Okay, so let's go through this.

1. Yes, as I said, vaccine makers must report POTENTIAL side effects, which means, ANY apparent problem that comes up after the vaccine. That does NOT mean that these illnesses are verified as a result of the vaccine, which means that a vaccine-producer's report is no more verified than a rando submitting a report to end up in VAERS.

2. Being illegal to report false data means nothing. It's illegal to use fake vaccine cards (government document fraud) and that's clearly being ignored. Plus, it doesn't need to be a FALSE report to be bad data. It could just be someone who has no idea why they have a sore throat, blame it on the vaccine, and submit a report. It doesn't mean it's a correct report, and it still bogs up the data.

3. I have no idea why you're so hung up on financial disclosure, and it seems like you're nitpicking what you think it supposed to happen rather than what actually happens in the real world. Financial disclosures are for studies that draw conclusions, like experiments. They're not for reports on raw data, nor are they collected from participants in a survey, and VAERS is just a big survey.

4. It's not a straw-man to describe a real-world example. A 98 year old cancer survivor who dies shortly after receiving the vaccine will still be listed in VAERS by their doctor until their cause of death is confirmed. That's the point I'm making. Because doctors HAVE to report, then they will report ANY case that cannot immediately rule out the vaccine as a cause, even if it's super obvious that the vaccine is not the cause. That's how VAERS works.

Same thing with very young babies, per VAERS:

Millions of vaccines are given each year to children less than 1 year old in the United States, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence. These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination. Therefore, vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

5. I don't find it an interesting coincidence that young, healthy people die after taking the vaccine. Young, healthy people die for weird, random reasons all the time regardless of whether or not they're vaccinated. And when you have tens of millions of people vaccinated, some proportion of those people are going to experience weird, random deaths. You'd need a LOT more than a few to rise above statistical significance, which is why no actual researchers are sounding the alarm bells yet. Because you're stressing out about a baseline of garbage data.

6. I know that nothing in the VAERS system is verified because VAERS tells us that nothing in the VAERS system is verified. I can read the directions that VAERS helpfully provides on how to interpret the data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

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.

8. As I said, VAERS was NOT given to you, as a layperson, to use for the reasons you're using it. It was given as open-access to scientists and researchers who are studying the data for localized, batch-related problems that jump above that baseline of garbage data that I was referring to.

What they HAVE given you is what you guys choose to distrust and ignore, which is information from the CDC, which IS designed for layperson understanding, and features conclusions reached after people who know what they're doing sort through data from systems like VAERS.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html

As I said, just because VAERS is open TO you does not mean it's designed FOR you. It is not the only data you have been given. It's just the only data that you're choosing to use, because it's the only data that you seem to think supports your conclusion about vaccine safety, even though it does not.

Okay, so let's go through this.

1. Yes, as I said, vaccine makers must report POTENTIAL side effects, which means, ANY apparent problem that comes up after the vaccine. That does NOT mean that these illnesses are verified as a result of the vaccine, which means that a vaccine-producer's report is no more verified than a rando submitting a report to end up in VAERS.

2. Being illegal to report false data means nothing. It's illegal to use fake vaccine cards (government document fraud) and that's clearly being ignored. Plus, it doesn't need to be a FALSE report to be bad data. It could just be someone who has no idea why they have a sore throat, blame it on the vaccine, and submit a report. It doesn't mean it's a correct report, and it still bogs up the data.

3. I have no idea why you're so hung up on financial disclosure, and it seems like you're nitpicking what you think it supposed to happen rather than what actually happens in the real world. Financial disclosures are for studies that draw conclusions, like experiments. They're not for reports on raw data, nor are they collected from participants in a survey, and VAERS is just a big survey.

4. It's not a straw-man to describe a real-world example. A 98 year old cancer survivor who dies shortly after receiving the vaccine will still be listed in VAERS by their doctor until their cause of death is confirmed. That's the point I'm making. Because doctors HAVE to report, then they will report ANY case that cannot immediately rule out the vaccine as a cause, even if it's super obvious that the vaccine is not the cause. That's how VAERS works.

