When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.
...vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.
VAERS reports can be submitted voluntarily by anyone, including healthcare providers, patients, or family members. Reports vary in quality and completeness. They often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors.
A report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified vaccine(s) caused the adverse event described. It only confirms that the reported event occurred sometime after vaccine was given. No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report. VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.
Like I said. Just a giant survey. With all the many, many limitations that surveys have.
I kind of hate surveys. This one does exactly what it's supposed to do, but true to form, they are confusing for people to interpret when they don't have all the info they need to understand the data they're looking at.
If nothing is verified, and everything is reported, then it doesn't matter how you filter the cases.
They could be injecting you with saline, and you'd still see this list of "side effects" pop up, because when you're vaccinating hundreds of millions of people, some of them are going to get sick randomly. Some are going to die randomly. All of them are going to be listed in VAERS. None of them are proven to have had their problems due to the vaccine.
Again, because VAERS is NOT DESIGNED to collect that kind of data.
It's designed to help researchers hone in on spikes above the baseline.
If 10,000 people are reported to have died after getting the vaccine this month after millions of people have been vaccinated, that's not interesting. It's not proof of literally anything other than 10,000 people died.
If 100 MORE people than expected died in Flynnville, Colorado after getting the vaccine, based on extrapolating from the baseline, then NOW researchers are interested. Because maybe there was something wrong with the batch in Flynnville.
That's the data VAERS is used to study. Not what you guys are trying to do. It can't be done, and that's why you guys are the only ones freaking out about VAERS.
If you are correct, and you're seeing something in this publicly-accessible data that is being missed by every independent scientist on the planet, and every lawyer looking for the ultimate lawsuit, and every politician looking for a guaranteed winning platform, and so forth...
I won't be the one you should be trying to convince.
Perhaps you DO know a way to manipulate the data in order to show what you think is there. But we're back to Occam's Razor.
I can believe you're the Data Messiah who is seeing a way to use this data that the creators of the database didn't foresee to unveil the largest crime against humanity in history, or I can believe that you're missing something.
You're welcome to present your argument, but whether or not you convince me doesn't really make a difference. I'm not the one who can vindicate you. But there are plenty of people who can, and if you think you can prove it, I'd absolutely encourage you to do so. I'd support that 100%.
But you CAN. There's nothing stopping you.
VAERS, really, is just a giant fucking survey. That's it.
This is the page I want you to read to get my point: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html
Like I said. Just a giant survey. With all the many, many limitations that surveys have.
I kind of hate surveys. This one does exactly what it's supposed to do, but true to form, they are confusing for people to interpret when they don't have all the info they need to understand the data they're looking at.
I don't think you're getting it.
If nothing is verified, and everything is reported, then it doesn't matter how you filter the cases.
They could be injecting you with saline, and you'd still see this list of "side effects" pop up, because when you're vaccinating hundreds of millions of people, some of them are going to get sick randomly. Some are going to die randomly. All of them are going to be listed in VAERS. None of them are proven to have had their problems due to the vaccine.
Again, because VAERS is NOT DESIGNED to collect that kind of data.
It's designed to help researchers hone in on spikes above the baseline.
If 10,000 people are reported to have died after getting the vaccine this month after millions of people have been vaccinated, that's not interesting. It's not proof of literally anything other than 10,000 people died.
If 100 MORE people than expected died in Flynnville, Colorado after getting the vaccine, based on extrapolating from the baseline, then NOW researchers are interested. Because maybe there was something wrong with the batch in Flynnville.
That's the data VAERS is used to study. Not what you guys are trying to do. It can't be done, and that's why you guys are the only ones freaking out about VAERS.
I had to think for a bit.
If you are correct, and you're seeing something in this publicly-accessible data that is being missed by every independent scientist on the planet, and every lawyer looking for the ultimate lawsuit, and every politician looking for a guaranteed winning platform, and so forth...
I won't be the one you should be trying to convince.
Perhaps you DO know a way to manipulate the data in order to show what you think is there. But we're back to Occam's Razor.
I can believe you're the Data Messiah who is seeing a way to use this data that the creators of the database didn't foresee to unveil the largest crime against humanity in history, or I can believe that you're missing something.
You're welcome to present your argument, but whether or not you convince me doesn't really make a difference. I'm not the one who can vindicate you. But there are plenty of people who can, and if you think you can prove it, I'd absolutely encourage you to do so. I'd support that 100%.