Note that 270 deaths following Covid vaccines published to VAERS are 'unknown age' and are not shown in the table.
Posted on 05/24/2021 2:18:06 PM PDT by ransomnote
I began writing a reply to a post in the forum and decided to make it a standalone thread given both the level of effort expended and the frequency I encounter the issue at hand.
FReeper assertion seen in the forum: There are convincing analyses showing that VAERS is only reporting 1/4 of events (including deaths). That’s still almost 4,000 deaths that should be in VAERS, essentially matching what we see in VAERS. If those assumptions are true, it is entirely coincidental deaths. If you take issue with an assumption please specific.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
51% of events published to VAERS [5/21 data] were reported during December and January. 36 million doses of the Covid 'vaccines' were administered during those 51 days.
Data analyst Albert Benevenidos (sp) used the ratios of adverse event categories (hospitalizations, deaths, office vists etc.) from those records to estimate number of adverse events reported, but not published, by the CDC during the administration of an additional 230 million doses from February to May.
Using that method, Benvidos estimates there have actually been 12,200 deaths and over 1 million adverse events reported to the CDC, most of which have not been published. That's close to your 14K.
However, based on a Harvard study which found only about 1% of actual events are ever reported to the CDC, he adjusted that figure. Instead of multiplying by 100 to estimate total numbers of actual post vaccine deaths, he cut that factor to be extremely conservative, as if half of all Covid deaths are reported to VAERS, an impossibly low ratio.
Assuming 1/2 of all post 'vaccine' deaths were being reported to the CDC , the total adjusted estimate for adverse events following Covid 'vaccination' is 610,000 deaths and 50 million adverse events, according to Benevenidos' analysis.
The CDC is not making much of an effort to monitor safety during the purported Covid 'pandemic' or else it would be vigilant in updating and maintaining VAERS promptly. To clear the air, the CDC can easily refute these numbers by uploading the reports it has received but not published.
Also, there are numerous reports of doctors and patients not able to file reports to the CDC.
How To Report An Adverse Event To VAERS (CDC Database) ONLINE Following Covid-19 Vaccination
On the CDC's 'how to' page for reporting to VAERS, the linked table of 'reportable events' which lists the names of vaccines, does not include Covid. That makes sense, at first, because the Covid 'vaccines' are not actually vaccines. However, it certainly must discourage some from reporting their struggles.
So the numbers of reports the CDC is throttled back by challenges the patients face just to file, as are the CDC's decision to publish only a fraction of the reports it receives to VAERS.
And of course, the Harvard research which found only about 1% of actual vaccine adverse events were ever reported to the CDC was conducted was prior to Covid lockdowns which reduced medical and nursing home staff available to file such reports.
Certainly, there are concerns about reports that at nursing homes are under reporting cause of death a level never seen before.
I've heard that we 'must understand' that the most vulerable were vaccinated first and therefore early reports contained a higher proportion of deaths. I don't know if that's true, because based on the conduct of the CDC since the start of the Plandemic, I'm not willing to assume that the CDC is randomly selecting which records it will upload. They could be selectively withholding death reports based on age or other combinations of demographics and instead publishing less severe adverse events.
Remember that reports from December and January are not updated after the patient leaves the ER or hospital, so if those who were surviving during their ER visit, hospital stay or other event reported to VAERS, but continued a downward spiral and died afterwards, their deaths are not counted.]
Note that the table below does not include records in which a check mark was missing from a specific field in VAERS, but 'death' or 'autopsy request' was typed in the 'event descripton' for the patient.
Also, of the 80 deaths published to VAERS during this time period but classified as vaccine type 'unknown' about half of the 20 I reviewed had text in the description field which indicated they were Covid 'vaccines'. Therefore, some numbers are still under reported in the table below.
Note that 270 deaths following Covid vaccines published to VAERS are 'unknown age' and are not shown in the table.
There are many complications with poorly maintained data in VAERS which impedes understanding of the impact vaccines may be having on the public. Again, if the CDC would like to clarify these concerns during what they claim is a national emergency updating and correcting data in VAERS, they have the tax payer funds to do so.
The CDC tracks every vaccination carefully, something they would do even if they weren't preparing to roll out vaccine passport mandates.
I believe the NIH/CDC/FDA have the IT and access/infrastructure to match data from other federal or state databases, like US death certificates, with with vaccine records by Social Security Number, if they wanted to. Hospital software tracks annual deaths by type (accidental death versus illness) so surely there are medical databases which could be matched to vaccination databases - likely both types of data are sitting in the same system(s) right now.
Do you think 610,000 deaths following Covid 'vaccinations' is an over estimate? Okay, cut it in half. So the estimate becomes 'only' 305,000 deaths following Covid 'vaccination'. Is everything alright now?
If you think the CDC is concerned, you'd be wrong. Their only concern is concealing this information from the public.
Those idiots are all on your side, why didn't you *ping* them?
That's a false equivalency argument. No single person in the ordinary capacity of their jobs would be expected to see the entire national picture and then keep silent about it.
