Covid vaccine maker Moderna received 300,000 reports of side effects after vaccinations over a three-month period following the launch of its shot, according to an internal report from a company that helps Moderna manage the reports.
That figure is far higher than the number of side effect reports about Moderna’s vaccine publicly available in the federal system that tracks such adverse events.
Vaccine manufacturers like Moderna are legally required to forward all side effect reports they receive to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, where they are made public each week.
To be clear, you want me to be suspicious that the VAERS data currently does not match a screenshot of what might be a presentation of unlabeled data from some three month period we can’t identify from an anonymous source?
There are a million and one reasons why those don’t match, including outright forgery by the anonymous source, because there is literally nothing about a screenshot I can analyze or identify. Could be that it’s an old number and reports have been resolved and removed from VAERS.
Even the article suggests it could be just a lag in processing.
Seriously, you look at that screenshot and tell me what about it you consider to be objectively proving your point. Tell me the absolute indisputable facts you can tell about that picture by looking at it.
None of these are "indisputable facts". You made hypothesis yourself to try to explain what's going on; that's what people do. There are doctor's only sites saying exactly what is going in VAERS reports are happening to them verifying that something is going wrong that they haven't experienced before. You got an explanation for that ?
This isn't happen in a vacuum either. Look at all the other data points: every time this has gone to court they hide the date and lose. You are either being intentional ignorant or carrying water for someone I can't decide.
I don’t have an explanation for data that I also don’t have a source for.
I didn’t claim to be making indisputable facts. I said that a screenshot provided by an anonymous source with no other data or even a date gives me absolutely no verifiable data.
What I asked was for the indisputable facts you could claim about that screenshot. Can you tell me indisputably where it came from? What data it’s sourcing? That it actually came from an internal presentation? When the photo was taken? The date range for the data being represented?
Because all I see is a screenshot and literally nothing else to verify this info as accurate. So I cannot offer an explanation, because this source has almost no actual data in it. Just a claim.
I agree in isolation its meaningless but it jives with other data. I just think its funny that you make "claims" based on your gut its fine but when someone else does the same its a cardinal sin.
You ready to get down and dirty for this? Hiding something?
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/some-actual-news?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNDc2MjAxMSwicG9zdF9pZCI6Mzk2NzAyMDIsIl8iOiJ0NUorbCIsImlhdCI6MTYyODI2MzE5NywiZXhwIjoxNjI4MjY2Nzk3LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMzYzMDgwIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.MlY3gm9ssZ5c5D0XFWSTPlz7x-f
That figure is far higher than the number of side effect reports about Moderna’s vaccine publicly available in the federal system that tracks such adverse events.
Vaccine manufacturers like Moderna are legally required to forward all side effect reports they receive to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, where they are made public each week.
To be clear, you want me to be suspicious that the VAERS data currently does not match a screenshot of what might be a presentation of unlabeled data from some three month period we can’t identify from an anonymous source?
There are a million and one reasons why those don’t match, including outright forgery by the anonymous source, because there is literally nothing about a screenshot I can analyze or identify. Could be that it’s an old number and reports have been resolved and removed from VAERS.
Even the article suggests it could be just a lag in processing.
Seriously, you look at that screenshot and tell me what about it you consider to be objectively proving your point. Tell me the absolute indisputable facts you can tell about that picture by looking at it.
None of these are "indisputable facts". You made hypothesis yourself to try to explain what's going on; that's what people do. There are doctor's only sites saying exactly what is going in VAERS reports are happening to them verifying that something is going wrong that they haven't experienced before. You got an explanation for that ?
This isn't happen in a vacuum either. Look at all the other data points: every time this has gone to court they hide the date and lose. You are either being intentional ignorant or carrying water for someone I can't decide.
I don’t have an explanation for data that I also don’t have a source for.
I didn’t claim to be making indisputable facts. I said that a screenshot provided by an anonymous source with no other data or even a date gives me absolutely no verifiable data.
What I asked was for the indisputable facts you could claim about that screenshot. Can you tell me indisputably where it came from? What data it’s sourcing? That it actually came from an internal presentation? When the photo was taken? The date range for the data being represented?
Because all I see is a screenshot and literally nothing else to verify this info as accurate. So I cannot offer an explanation, because this source has almost no actual data in it. Just a claim.
I agree in isolation its meaningless but it jives with other data. I just think its funny that you make "claims" based on your gut its fine but when someone else does the same its a cardinal sin.