Doesn't surprise me. The population of people who has held out this long from the vaccine is going to continue holding out. Most other people have already either gotten it without issue, or had already decided it's not worth losing their job over.
Sort of like saying, "95% of high school dropouts don't think formal education is important." Well, sure. Look who you're sampling.
I speak anecdotally, as someone who has gotten two Pfizer shots back in January, along with all of my coworkers, and their coworkers. We're all still kicking strong.
Maybe other people are having problems, but the only data I've seen allegedly supporting that has been VAERS, and VAERS data literally cannot be used to support that conclusion, based on the how-to guide to the VAERS data on its own page.
I will let you know if I start having health problems, but given that I was one of the earliest vaccinated individuals around, I would have expected to have the same problems by now that you guys think other vaccinated people are having when they got it done later than I did.
It's not that VAERS data is unreliable for what it's supposed to be.
It's that it doesn't collect verified data.
I've written pages and pages on this, but if you look at the how-to guide, you get three important pieces of info:
Nothing, NOTHING is verified before VAERS publishes it into the numbers.
Anyone, ANYONE can submit a VAERS report for anything they even remotely think might be a side-effect from the vaccine.
Doctors are REQUIRED to submit reports on ANY potential side-effect from the vaccine, regardless of whether or not they think the vaccine is actually the cause.
Which means that the vaccine could literally be absolutely, 100% perfect and safe, and we'd still see the VAERS system chock full of reports.
Because it's not designed to see whether the vaccine is killing people. It's designed to established a baseline of "garbage data" in order to detect localized spikes that might show a bad batch or a generalized trend.
The baseline data is going to show thousands of deaths and injuries, and not a single one of them is proven to have anything to do with the vaccine. This is a normal part of data collection when you're dealing with hundreds of millions of data points.
Which is why no actual data scientists are freaked out by the VAERS data. Because they know they're looking at a baseline that was built-in by design to the VAERS system.
Everyone is encouraged to submit everything for any reason, and nothing is verified. That equals a baseline of garbage reports. Stuff that rises ABOVE that baseline is what they're interested in investigating.
They've made it openly available so other scientists can use that data. The data is not curated to be used by laypeople to try to determine whether the vaccine is killing people, because the data, due to the way it's collected, literally can't be used to come to that conclusion. It's impossible given how VAERS is set up.
The clinical trials were designed to see if the vaccine was dangerous. VAERS is used to look for trends above a sea of garbage reports.
Doesn't surprise me. The population of people who has held out this long from the vaccine is going to continue holding out. Most other people have already either gotten it without issue, or had already decided it's not worth losing their job over.
Sort of like saying, "95% of high school dropouts don't think formal education is important." Well, sure. Look who you're sampling.
I speak anecdotally, as someone who has gotten two Pfizer shots back in January, along with all of my coworkers, and their coworkers. We're all still kicking strong.
Maybe other people are having problems, but the only data I've seen allegedly supporting that has been VAERS, and VAERS data literally cannot be used to support that conclusion, based on the how-to guide to the VAERS data on its own page.
I will let you know if I start having health problems, but given that I was one of the earliest vaccinated individuals around, I would have expected to have the same problems by now that you guys think other vaccinated people are having when they got it done later than I did.
It's not that VAERS data is unreliable for what it's supposed to be.
It's that it doesn't collect verified data.
I've written pages and pages on this, but if you look at the how-to guide, you get three important pieces of info:
Which means that the vaccine could literally be absolutely, 100% perfect and safe, and we'd still see the VAERS system chock full of reports.
Because it's not designed to see whether the vaccine is killing people. It's designed to established a baseline of "garbage data" in order to detect localized spikes that might show a bad batch or a generalized trend.
The baseline data is going to show thousands of deaths and injuries, and not a single one of them is proven to have anything to do with the vaccine. This is a normal part of data collection when you're dealing with hundreds of millions of data points.
Which is why no actual data scientists are freaked out by the VAERS data. Because they know they're looking at a baseline that was built-in by design to the VAERS system.
Everyone is encouraged to submit everything for any reason, and nothing is verified. That equals a baseline of garbage reports. Stuff that rises ABOVE that baseline is what they're interested in investigating.
They've made it openly available so other scientists can use that data. The data is not curated to be used by laypeople to try to determine whether the vaccine is killing people, because the data, due to the way it's collected, literally can't be used to come to that conclusion. It's impossible given how VAERS is set up.
The clinical trials were designed to see if the vaccine was dangerous. VAERS is used to look for trends above a sea of garbage reports.