Same thing with very young babies, per VAERS:

Millions of vaccines are given each year to children less than 1 year old in the United States, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence. These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination. Therefore, vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

5. I don't find it an interesting coincidence that young, healthy people die after taking the vaccine. Young, healthy people die for weird, random reasons all the time regardless of whether or not they're vaccinated. And when you have tens of millions of people vaccinated, some proportion of those people are going to experience weird, random deaths. You'd need a LOT more than a few to rise above statistical significance, which is why no actual researchers are sounding the alarm bells yet. Because you're stressing out about a baseline of garbage data.

6. I know that nothing in the VAERS system is verified because VAERS tells us that nothing in the VAERS system is verified. I can read the directions that VAERS helpfully provides on how to interpret the data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

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.

8. As I said, VAERS was NOT given to you, as a layperson, to use for the reasons you're using it. It was given as open-access to scientists and researchers who are studying the data for localized, batch-related problems that jump above that baseline of garbage data that I was referring to.

What they HAVE given you is what you guys choose to distrust and ignore, which is information from the CDC, which IS designed for layperson understanding, and features conclusions reached after people who know what they're doing sort through data from systems like VAERS.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html

As I said, just because VAERS is open TO you does not mean it's designed FOR you. It is not the only data you have been given. It's just the only data that you're choosing to use, because it's the only data that you seem to think supports your conclusion about vaccine safety, even though it does not.

Okay, so let's go through this.

1. Yes, as I said, vaccine makers must report POTENTIAL side effects, which means, ANY apparent problem that comes up after the vaccine. That does NOT mean that these illnesses are verified as a result of the vaccine, which means that a vaccine-producer's report is no more verified than a rando submitting a report to end up in VAERS.

2. Being illegal to report false data means nothing. It's illegal to use fake vaccine cards (government document fraud) and that's clearly being ignored. Plus, it doesn't need to be a FALSE report to be bad data. It could just be someone who has no idea why they have a sore throat, blame it on the vaccine, and submit a report. It doesn't mean it's a correct report, and it still bogs up the data.

3. I have no idea why you're so hung up on financial disclosure, and it seems like you're nitpicking what you think it supposed to happen rather than what actually happens in the real world. Financial disclosures are for studies that draw conclusions, like experiments. They're not for reports on raw data, nor are they collected from participants in a survey, and VAERS is just a big survey.

4. It's not a straw-man to describe a real-world example. A 98 year old cancer survivor who dies shortly after receiving the vaccine will still be listed in VAERS by their doctor until their cause of death is confirmed. That's the point I'm making. Because doctors HAVE to report, then they will report ANY case that cannot immediately rule out the vaccine as a cause, even if it's super obvious that the vaccine is not the cause. That's how VAERS works.

Same thing with very young babies, per VAERS:

Millions of vaccines are given each year to children less than 1 year old in the United States, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence. These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination. Therefore, vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

5. I don't find it an interesting coincidence that young, healthy people die after taking the vaccine. Young, healthy people die for weird, random reasons all the time regardless of whether or not they're vaccinated. And when you have tens of millions of people vaccinated, some proportion of those people are going to experience weird, random deaths. You'd need a LOT more than a few to rise above statistical significance, which is why no actual researchers are sounding the alarm bells yet. Because you're stressing out about a baseline of garbage data.

6. I know that nothing in the VAERS system is verified because VAERS tells us that nothing in the VAERS system is verified. I can read the directions that VAERS helpfully provides on how to interpret the data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

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.

8. As I said, VAERS was NOT given to you, as a layperson, to use for the reasons you're using it. It was given as open-access to scientists and researchers who are studying the data for localized, batch-related problems that jump above that baseline of garbage data that I was referring to.

What they HAVE given you is what you guys choose to distrust and ignore, which is information from the CDC, which IS designed for layperson understanding, and features conclusions reached after people who know what they're doing sort through data from systems like VAERS.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html

As I said, just because VAERS is open TO you does not mean it's designed FOR you. It is not the only data you have been given. It's just the only data that you're choosing to use, because it's the only data that you seem to think supports your conclusion about vaccine safety, even though it does not.

