccine doses have been shot into the arms of residents and staff.

“The weekly rate of COVID-19 cases at nursing homes plummeted 89% from early December through the second week of February. By comparison, the nationwide case rate dropped 58% and remains higher than figures reported before late October.”

Disability Scoop published an article on 3/10/21, “Intellectual Disability Among Greatest COVID-19 Risk Factors, Study Finds” by Shaun Heasley, citing research showing that people with intellectual disability disabilities are at a much higher risk of dying from COVID than the general population.

“New research suggests that people with intellectual disability are about six times more likely to die if they contract COVID-19, a higher risk than almost anyone else.

“A review of 64 million medical records from individuals seen by 547 health care organizations across the U.S. between January 2019 and November 2020 finds that intellectual disability is the greatest risk factor — other than old age — associated with COVID-19 deaths.”

According to Tennessee Lookout, Tennessee was the first state in the nation to prioritize people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in its initial vaccine distribution phase.

From the article “COVID-19 numbers plummet among disabled with vaccine rollout” by Anita Wahdwani, 3/9/21:

“The numbers of new COVID infections among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and staff who care for them, decreased by more than 80 percent from December 2020 to February 2021, according to newly released data from the Department of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities."...

”The fatality rate among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Tennessee was three-and-a-half times as high as other Tennesseans — a rate comparable only to nursing homes. DIDD programs serve a total of about 12,500 people with disabilities. At least 57 have died and 1,503 tested positive for the virus."

Treatments for COVID improve by trial and error, despite a fractured health system and missteps along the way:

USA Today summarized the progress in treating COVID-19 in this article, “Treatment for COVID-19 is better than a year ago, but it still has a long way to go” by Karen Weintraub, 3/14/21.

Dr. David Fajgenbaum is director of the CORONA (COvid19 Registry of Off-label & New Agents) Project, which has been tracking more than 400 drugs given to 270,000 COVID-19 patients. The article lists potential treatments:

"There are four basic categories of potential treatments, according to Fajgenbaum, each of which needs to be given at a different time in the disease course.

• Drugs that boost the immune response early in infection, such as monoclonal antibodies, are given while the body is mounting its response to the virus in the first week after infection. Targeted at high-risk people, these are intended to prevent their disease from getting worse.
• Antiviral drugs, such as remdesivir, target the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. These are believed to be most effective in the early stages of disease, when they can prevent the virus from taking hold and replicating inside human cells.
• Drugs such as the steroid dexamethasone that suppress the immune system are given to the sickest hospitalized patients a week or two after symptoms begin, when their biggest problem is likely to be an immune overreaction to the virus, rather than the virus itself.
• Finally, there are drugs that treat symptoms of COVID-19, such as blood clots, which can theoretically be prevented with the blood thinner heparin, though much of this research is inconclusive.

"It's important to use different drugs at different stages of the disease, Fajgenbaum and others said. Tamp down the immune system too early and the virus could wreak havoc; fail to stop an immune overreaction and the patient could die."

Read more about the complexities of finding treatments in the middle of a pandemic for patients desperate for life-saving relief.

**************************

Update, March 25, 2021 from The Detroit Free Press 

The COVID-19 case rate is rising in Michigan. There has been a 633% rise in hospitalizations since March 1 among people ages 30-39 and an 800% increase among those 40-49 years old....Those 30-49 — who do not have wide access to COVID-19 vaccines in Michigan — are being admitted to hospitals at a faster pace than those 80 and older, the hospital association reported...People in that 30-49 age group also are most likely to be parents of school-age children, among whom the virus is spreading like wildfire. Almost two-thirds of Michiganders over the age of 65 have gotten at least one dose of the vaccine. 

COVID-19 and people with Down syndrome

According to an article in USA Today, “COVID-19 is especially deadly for adults with Down syndrome, but many can't get a vaccine shot", by Marc Ramirez, 3/8/21, families and advocacy groups for people with Down syndrome are pushing local, state, and federal agencies to prioritize people with Down syndrome for Covid-19 vaccinations.

