CDC is hiding the true number of Myocarditis Cases in Covid-19 Vaccinated Teens

His whole calculation hinges on something called PTR (Propensity To Report). This number represents the likelihood someone will actually report an adverse event to VAERS.

A committed Democrat VacciNazi will avoid reporting anything that might thwart the CAUSE.

So if this eevil vaxx is making people grow a
bunch of spikey proteins then shouldn’t that be
really good for folks?
Like folks who buy protein bars or shakes... well now they making they own and saving money.
There is a big industry around getting protein to folks.
You Qtards hate the proteins.
Y’all need a protein shake.

It’s bizarre trying to discuss this with you when you pretend there isn’t a massive effort to censor doctors speaking about vaccine harm, and more specifically, doctors and nurses being pressured not to report post VAERS injuries.

It’s everywhere so you do see it - you simply deny it. There’s never been a propaganda carrot/stick like the one smothering Covid. The CDC likes to insist that there is no evidence of vaccine harm and ignores the autopsies, ignores Maddie Degary (wheel chair, feeding tube for life).

So watching you try to poke holes in Kirsch’s data while pretending that there’s no reason to suspect that VAERS is WILDLY under reported, even when the CDC release V-Safe to every person getting vaccinated for Covid. Gosh - wouldn’t giving someone a phone app to report their adverse events to a PRIVATE, separate database reduce the already abysmal history of reporting to VAERS? Ah but you’re not about truth - you’re just trying to conceal vaccine harm by any means necessary.

I think Steve’s ACIP report has more along the estimate.

...watching you try to poke holes in Kirsch’s data

You said:

"I didn't think you'd go for Kirsch's data though because he outlines how he arrived at his estimate so that people understand where the number is from and if they disagree, can dispute it with their own estimate etc."

When I asked how he arrived at his estimate you waved your hands and offered no specifics so I researched it myself.

What I found wasn't very good for Steve, and I went into quite some detail as to why his calculations didn't hold water.

I also linked to similar criticism from the head of Biostatistics for the University of Pennsylvania.

So how do you respond? Do you question my critique of Kirsch's methods? Do you offer any rebuttal to my points?

Of course not.

You go off on a rant about how I don't recognize big conspiracies keeping doctors from reporting to VAERS.

You're right about that, I don't.

You also demonstrate you don't understand the purpose of V-Safe. V-Safe is an acknowledgement by the CDC of the limitations of VAERS.

Instead of passively relying on people to report adverse events the CDC provides an app that proactively solicits symptom input for several days following vaccination. It's the difference between passive and active monitoring and shows CDC is actually trying to figure out what the reactions are.

Unsurprisingly, you see it as another conspiracy.

You pay lip service to the idea of data until someone presents some that doesn't fit your narrative, then you change the subject.

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled CDC is hiding the true number of Myocarditis Cases in Covid-19 Vaccinated Teens, semimojo wrote:

...watching you try to poke holes in Kirsch’s data

You said:

"I didn't think you'd go for Kirsch's data though because he outlines how he arrived at his estimate so that people understand where the number is from and if they disagree, can dispute it with their own estimate etc."

semimojo: When I asked how he arrived at his estimate you waved your hands and offered no specifics so I researched it myself.

You're a waste of time so I don't go into detail. You work to protect the horrible reputation of the 'vaccines' by any means necessary. It has to be 'worth it' to me before I expend much effort because you're like talking to a wall.

semimojo: What I found wasn't very good for Steve, and I went into quite some detail as to why his calculations didn't hold water.

I also linked to similar criticism from the head of Biostatistics for the University of Pennsylvania.

You went an referenced talking points which Steve can refute if he likes. He's given presentations that brought the FDA to a shuddering halt without any capacity to refute what he or his team says. As I said, I think ACIP report has more. He is asking the NIH/CDC/FDA to address his assertions because that's where the problem (i.e., lies supporting the plandemic) originate from and must change.

So how do you respond? Do you question my critique of Kirsch's methods? Do you offer any rebuttal to my points?

Of course not.

You aren't worth the time, seriously. I rebut you only to the degree I think the public should know your information is false. I'm not wasting my time trying to convince you of anything- that ship has sailed.

You go off on a rant about how I don't recognize big conspiracies keeping doctors from reporting to VAERS.

You're right about that, I don't.

Sometimes I look up from my monitor and after sighing, "he's such a waste of time" I pause to consider how your kind sits in the middle of the biowarfare battlefield pretending we're all on a picnic. Your analysis and opinions occur in a mysterious vacumn where we havin'g been lied to for 2 years about every aspect of the plandemic.

The Harvard study showed less than 1% of all adverse reactions to 'vaccines' are reported to the CDC's VAERS database. The following is an excerpt from Christian Elliot's article, 18 Reasons I Won't Be Getting a Covid Vaccine from April '21.

