Scroll down a few pages to results and there's a line that says they believe only 1% of cases are reported.
Furthermore, the red pill I give normies is I ask them for what data stream is being used to determine safety over time of the vaccines. Either they say VAERS or I tell them. I also point that Healthcare providers are legally required to report adverse events to VAERS. They look at go *ackshually, here's a disclaimer from the CDC that VAERS is self reported and unverified! Deboooonked." So that begs the question... what continued tracking with follow up is the CDC doing to determine vaccine safety? The CDC says it's VAERS so if you're saying that's not good enough, then we have NO DATA monitoring safety.
Clinically trained reviewers have undertaken a detailed analysis of a sample of the early deaths reported in VAERS (250 out of the 1644 deaths recorded up to April 2021). The focus is on the extent to which the reports enable us to understand whether the vaccine genuinely caused or contributed to the deaths. Contrary to claims that most of these reports are made by lay-people and are hence clinically unreliable, we identified health service employees as the reporter in at least 67%. The sample contains only people vaccinated early in the programme, and hence is made up primarily of those who are elderly or with significant health conditions. Despite this, there were only 14% of the cases for which a vaccine reaction could be ruled out as a contributing factor in their death.
I do think the reporting percentage is dramatically higher for COVID-19. This is data on adults with an EUA, so more doctors are willing to believe there is a correlation.
VAERS is an open database. Healthcare workers can submit reports (provided they ever are given time, and actually remember to do it amongst the plethora of other documentation they must do).
The general public can as well, and they can write whatever claims they want. Consider this like a customer service review. You only care if you're either really happy with the service or really unhappy with the service. The average experience doesn't get you mad enough to look up the database, find the form in the shit-show of the CDC website, fill it out, and submit it.
Reporting is low because it takes effort and comes with a huge selection bias which makes working with it a nightmare.
Yes, the current EUAs require reporting to VAERS. How many actually comply? Unknown. Between logging things with your own electronic documentation, then submitting it to the state database(s) you're required to submit to, do you remember to hit VAERS as well? Or do you get back to caring for your next patient who's pissed because they've been waiting forever?
Re: no monitoring - not exactly. The EUAs require each of the 3 vaccine manufacturers to collect a database of adverse event reports. So that's 3 databases. Good luck getting access to them. I've emailed each company asking for it and gotten a form letter auto-response politely declining. I'm told FDA gets to see them. That's lovely and totally trustworthy, given the cozy relationship FDA seems to have with many of their respective board members.
The V-safe app is encouraged, and that's supposed to be another source. It's our primary source for data on pregnancy and complications, but again, the patient has to opt-in, download the thing, register, and then actually submit the data. And it's not publicly accessible. CDC curates the data then publishes it. This is on top of but separate from CDC's VAERS.
So, we have an absolute horror show of a system set up to monitor this stuff. It's decentralized, opt-in, and in no way coordinated or collated by anyone into a complete picture. Data's not standardized. It's not publicly accessible (aside from VAERS). Why they didn't centralize it and integrate it directly into the major EHRs, I don't know. Probably too technically difficult or time-consuming to do, so they jerry rigged a quick solution, without thinking about whether it actually would provide usable data or not. If you want a job not to be done properly, ask a government agency to do it.
"Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of
ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events
and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or
slow the identification of βproblemβ drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New
surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. Barriers to reporting
include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the
burdens of reporting: reporting is not part of cliniciansβ usual workflow, takes time, and is
duplicative. Proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting imbedded within EHRs (Electronic Health Records)
and other information systems has the potential to speed the identification of problems with new
drugs and more careful quantification of the risks of older drugs.
Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments
because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants
responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with
testing and evaluation."
Thank you for slamming worthless journalism. The prostitutes that work for the media absolutely know how much they are lying, and they should all quit in disgrace.
I hate that journalists are so lazy that can't link to the study...
2009 Harvard study: https://digital.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/electronic-support-public-health-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system
Download the pdf report.
Scroll down a few pages to results and there's a line that says they believe only 1% of cases are reported.
Furthermore, the red pill I give normies is I ask them for what data stream is being used to determine safety over time of the vaccines. Either they say VAERS or I tell them. I also point that Healthcare providers are legally required to report adverse events to VAERS. They look at go *ackshually, here's a disclaimer from the CDC that VAERS is self reported and unverified! Deboooonked." So that begs the question... what continued tracking with follow up is the CDC doing to determine vaccine safety? The CDC says it's VAERS so if you're saying that's not good enough, then we have NO DATA monitoring safety.
Great follow up post realAnon!ππ» Thanks for the additional link and context!
You get a cat for that!
u/#catdance
No prob! Great post! Glad healthcare workers know this info too and are speaking up!
Yep itβs more like %0.01 reported.
Almost every MD I talk to doesnβt even know what VAERS is despite there being a wall mounted mention of it.
This is another good study to look at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352837543_Analysis_of_COVID-19_vaccine_death_reports_from_the_Vaccine_Adverse_Events_Reporting_System_VAERS_Database_Interim_Results_and_Analysis
Clinically trained reviewers have undertaken a detailed analysis of a sample of the early deaths reported in VAERS (250 out of the 1644 deaths recorded up to April 2021). The focus is on the extent to which the reports enable us to understand whether the vaccine genuinely caused or contributed to the deaths. Contrary to claims that most of these reports are made by lay-people and are hence clinically unreliable, we identified health service employees as the reporter in at least 67%. The sample contains only people vaccinated early in the programme, and hence is made up primarily of those who are elderly or with significant health conditions. Despite this, there were only 14% of the cases for which a vaccine reaction could be ruled out as a contributing factor in their death.
Translation:
Despite this, there were 86% of the cases for which a vaccine reaction could be a contributing factor in their death.
Excellent points realAnon - causing more CogDis at every turn...
I would believe 5x or 10x. 1 percent is probably too low. But it's still totally fucked
Yeah I would wager deaths get reported more than other things.
The doctors report it only if they run their own practice.
Otherwise they report it to administrators who donβt input to VEARS as they donβt want bad publicity
If there are 100 times as many deaths by clot shot, then I think we would start to see that vital statistics death rate start to nudge up.
Yes, 600k deaths usually gets noticed
I believe 1% for childhood vaccines.
I do think the reporting percentage is dramatically higher for COVID-19. This is data on adults with an EUA, so more doctors are willing to believe there is a correlation.
GREAT QUESTION! What database are they using AND letβs see it so we all feel good about the vaxx!
Answer: it's VAERS. And no they are not following up.
Some thoughts:
So, we have an absolute horror show of a system set up to monitor this stuff. It's decentralized, opt-in, and in no way coordinated or collated by anyone into a complete picture. Data's not standardized. It's not publicly accessible (aside from VAERS). Why they didn't centralize it and integrate it directly into the major EHRs, I don't know. Probably too technically difficult or time-consuming to do, so they jerry rigged a quick solution, without thinking about whether it actually would provide usable data or not. If you want a job not to be done properly, ask a government agency to do it.
thanks. It's on page 6 of the PDF you linked to.
"Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of βproblemβ drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. Barriers to reporting include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the burdens of reporting: reporting is not part of cliniciansβ usual workflow, takes time, and is duplicative. Proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting imbedded within EHRs (Electronic Health Records) and other information systems has the potential to speed the identification of problems with new drugs and more careful quantification of the risks of older drugs.
Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with testing and evaluation."
If the vacine kills you before you can be counted as as vaccinated (2wks after the 2nd jab) then the death is counted as covid? Anyone know?
Thank you for slamming worthless journalism. The prostitutes that work for the media absolutely know how much they are lying, and they should all quit in disgrace.