All the front-line health care workers who want to keep their jobs would each only see the few affected people who come through their doors, only see them for a few minutes and never see them again, and likely never know what ultimately happened to them.
-PJ
I challenge the idiots who abuse every sensible person to take responsibility and do the same.
Step up “Grey whiskers” or shut up.
What about the next day? Does the ER guy ask when the heart attack victim had their shot? Don't know but it's probably not the ER guy's first priority. Mostly going to try to help the patient.
Which shows that the serious events and/or deaths are likely going underreported.
Incidentally, a few weeks back there was a post about an internal medicine doctor who had previously participated in clinical trials, and ALWAYS got a call back within 2-4 hours when calling in an AE. This time with the coof, either the other end did not answer the phone, or they hung up knowing she was an internal medicine MD.
As several of your illustrious fellow seminar posters would say, "Help, Help! I'm being repressed."
I wouldn’t use the flu shot rejection as an estimate of the Covid shot rejection. It would be reasonable to assume higher mortality for the virus and higher effectiveness for the shot.
I agree that the media campaign isn’t needed. When the local baseball announcer (who doesn’t know baseball that well) promotes the shot, it makes me wonder.
I like your idea of asking my physician to put it in writing.
I challenge the idiots who abuse every sensible person to take responsibility and do the same.
Step up “Grey whiskers” or shut up.
“Glad to oblige Jim. There were times I couldn’t.
I don’t expect any of the liars to contribute...
No challenge can get through to them...
Well, there’s my hundred bucks.
I assume the liars won’t send anything EXTRA for their abuse of this forum.
Let me know if I’m wrong.”
Step up “Grey whiskers” or shut up.
You're repeat posting. Didn't one of your friends just complain of cut-and-paste over and over on these threads?
Sweet baby Jesus. Now THA'TS horse of a different color coming from you.
After months of you loudly screaming
"NO DOCTOR EVER EVER AND EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE EARTH DOCUMENTED CAUSE OF DEATH AS THE POISON RONA VAX!!! LINK PLEASE OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, YOU ANTI-VAXXERS ARE CONFUSED AND DON'T KNOW HOW TO INTERPRET VAERS!!!
Now you are shown how full of the 'S' word you are, and its all like:
"Well okay, But only one".
I find it odd that every time you are shown documentation of just how wrong you are, you dismiss it with an upturned nose, a sniff, and a wave of your hand and plow dutifully onward with your canned responses.
Its really, truly amazing. It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to be that intellectually dishonest, and unashamedly so.
So we can put to bed your canned and overused talking point that NOBODY has been declared dead from taking the poisonous vax.
You just got pulled a little closer to the mud pit, in this particular tug-of-war. And you probly don't even know it.
(I suspect you do, but will never admit it).
Oooh when you ignore a point you get SO mad when that’s pointed out.
LOL!
Pay up or shut up.
LOL!
Pay up or shut up.
Nope. Stop wasting bandwith with trolling.
Both under and over. Overall they are underreported because of numerous factors that deter people from reporting. But there are obviously overreports in VAERS, pure coincidence and the reporter says so.
Have to subtract all of those. Or leave them in, that's fine too. Either way multiply by ransomnote's multiplier. That was 4 in the vanity I read a few weeks ago. Now it seems to have gone up. That's fine new info. Then compare to expected deaths if you have don't subtracted the coincidences (some are obvious, some are overt).
Or you subtract the coincidences, then multiply the remainder for underreporting, then you get deaths from vaccincation.
You are arguing in support of my position.
LOL. I am arguing in support of valid analysis. The fact that only 0.1% of vax recipients reported their fever to VAERS supports your position. That 's great , but what I think about the vax is much less important than what I think about numbers math and logic.
Yes, that's a valid point. The fact is that arguing over what is and what isn't in VAERS is like arguing over the amount of sawdust there is in your cheap dog food because you plan on eating some. It's garbage, should just be tossed.
No argument at all. The only question is by how much.
“Pay up or shut up.”
Nope.
LOL!
“All of them are safe and effective.”
The CDC also says the vaccines are safe and effective. They do not define “safe” or “effective”.
***
They say some people have no side effects. (That’s a start).
Others have reported common side effects. (That doesn’t sound as safe).
Serious safety problems are rare. (The common side effects must be more common than rare. And there are serious safety problems.)
Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) ... occurring at a rate of about 7 per 1 million women between 18 and 49. (Any deaths? Why are there no figures for the common side effects and the other serious safety problem? (Anaphylaxis).
The CDC continues with “Long-term side effects are unlikely ... Vaccine monitoring has historically shown that side effects generally happen within six weeks of receiving a vaccine dose.” (The vaccines use new technology. How does the history of other vaccines let us conclude that these vaccines will have few to no side effects in the future?)
***
The CDC says the vaccines are effective. They provide links to four studies. These are for Healthcare Personnel, Hospitalized over 65, Essential and Frontline Workers and Residents of Skilled Nursing Facilities. (Are there no studies for the vast majority of adults? How about a study comparing the effectiveness of the vaccine for people with and without antibodies?)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/effectiveness-research/protocols.html
Wow, all the bizzaro anti-vaxxers disappeared...
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.