The Great Disconnect: When Millions of People Feel “The Science” Got It Wrong
Let’s start with a number so large it’s almost abstract: 63 million. That’s more than the population of Italy. It’s roughly the number of people who live in California and Florida combined.
According to a startling new Rasmussen survey, it’s also the estimated number of American adults who report experiencing at least some side effects from a COVID-19 vaccine. This includes more than 17 million who experienced major side effects.
Let that sink in for a moment.
We’re not talking about a fringe group on the internet. We’re talking about a cohort of citizens larger than most countries. And their experiences, and their beliefs about what happened, are creating a chasm between the public and the scientific establishment that we can no longer afford to ignore.
The Rasmussen data, collected in November 2025* via a national US survey of 1,292 individuals, paints a stark picture of the vaccine aftermath. Here’s the breakdown among the 68% who had received a Covid vaccine:
- 60% reported no side effects. But we’d need to follow them up to be able to say they are safe.
- 26% reported minor side effects. Think fever, chills, fatigue.
- 10% reported major side effects. This is the critical number. It translates to over 17 million Americans who believe they suffered a significant health event following vaccination.
But the numbers get even more revealing when we ask about the ultimate cost. Nearly half of American adults (46%) believe it is likely that vaccine side effects have caused “a significant number of unexplained deaths.” A full quarter are convinced it’s “very likely.”
The narrative splits, predictably, along the lines of personal experience. A staggering 85% of those who reported major side effects believe the vaccines have been deadly. Conversely, 69% of those who reported no side effects find the idea unlikely.
This isn’t just data; it’s a story of two Americas—one that moved on unscathed, and one that feels fundamentally changed by the shot.
The Billion-Dollar Question: What Created This Chasm?
So we arrive at the heart of the matter. How can there be such a profound disconnect between the lived experience of millions, and the official narrative from public health authorities?
The CDC/FDA’s VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) data, while acknowledging rare serious events like myocarditis, do not support the notion of millions of cases of major side effects, or a significant death toll from the vaccines. But how many of the actual side effects made it onto the VAERS platform, when most doctors still deny any negative consequences of the injections?
The official position remains that the benefits of vaccination vastly outweighed the risks. Yet the data we have translates into a negative efficacy: multiple peer-reviewed studies indicate that the more injections you receive, the more likely you are to get symptomatic Covid or flu-like illness. The assumption it saved many lives has by now been strongly refuted.
In the survey, the public is reporting something very different to the longstanding “approved” narrative. Why?
1. The Dismissal Dynamic: For every person with an acknowledged adverse event, there were countless others who reported persistent issues—chronic fatigue, neurological problems, heart palpitations—only to be told by medical professionals: “It can’t be the vaccine,” or “It’s just anxiety.” When people’s lived reality is dismissed, trust evaporates. It opens the door to seeking answers beyond the official explanations.
2. The Data Lag: Science is slow, cautious, and methodical. It requires years of study to definitively link a drug to a rare long-term outcome. A person’s pain is immediate. People are being asked to wait for science to catch up to what they feel in their bodies right now.
3. The Credibility Crisis: Public health messaging was often absolute and focused on population-level benefits, leaving little room for nuance or the acknowledgment of uncertainty. When you firmly declare a product “safe and effective” without transparently communicating the known risks (whether rare or otherwise), you create a credibility breakdown when people experience anything other than the absolute safety they were assured.
4. The Coincidence Question: The vaccines were rolled out on a mass scale. People get sick and die every day from a thousand different causes. When a tragic event occurs weeks or months after a vaccination, the human brain, seeking patterns, will often connect the two dots—even if current scientific knowledge cannot. This is a normal and reasonable human response.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Dismissing millions of people as “misinformed” or their experiences as “anecdotal” is not a strategy. It’s a recipe for a permanent loss of public trust. The path forward requires a humility that has been in short supply.
- We must investigate these reports with rigor, as this was not done in the development of the “vaccines“. We need long-term, large-scale studies that take these patient-reported outcomes seriously. Is there a subset of the population genetically predisposed to certain post-vaccine conditions? We won’t know until we look without prejudice.
- We must empower doctors to listen, not just dismiss. Medicine is both an art and a science, and a patient’s testimony is data.
The Rasmussen survey is a massive, flashing warning light on the dashboard of our society. It signals that a significant portion of the populace feels unheard, unwell, and distrustful of the institutions designed to protect them. Ignoring them won’t make them disappear. It will only make the chasm wider.
The first step is to stop talking and start listening. The injured are speaking, and it’s time we heard them.
Reference:
Rasmussen Reports. (2025, November 21). Millions experienced COVID-19 vaccine side effects. https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/covid_19/millions_experienced_covid_19_vaccine_side_effects
*N.B. The linked webpage mistakenly gives the survey year as 2024. The correct year is 2025, as shown on Rasmussen’s Question Wording page.
Disclaimer:
This article is not intended to be used in place of individual medical advice. It cannot be used to diagnose illness or access treatment. Individuals may use the materials provided by World Council for Health to complement the care provided by their qualified, trusted health professionals. All information provided by World Council for Health or in connection with its website is offered to promote consideration by individuals and their trained health care providers of various evidence-based prevention and treatment options. The information on this website is for general informational purposes and is not a substitute for medical advice. Errors and omissions may occur.
source worldcouncilforhealth.substack.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend the Scientific Method