Vaccine injury database VAERS considered unreliable, ‘subject to biases’

mLive ^ | Malachi Barrett

[SeekAndFind]

A public database that collects reports of vaccine side effects and injuries isn’t considered a reliable source of information about risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines.

Established in 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) collects reports of potential side effects from licensed vaccines. Interest in the database, publicly available online, has grown since COVID-19 vaccines were approved, but the data can be misleading if used to make a direct connection to the reported deaths and injuries.

Dr. . Russell Bush, director and chief medical examiner at the Michigan Institute of Forensic Science & Medicine, said conclusions shouldn’t be drawn from the raw data, since it doesn’t include the result of a review by researchers.

“With any public open data-collecting system, the input cannot be verified as a true and accurate assessment, nor can ‘cause and effect’ relationships be directly determined in the vacuum of a database,” Bush said. “The researchers look for signs, symptoms, outcomes trends and outlier occurrences that may require follow up by delving into the medical histories of affected individuals.”

Health officials and VAERS itself warn that the database is prone to bias and doesn’t provide an accurate picture of vaccine side effects. Anyone can submit a report, and VAERS accepts all reports without determining whether adverse effects were actually caused by vaccines.

The VAERS website includes a lengthy disclaimer about how the data shouldn’t be used to draw conclusions about the safety of vaccines. It also notes that reports account for a fraction of all adverse events, but serious events are more likely to be reported.

[AndyTheBear]

Go to any tracking site for problems with a major web service that uses people reporting problems. If there is a gigantic spike in reports, only a moron would not take that as extremely good evidence that the web service is having more problems than usual.

[WMarshal]

"Can hackers not put garbage data into it to make the vaccines look more dangerous?"

COVIDiots sure love their clot-shots. Sad.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: point? In my opinion, many (most?) vaccine adverse effects are never reported

Yep. That’s what a Columbia study concluded:

https://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/14298/20211216/columbia-university-study-finds-vaers-deaths-undercounted-by-factor-of-20.htm

[Pollard]

Knowingly filing a false VAERS report is a violation of Federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1001) punishable by fine and imprisonment.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

So just how many people do you suppose are knowingly making false reports that may end up with them going to prison for up to 5 years?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

[Jan_Sobieski]

Isn’t the database managed by the CDC? If so, is the CDC culpable for malfeasance?

[Soul of the South]

So the VAERS database, which the government administers and makes public is “unreliable”. Meanwhile the government has determined the “truth” in the government records regarding vaccine approval cannot be made public for 75 years.

What does this say about our government? To a person who uses logic and reason, the government is admitting it habitually puts out false information to the people and covers up the truth.

If the VAERS database is truly “unreliable” there can be only two reasons:

1) The bureaucrats responsible for administering it are not doing their jobs.
2) The bureaucrats administering it are incompetent.

[AndyTheBear]

Agree with you if by "unreliable" you mean "completely unreliable". The fact is the VAERs site can be relied on to indicate when there is a significant increase in adverse reactions. It has done so. It is not anywhere near a precise measurement for exactly how many more adverse reactions there are. We can only tell there is a huge increase. We can't tell exactly how big the huge increase is.

Those trying to discredit VAERs in order to argue the jabs are safe are creating a false dichotomy where it has to be super precise or it should be ignored as not reliable. I think we should call out that equivocation fallacy explicitly.

[AppyPappy]

A site where you can report your own death

[Myrddin]

A VAERS report by an MD consumes almost 40 minutes to do it right. It's not billable activity and there are legal ramifications for false entries. There is a significant financial and legal disincentive. There is also administrative pressure from medical employers to not make the reports. Policy. The consequence is reporting is likely only 1% of actual events. The best data starts with an initial report confirmed with a good autopsy. Unfortunately, an autopsy is an expensive process. They happen when the results will be needed for legal purposes.

[Myrddin]

There is subversion of the VAERS database to hide events. Every report has a unique id. You can download a CSV of the database. I did that in April 2021 and just for grins and giggle, I processed it in Microsoft PowerBI. I generated a meta column of days post injection, filtered for records that were Pfizer or Moderna and had death as a consequence. The histogram showed most deaths 3 days post injection with another peak around 2 weeks.

Having noted that you can download a CSV and records are marked with a unique incident ID, that means to can take snapshots separated in time and compare them. Another person did this an noticed that adverse events resulting in death were being replaced with a minor consequence using the old, unique ID. In short, someone with access to the database is covering up death results by replacing them with minor consequences. Upon learning that was happening, my faith in the integrity of VAERS was significantly diminished.

[griffin]

Was fine before rona, but not with rona....um, SUUUURRRREEEEEE!!

[Madam Theophilus]

This statement is not true.

If you want to understand why listen to this interview of Dr. Jessica Rose, a computational biologist who has a masters in virology. She was approved twice to present her findings before the FDA, although they rejected her study. But the fact she was allowed to speak means she has credible expertise. Since the pandemic her sole work has been analyzing the VAERS database. You will learn how the database has been set up by the CDC and FDA, as well as the procedure for how entries are made on it. (Hint: It is very difficult to get your case added.) She has dedicated herself to this work because she said each number on VAERS represents a human being who should have the right to make their case known. They have not been allowed to speak and she wants to be their voice.

Chris Masterjohn has a PhD in nutritional science and has a practice which specialized in helping people with autoimmune problems.

https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/blog/2021/12/27/jessica-rose-adverse-events-reporting-and-much-more

https://rumble.com/vrj7xf-jessica-rose-vaers-and-all-things-covid-vaccines.html

Utube took down the interview hours have it was posted, so be forewarned.

[Madam Theophilus]

PS. I did not make her credentials clear:

Dr. Rose has a PhD in computational biology as well as other post doctoral degrees. Her masters was in virology where she was involved in HIV research.

[Kazan]

Yes, it's completely meaningless and the numbers are likely inflated in regard to vaccine deaths because of all the paranoia and the anti-vax political agenda connected to the vaccine.

Yet, it's the ONLY evidence anti-vaxxers have to proven the vaccine is deadly.

The anti-vax nonsense is shrill and hysterical as the climate change nonsense. It's the Democrats' best friend and only life preserver.

[Sarcazmo]

I had only assumed that “There is also administrative pressure from medical employers to not make the reports” - as you stated.

I never considered your other points. It never occurred to me that the work is not billable. Or the expense of an autopsy. And the possibility of legal ramifications compelling administrative pressure to not make reports.

Interesting, thanks!