According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS) - read page 6 at the link above.
While the problems with VAERS have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing VAERS reports over 2,200 deaths from the current covid vaccines, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.
"VAERS data released today showed 50,861 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021."
And those numbers don't include (what is currently) 578 cases of Bell's Palsy.

If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,000 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.

So I've been repeating this 'less than 1%' in VAERS data since April while watching nurses and doctors fired and slandered for trying to report to VAERS, noting the bizarre propaganda effort unlike any in previous (VAERS) history, and there you are, picking daisies and watching clouds, acting like the real world doesn't exist and questioning Steve Kircsh's estimate that over 2% of 'vaccine' adverse events are reported to VAERS. His estimate is wildly conservative and of course you want to drag out some long debate and demand more proof, when you never seem to demand it of those attacking us.

You also demonstrate you don't understand the purpose of V-Safe. V-Safe is an acknowledgement by the CDC of the limitations of VAERS.

You are intentionally distorting the issue of V-safe.

The CDC intentionally created VAERS to be awkward, unweildy and under report. The onine form to report an advers event logs you out without warning at the 20 minute mark so you have to start your data entry over from the beginning. The printed form is pages and pages of boxes that takes an estimated 45 unpaid minutes for a doctor to complete. The CDC/FDA did not want VAERS to expose what they had going on.

The CDC was shocked that people still report 'too much' information to it so they intervened - when you file a VAERS report, the CDC gives itself 4 to 6 weeks to review your report. And then the CDC simply decides not to publish many reports to VAERS - the public doesn't get to see the reports, or the CDC loads them months later, when it is supposed to function as an early warning system.

Then they rolled out their Covid 'plandemic' and started threatening, firing people who actually report to VAERS, with its minions sneering that this or that doctor had no evidence to warrant a report, when in fact VAERS was supposed to be a warning signal to indicate something should be investigated.

The CDC had 11 years post the Harvard result to do something to improve VAERS. It has billions to shower on whatever it wants - and it gets donations via it's CDC Foundation from Bill Gates, former Microsoft guy. If the CDC/FDA wanted VAERS to work, they would have designed and maintained it and encourage it's use. Instead it simply lies derelict, poor user interface, errors in failing to identify the 'vaccine' or manufacturer 'reviewed' and placed in the database etc.

For the Covid plandemic, they devised V-Safe to be a convenient phone app for patients to use. They could have designed it for doctors to use but they didn't because they don't want reports. They could have designed V-Safe to be a VAERS phone app that resolves all the awkwardness and maintains the database mandated by Congress to provide the public with a window into vaccine safety.

V-SAFE puts an end to public access that VAERS was intended to give. Only CDC staff can view V-safe and as I said, there's no app for doctors to use to report those who died, and the dead are notorious for not reportng to V-Safe.

So here you are carrying water for those attacking us by claiming the CDC's intentional rejection of the mandate they were given to track and make public vaccine harm is actually a sign that I don't understand VAERS, and that it's some kind of caring admission on the CDC's part. You are literally passing along fake information that protects our attackers. Way to go, patriot. /s

Instead of passively relying on people to report adverse events the CDC provides an app that proactively solicits symptom input for several days following vaccination. It's the difference between passive and active monitoring and shows CDC is actually trying to figure out what the reactions are.

VAERS could have been active. VAERS could allow users more than 20 minutes to report a complicated adverse event without suddenly logging them out, so they have to start over from the beginning. VAERS was designed to be hard to use and under report. The CDC/FDA knew this 10 years ago and made sure that by 2020, many doctors don't even know VAERs exists and those which do already know it would be an (unpaid) battle to try to get a report in.

The difference between VAERS and V-Safe is that VAERS can be viewed by the public and V-safe is off limits, only the CDC staff can access V-Safe. That's why the CDC created V-safe with time and funds it could have used to connect that interface to VAERS to modernize centralized data. They are hiding data from us and you are commending them for it, as if they 'care'.

Unsurprisingly, you see it as another conspiracy.

Even 201, Operation Lockstep and other internation collaborations like them were used to figure out how to lock down communications. It's part of the propaganda war and you're on board, supporting it.

You pay lip service to the idea of data until someone presents some that doesn't fit your narrative, then you change the subject.

I know you're here to mislead FReepers and I limit my time accordingly. You're here to erode non censored information in the eyes of the public, and drive them back into the MSM/CDC/NIH/FDA/FAUCI fold.

“ p.s. Vax f’s up your immune system. You know that.”
——————————————————————————————————————

Ummmmm………No, it does not.

But what the vax does do is scare people so badly that they empty the Tractor & Supply of Ivermectin Horse Paste.

Which brings up how I afraid they are of Covid. That’s another chapter……..