Comparing VAERS Adverse Event Numbers - C-19 vs. ALL OTHERS COMBINED

a reply to: Zitterbewegung

No worries. My misunderstanding

a reply to: litterbaux

VAERS needs to be renamed if you want to keep this narrative.

It is appropriately named. A system for reporting adverse events which occur after vaccination.

In the case of the vaccines under EUA, all serious events;

regardless of causality

I addressed the limitations of VAERS data in my OP, if anyone bothered to read it. However, looking at VAERS data was what enabled them to determine there was a problem with Myocarditis and Pericarditis to begin with.

Now, looking at that exact same data, there were close to 1000 more reports (2197) of Pulmonary Embolism (blockage of an artery in the lungs) than there were for Myocarditis and two and a half times the amount of reports there were for Pericarditis. This is close to 19 TIMES the amount of reports filed for Pulmonary Embolism in the last year and a half than there were for EVERY OTHER VACCINE ADMINISTERED IN THE LAST 31 YEARS COMBINED... but I've yet to see any updated warnings that list Pulmonary Embolisms as a potential reaction.

a reply to: Sonder

but I've yet to see any updated warnings that list Pulmonary Embolisms as a potential reaction.

Because the event is required to be reported under the EUAs even if the physician knows it was caused by something else.

Try looking at how many pulmonary embolisms occur every year (not just on VAERS). That would be a more valid comparison. Is the rate particularly high this year?

a reply to: putnam6

Why should we need Vaers if doctors were accurately reporting adverse side effects? Is this another legal loophole where the Doctor has deniability? I can imagine the scenario where Doctors are dealing with some pretty difficult patients, who would sue them at the drop of a hat. So in this system, they pass the buck up the line to the drug manufacturer. The Drug manufacturer has a get out of jail card issued by the Government. The politicians who invest in hardy stocks would know a cash cow when they see one. Especially one they are funding with public money. It really is a joke.

a reply to: Phage

If comparing data is your game. Compare influenza deaths in 2020 (there's enough time for real data) with any other year.

How can you honestly say comparing data is relevant or accurate?

People are not reporting it.

They didnt report my best friends death. Its always something else. Doctors want to keep their jobs. Families are in shock and denial. I understand those ATS members that are defensive, and aggressive against those who undermine those things they have been told by governments.

I dont want anything bad happening to any of you. I do care. I dont care if you are progressive or conservative. I just care, and want you all healthy and safe. My anger is toward elite groups, that only care about money and wealth. Those who will cast corpses, then step over them to gain material wealth. They wish to gain the whole world, yet see not what they themselves stand to lose. They dont care about you. I do.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: putnam6

Why should we need Vaers if doctors were accurately reporting adverse side effects? Is this another legal loophole where the Doctor has deniability? I can imagine the scenario where Doctors are dealing with some pretty difficult patients, who would sue them at the drop of a hat. So in this system, they pass the buck up the line to the drug manufacturer. The Drug manufacturer has a get out of jail card issued by the Government. The politicians who invest in hardy stocks would know a cash cow when they see one. Especially one they are funding with public money. It really is a joke.

And better still, if you want evidence, who is doing the autopsies? I hear doctors (real doctors) complaining they are not allowed to do autopsies on jab'd patients (it's not a vaccine).

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: putnam6

(it's not a vaccine).

Cheers - Dave

it's not a vaccine.

That is correct

edit on 24-8-2021 by visitedbythem because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: putnam6

Why should we need Vaers if doctors were accurately reporting adverse side effects? Is this another legal loophole where the Doctor has deniability? I can imagine the scenario where Doctors are dealing with some pretty difficult patients, who would sue them at the drop of a hat. So in this system, they pass the buck up the line to the drug manufacturer. The Drug manufacturer has a get out of jail card issued by the Government. The politicians who invest in hardy stocks would know a cash cow when they see one. Especially one they are funding with public money. It really is a joke.

You pretty much nailed it in one paragraph, it's a huge money grab and that was even before COVID, that aspect didn't go away overnight. Now just expand a bit and imagine hearing about the virus in China in late 2019 and being an executive in a pharmaceuticals company. You got all this intelligence and you are just dying to LOBBY your friends in Congress on how they need to attack the problem. Hell, I heard rumblings from China late in November I have no doubt insiders knew even earlier.

