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.
new: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-25
They're the SAME Thing.
Talk about getting tired of cut-and-paste.
Your troll skills are fading. Either you're flustered and careless, or you're so used to wowing Democrat NPCs that you think I wouldn't notice they were the same.
Also your "longer bit" in its internal hyperlinks, just refers back to the 2nd webpage on your earlier post.
The only new thing is this, which does not look good for your side:
When a death following vaccination is reported to VAERS, CDC requests medical records about the person’s death, including an autopsy report (if available) from medical authorities, as well as a death certificate and other relevant medical records. Physicians in the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office review all reports of death following COVID-19 vaccination. CDC routinely analyzes death reports in a systematic way to detect unusual or unexpected patterns. This analysis is done through individual report reviews and reviews of records, analysis of automated data, and disproportionality analyses in the VAERS database. VAERS scientists do not routinely reach out to the individuals or family members who submitted the report. There is no expectation of state or local health departments to conduct investigations into reported deaths after vaccination.
Oooh, scary big word! "Disproportionality analysis" with no transparency about methods, baselines, or error bars. LOL!
And the Feds will do all investigation, thank you very much; don't contact the family or invite state or local health departments to get involved.
So it's basically the FBI taking charge of Hillary's or Huma's or Hunter's laptop.
FAIL.
So you keep posting the idiocy that they tell you they’ll back up, but they never do...
"On March 8, the CDC announced with little fanfare it had reviewed about 1600 deaths with unnamed FDA doctors and they indicated not a single death was related to the vaccine.
That was concerning in the academic community. I have chaired and participated in dozens of safety monitoring boards and critical endpoint committees, and I can tell you based on my experience that kind of work would have taken many months to review all the laboratories, the death certificates, and all the circumstances.
It is impossible for unnamed regulatory doctors without any experience with Covid-19 to opine that none of the deaths were related to the vaccines, so I think this was effectively a scrubbing, like we've seen elsewhere.
Pasted from <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3955998/posts>
“LOL! Plead on!”
Plead and plead. LOL!
So, musicman, did they step up= or fall.
Yeah, it’s very telling that you, nor anyone else, can cite any bizzaro pro-vaxxer comments.
Impressed how these liars abuse this forum at such a low cost.
Yer on a roll today, Mrs. Mith.
English please, old woman.
How senile are you, oldster. I cited one earlier. Here, I'll cite another.
Yeah, it’s very telling that you, nor anyone else, can cite any bizzaro pro-vaxxer comments.
I could do this all day and night and then some.
I think you're having a meltdown.
Is somebody there with you?
Yeah, it’s very telling that you, nor anyone else, can cite any bizzaro pro-vaxxer comments.
And again....
Yeah, it’s very telling that you, nor anyone else, can cite any bizzaro pro-vaxxer comments.
You keep settin' em up, I'll keep knockin' 'em down.
Pretty much a crap shoot Vax plan. No follow up. No care to track results. Looks like they’re culling the herd.
They would recall a baby car seat for less.
They will never give it to you in writing that the Vax are safe
Since none of the liars who said they would defend you have spoke up...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUvcWXTIjcU
Can be portrayed whatever way.
” Certainly their data would not be accurate beyond 2 months because that’s when the trials ended.”
That trials ended two months ago isn’t sufficient to discount a year’s worth of trial data from around the world.
I looked up the two ‘allergens’ you mentioned and one is a sorbitol fatty acid (polysorbate) and the other is PEG, a cousin of PG also a sugar acid. From early vaping days, I recall PEG caused more throat irritation than PG, and PG use is now the standard for vape ‘juice’ (although it still makes my throat scratchy).
The CDC advises if you’re allergic to PEG you should get the J&J vaccine (and since I had a scratchy throat from PEG, I’ll be getting J&J if it ever becomes available). If you’re allergic to polysorbate, you should pass on the J&J and get the other vaccines instead. So hopefully that should solve allergic issues? Definately something to discuss with your doctor. :)
That trials ended two months ago isn’t sufficient to discount a year’s worth of trial data from around the world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The design of the early trials is sufficient to discount them from determining efficacy. Moderna had Phase I trials with 15 persons at each of two separate doses, and 16 people in a control group. This is meaningless as to efficacy.
Their Phase II trial was statistically anemic. A real phase II would last about a year or more and they would be expected to have around 2 thousand participants. But theirs lasted 2 months and had about 600 people in it. These are ‘trials’ in name only - the pharmas are phoning it in, assured they’ll make it to administration even lacking sufficient rigor.
Phase III for Pfizer is still in progress and won’t be finished for a year or two, but that’s the phase in which they claim they evaluate efficacy - they just make up the rules for these EUA’s. Ordinarily they’d be expected to research for about 12 years before making efficicacy and safety statements.
Now it’s just whatever they want to say, the CDC will underwrite.
So Moderna’s phase III was 2 months and I recently saw follow up information from month 6 which seems to erase their efficacy claims, but I lost track of it.
Fauci/CDC/Pharma are stating it’s safe without any evidence, and sneering at concerns about safety as ‘baseless’.
I don’t believe anyone doesn’t realize what a lying, cowardly POS you are.
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.