It doesn't matter who presents the data. Data is data.
And the matter of fact is that the data is an underestimation of negative effects in favor of the vaccines due to the way the data is collected.
his suggested death rate is inferred based on a perceived underreporting bias without any evidence to back it up
There are studies to back it up from before this pandemic. VAERS massively underestimates real cases. Even if you factor in the increased public awareness of it due to the current pandemic there is no way that it doesn't underestimate cases. Simply because a significant number of fools out there still believe the pseudo-vaccines to be "100% safe" and because there are people who are afraid of speaking about any side effects because they don't want to be labeled antivax by retards.
not for why the vaccine is dangerous (or else the side effect would’ve occurred after the first dose).
Other people have done that. Why a historically flawed at best and likely corrupt institution is not yet showing any of it is, for the time being, up to your imagination.
but the simple fact is that VAERs is self reported and unverified
Nice Goebbels media talking point.
I understand you’re scared
No, I most certainly am not scared. Zero changes in life style. I understand that you are, you little shill.
but you’re grasping at straws because you want what you believe to true
No, I just see the data aligning in a certain direction regardless of where you look. If you don't like VAERS, which is reported by the doctors IF THEY get a report from the patient (which hence validates all the points I've raised), then look to other countries that paint a very similar picture while employing more rigorous data collection standards.
unfortunately you will never 100% and neither will I.
Is your vaccine kicking in or why the incoherence?
P.S. If you applied even 1% of the standards you try to (falsely) deploy here you'd be out in the streets demonstrating against these pseudo-vaccines.
It doesn't matter who presents the data. Data is data.
And the matter of fact is that the data is an underestimation of negative effects in favor of the vaccines due to the way the data is collected.
There are studies to back it up from before this pandemic. VAERS massively underestimates real cases. Even if you factor in the increased public awareness of it due to the current pandemic there is no way that it doesn't underestimate cases. Simply because a significant number of fools out there still believe the pseudo-vaccines to be "100% safe" and because there are people who are afraid of speaking about any side effects because they don't want to be labeled antivax by retards.
Other people have done that. Why a historically flawed at best and likely corrupt institution is not yet showing any of it is, for the time being, up to your imagination.
Nice Goebbels media talking point.
No, I most certainly am not scared. Zero changes in life style. I understand that you are, you little shill.
No, I just see the data aligning in a certain direction regardless of where you look. If you don't like VAERS, which is reported by the doctors IF THEY get a report from the patient (which hence validates all the points I've raised), then look to other countries that paint a very similar picture while employing more rigorous data collection standards.
Is your vaccine kicking in or why the incoherence?
P.S. If you applied even 1% of the standards you try to (falsely) deploy here you'd be out in the streets demonstrating against these pseudo-vaccines.