That's the thing it doesn't have to all be planned just as long as you have knowledge before everybody else it's only human nature to use it to your advantage.

I give my personal opinion on whether I believe this vaccine research is truthful but am not trying to persuade anyone to take it or avoid it. It is everyone's personal choice, I am just trying to give my opinion on t he dishonesty in the evidence they are supplying. I suppose the majority of people who get it will be fine and it may help them. Before making a decision on taking it a person should be informed of side effects it can cause and I believe they are downplaying the side effects with this vaccine. Some other vaccines they are pushing I do not believe the disease risk justifies the vaccine, but in this case the risk is adequate, I just do not think that this vaccine technology has been tested enough and they are deceiving people about it's effectiveness, especially the MSM media giants. It makes me sick to watch the national news because they are twisting everything to make people believe something that is not completely true.

a reply to: litterbaux

How can you honestly say comparing data is relevant or accurate?

Just following the premise of the thread. Note its title.

Comparing data can be instructive if you are comparing apples to apples. Otherwise, not so much.

Not that I am a fan of Sen. Ron Johnson or FOX News but the following video goes into just a few of the numerous stories out there of people claiming C-19 vaccine harm.. Including a few from adults and youth who were actually involved in the clinical trials who tried to report instances of serious harm but were dismissed and whose experiences were not documented or included in the adverse event reporting or the clinical trial reports. Serious cases of vaccine harm are happening all over the place in far greater numbers than what we're hearing about and their stories are being silenced and discounted.

a reply to: putnam6

While using the 'any idiot' analogy you left out the most important part about 'any idiot'. 'Any Idiot' can enter something in.. There are no standards, or no requirements... 'Any Idiot' can be entering in information even if it is completely false. 'Any Idiot' can enter in information multiple times... 'Any idiot' can influence what is in this database, which means that 'any idiot' would realize that the data contained here .. While may have some valid conditions with people reporting actual issues has no standards and shouldn't be consumed to try to make a point that 'any idiot' could understand.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: litterbaux

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting Site.

Not Vaccine Injury Reporting Site.

Ah, another gem from the king of quibblers.

Anyone who denies that the number of reports over a mere 17 months for only 3 jabs that massively overwhelms all other jabs combined over 31 freakin years is extremely significant and indicative of massive problems is just an apologist for medical fascism, and yes, I'll say it - murder by injection.

How you can live with yourself is beyond me.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Sonder
Because the event is required to be reported under the EUAs even if the physician knows it was caused by something else.

And yet look at the huge number of real people saying their adverse reactions were not reported and were in fact completely ignored.

The fascist apologists never cease to amaze.

a reply to: Phage

HI PAIGE!!!

*Waves furiously

What's up, Girl? You just trolling again? Cool Cool. Its good to see the Voice of ATS dropping in to enlighten everyone lol

a reply to: mzinga

How many people do you know who got jabbed actually know the lot number of the particular vaccination they were given? What about all those folks who got poked at all those pop-up vaccination booths you see in malls, outside grocery stores, at festivals, etc..? Because knowing that is a requirement in order to have your VAERS report accepted. I know of a few doctors who tried to file numerous reports and most of them got dismissed because they didn't know the specific lot number of the dose their patient was given by some random health nurse on a street corner.

just a quick Google search on "People Ask"

How many pulmonary embolisms occur each year?

The precise number of people affected by DVT/PE is unknown, although as many as 900,000 people could be affected (1 to 2 per 1,000) each year in the United States. Estimates suggest that 60,000-100,000 Americans die of DVT/PE (also called venous thromboembolism).

How can we tell what would already have been in the cards as opposed to a vaccine causing it?

Wouldn't a lot more data need to be collected over a longer timeframe and correlated against avariety of sources?

a reply to: putnam6

Hi, again. That 7-day average data is a few weeks behind. Things have gone downhill fast in GA. Small example, four covid deaths at the relatively small hospital we discussed earlier just since Monday. And the reporting isn't all that fast on the government site either, when they even bother.