Posted on 09/14/2021 3:43:02 PM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
The U.S. government database that keeps track of deaths from vaccine side effects has exploded by 10-fold since the advent of COVID-19, and the experimental vaccines that have been developed in response.
The Beltway Report revealed there are about 1,400 deaths reported to the system each year, among the thousands of reports of adverse events from vaccines.
The report explained the Vaccine Adverse Event Report System gets more than 60,000 reports each year, including 1,400 deaths that are documented on average.
But since COVID was unleashed on the world, "there have been 14,701 deaths reported," the report said.
"Many of those have come from within the last month and a half with around 3,300 deaths. That’s about 70 per day!" the report said.
A chart of the death reports looks like a hockey stick, with the surge over just the last year or so.
"The big thing that people who are the hardcore pro-vaccine folk who think that they can do no wrong will typically offer the objection that anyone can report something to VAERS. My response to that is, so what? That’s supposed to be a bad thing…?"
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Thanks for the link. I’ll check it out.
News had me a little bitter earlier.
“It is incredible that, as much as I have pointed out the “limitations” of VAERS data, people keep using them for fearmongering against the vaccines.”
Then maybe you can explain why the annual death rate each year is published by the CDC but only after about 5-7 years to give time to scrub bad data, yet, the CDC published the 2020 death rate as fact while the CDC was performing the scrubbing and continually reduces that death count.
You like good data, so who do you accept BS data about covid deaths?
People will see what they want to see, even Freepers.
Not to those of us at 72, with 5 co-morbidities. We don’t have that option. I wish I did.
Right. Because you say so.
Tell the CDC that, then.
A while back, I estimated that there were 6 times as many adverse events per dose for Covid vaccines than for all the other vaccines combined. Grant that there might be some additional reporting done for these new vaccines. If my estimate is reasonable, does that suggest to you that these vaccines are more dangerous than other vaccines?
Note that there might be a reporting lag, which would make my numbers low. There’s also the possibility that the numbers are being suppressed.
I also found that the three vaccines had different adverse event rates. Does that suggest to you that they are not equally safe?
Thanks. I try to be a little funny at times. What is your prediction for this Friday’s cdc vaers drop?
Will the number of deaths related to vax injury go up or down?
Come on this is an easy one.
I’ve known several who died within a few days of the shot, but they were all in their 20’s. All the COVID deaths I’ve known were over 50 years old.
If you had 5 co-moribities already you may have added a 6th that might mess with the other 5.
Who knows. Hope not.
Prayers for God’s Blessing and Healing upon you.
Page 5 of the Kirsch analysis, he suggests two hypotheses for the reporting for Covid. One is that the vaccine has caused no deaths, the second is that adverse events are being reported at the same rate as previous years.
Considering the barrage of Covid news, it seems likely that Covid reporting would be higher than for other vaccines. Further, the other vaccines have been around for awhile with tolerable adverse event frequencies. Are reporters going to take these as seriously?
Kirsch continues, “And there was nothing “new” this year to
incentivize a massive change in behavior.”
Nothing new? First, the virus may have been man-made. Second, has anything health related ever gotten this much attention? For so long? Between the news and the PSA’s, there’s no way to avoid this story. Third, there is a possibility some may be afraid to report an event. Or want to keep the numbers down. Fourth, there is a possibility the feds are keeping the numbers down.
Page 8, Kirsch echoes my thought that some/many doctors are underreporting to keep the numbers down.
He also suggests that the reporting by time tends to confirm the vaccines’ involvement in adverse events, which my informal study had also found.
Kirsch estimates the number of vaccine deaths by applying a factor of 41 to the number of deaths through 8/27/21 = 7,149. This factor of 41 is equivalent to saying 2.4% of the deaths are being reported.
Eyeballing his page 9 chart of days/death, more than half of the deaths occurred in the first 10 days. Is it plausible that these were reported in 2.4% of the cases? Grant the reporting ratio would decrease over time.
**
Page 13, example 10, minor carp, the folks receiving the second dose would be a little bit older than for the first dose. Medium carp, if there is a cumulative effect to the vaccines, then we’d see an increase in events for the second dose. (It’s possible the cumulative effect takes a while to show up.)
**
Page 15, example 12:
“But we speculate that maximum accumulation of spike protein is achieved around 24 hours or so after injection and then it plateaus after that point as the mRNA disintegrates. Therefore, we would expect to see a death peak more than 24 hours after injection, i.e., on Day 1 and not on Day 0. This is exactly what happens in practice”
This looks like a tautology. Is there a reason Kirsch speculates that the maximum accumulation occurs at 24 hours?
Some interesting stuff in the Kirsch analysis. It’s getting late, so I hope to look at this more tomorrow.
Heh, nice loser attempt at propaganda.
Too bad you didn’t, like, *read* the article or anything?
They addressed the very issue you raise, in method 3 on pages 7-8...
the researchers looked at the relative frequencies of different adverse events (like a fingerprint, each vaccine has its own set), and they found that the shape of the curves differed once the COVID jabs entered the scene.
And then on page 17, they look at a variety of adverse events, and say (what is the ratio of this adverse event, compared to the expected background rate)?
And they do that for past years 2015-2019, and then for 2020 with the jabs.
They find that for some of the worse adverse events, the COVID jabs are (literally) HUNDREDS OF TIMES WORSE than the other jabs.
Not 8% worse. Not twice as bad. 100s of TIMES.
And no, not minor things like “my fweelings got hurt”.
Things like pulmonary embolism — 473 times worse.
Stroke — 326 times worse.
Tell your Mom not to let you post on her computer anymore.
You’re an embarrassment to trolls everywhere.
I need to see a graph to predict Friday’s VAERS numbers. What I am seeing the graph for new cases in the U.S. and it has greater interest for me. The country has peaked and is in the downward turn, thanks to the vaccines.
Actually, “retarded” ppl do whatever the federal govt tells them to do. They also allow a novel vaccine that was rushed through testing to be injected into their body, no questions asked. Then they demand that everyone around them does the same and they call them childish names if they refuse. 🤣
No problem. It’s a very difficult time. I find doing constructive/creative things helpful in managing stress. Exercise works well.
I played in one of my volleyball leagues yesterday evening, meditated this morning, and fresh coffee is brewing. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.