Increased vulnerability

“Recent studies indicate that adults with Down syndrome, specifically those 40 and older, are three to 10 times as likely to die from COVID-19 than the general population. The findings confirmed what many had already suspected – that those with the genetic disorder, already prone to respiratory issues, heart conditions and other risk factors for coronavirus, were more susceptible to the virus’s harmful effects. 

“A 40-year-old with Down syndrome faces the same COVID-19 risk as a typical 70-year-old, according to the most recent study led by researchers at Emory University in Atlanta, part of an international collaboration. The results, researchers and advocates said, indicate the need to prioritize vaccination for individuals with Down syndrome, especially adults.

“While the growing body of research helped spur the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to add Down syndrome to its list of high-risk groups for priority vaccination in December, advocates said many states still aren’t sufficiently emphasizing the population.”

The status of people with Down syndrome for Covid vaccination varies from state to state

“According to the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, at least 29 states now place those withDown syndrome in the CDC’s recommended high priority category for vaccination, based on the foundation’s interpretation of state guidelines.

“While the landscape continues to change as advocacy efforts ramp up nationwide, individuals with Down syndrome remain in lower-than-recommended tiers in eight states, according to the association’s last tally. As for the remaining states, the group said guidelines did not definitively cite priority status for those with Down syndrome.”

Risk Factors

“The primary COVID-19 risk factors faced by individuals with Down syndrome are immunodeficiency issues and conditions associated with premature aging, said Anke Huels, chief author of the Emory University study and assistant professor of epidemiology and environmental health.”
….

“Moya Peterson, director of the Adults with Down Syndrome Specialty Clinic at University of Kansas Medical Center, said it was clear that “if they got COVID, they got sick, very fast. We knew this was going to be a problem.

“The population contracts pneumonia easily, she said, and is prone to weight issues, heart issues and autoimmune disorders.

“The list also includes obstructive sleep apnea, which some studies have linked to a higher risk of COVID-19 and which can be experienced by between 40 to 70% of individuals with Down syndrome, depending on age.”

COVID restrictions have also caused problems - “Caregivers said that in addition to anxiety and depression, people with Down syndrome have suffered physical and intellectual setbacks as a result of COVID-19 lockdowns.”

Michigan Expands access to COVID vaccines

Tuesday, March 9, 2021

From the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services:

Following the announcement of a ramped-up effort by the Biden Administration to produce enough doses to vaccinate 300 million Americans by the end of May, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) announced that it is expanding vaccination eligibility beginning 3/8/21:

“MDHHS is moving forward with the vaccination of Michiganders age 50 and older with medical conditions or disabilities and caregiver family members and guardians who care for children with special health care needs. Beginning Monday, March 22, vaccine eligibility will again expand to include all Michiganders 50 and older. To date, more than 40% of Michiganders age 65 and older have been vaccinated.” 

"All vaccine providers may begin vaccinating the two new priority groups of 50 and older with medical conditions or disabilities and caregiver family members and guardians who care for children with special health care needs by Monday. Those eligible to receive a vaccine should:

• Check the website of the local health department or hospital to find out their process or for registration forms; or
• Check additional vaccination sites, such as local pharmacies like Meijer, Rite Aid or Cardinal Health (U.P. residents); or
• Residents who don’t have access to the internet or who need assistance navigating the vaccine scheduling process can call the COVID-19 Hotline at 888-535-6136 (press 1), Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Saturday and Sunday, 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. or can call 2-1-1.”

All this depends on vaccine availability that is increasing but has not yet kept up with demand.

*************
People living in long-term care facilities, including nursing homes and licensed group homes, along with staff, have been a priority in Michigan. Washtenaw County is also vaccinating people with severe disabilities, along with their caregivers and family members, who live in their own or their family’s home. 

For people with developmental disabilities who are eligible for Medicaid-funded Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS), their eligibility is based on their need for an institutional level of care (meaning a nursing home or an Intermediate Care Facility for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities - ICF/IID), but they choose to receive those services at home. 

In other counties where vaccinations have not been made available generally for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, I think there is a good argument for asserting rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act that prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities - in this case, people with the same eligibility for institutional services who choose to live in their own or their family’s home. Their risks of contracting COVID and the probability of severe complications are likely as high as for those who live in nursing homes and have been a priority for vaccination. Why should they not be considered a priority because they live at home and not in a long-term care facility?