Okay, so let's go through this.

1. Yes, as I said, vaccine makers must report POTENTIAL side effects, which means, ANY apparent problem that comes up after the vaccine. That does NOT mean that these illnesses are verified as a result of the vaccine, which means that a vaccine-producer's report is no more verified than a rando submitting a report to end up in VAERS.

2. Being illegal to report false data means nothing. It's illegal to use fake vaccine cards (government document fraud) and that's clearly being ignored. Plus, it doesn't need to be a FALSE report to be bad data. It could just be someone who has no idea why they have a sore throat, blame it on the vaccine, and submit a report. It doesn't mean it's a correct report, and it still bogs up the data.

3. I have no idea why you're so hung up on financial disclosure, and it seems like you're nitpicking what you think it supposed to happen rather than what actually happens in the real world. Financial disclosures are for studies that draw conclusions, like experiments. They're not for reports on raw data, nor are they collected from participants in a survey, and VAERS is just a big survey.

4. It's not a straw-man to describe a real-world example. A 98 year old cancer survivor who dies shortly after receiving the vaccine will still be listed in VAERS by their doctor until their cause of death is confirmed. That's the point I'm making. Because doctors HAVE to report, then they will report ANY case that cannot immediately rule out the vaccine as a cause, even if it's super obvious that the vaccine is not the cause. That's how VAERS works.

Same thing with very young babies, per VAERS:

Millions of vaccines are given each year to children less than 1 year old in the United States, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence. These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination. Therefore, vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

5. I don't find it an interesting coincidence that young, healthy people die after taking the vaccine. Young, healthy people die for weird, random reasons all the time regardless of whether or not they're vaccinated. And when you have tens of millions of people vaccinated, some proportion of those people are going to experience weird, random deaths. You'd need a LOT more than a few to rise above statistical significance, which is why no actual researchers are sounding the alarm bells yet. Because you're stressing out about a baseline of garbage data.

6. I know that nothing in the VAERS system is verified because VAERS tells us that nothing in the VAERS system is verified. I can read the directions that VAERS helpfully provides on how to interpret the data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

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.

8. As I said, VAERS was NOT given to you, as a layperson, to use for the reasons you're using it. It was given as open-access to scientists and researchers who are studying the data for localized, batch-related problems that jump above that baseline of garbage data that I was referring to.

What they HAVE given you is what you guys choose to distrust and ignore, which is information from the CDC, which IS designed for layperson understanding, and features conclusions reached after people who know what they're doing sort through data from systems like VAERS.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html

As I said, just because VAERS is open TO you does not mean it's designed FOR you. It is not the only data you have been given. It's just the only data that you're choosing to use, because it's the only data that you seem to think supports your conclusion about vaccine safety, even though it does not.

Okay, so let's go through this.

1. Yes, as I said, vaccine makers must report POTENTIAL side effects, which means, ANY apparent problem that comes up after the vaccine. That does NOT mean that these illnesses are verified as a result of the vaccine, which means that a vaccine-producer's report is no more verified than a rando submitting a report to end up in VAERS.

2. Being illegal to report false data means nothing. It's illegal to use fake vaccine cards (government document fraud) and that's clearly being ignored. Plus, it doesn't need to be a FALSE report to be bad data. It could just be someone who has no idea why they have a sore throat, blame it on the vaccine, and submit a report. It doesn't mean it's a correct report, and it still bogs up the data.

3. I have no idea why you're so hung up on financial disclosure, and it seems like you're nitpicking what you think it supposed to happen rather than what actually happens in the real world. Financial disclosures are for studies that draw conclusions, like experiments. They're not for reports on raw data, nor are they collected from participants in a survey, and VAERS is just a big survey.

4. It's not a straw-man to describe a real-world example. A 98 year old cancer survivor who dies shortly after receiving the vaccine will still be listed in VAERS by their doctor until their cause of death is confirmed. That's the point I'm making. Because doctors HAVE to report, then they will report ANY case that cannot immediately rule out the vaccine as a cause, even if it's super obvious that the vaccine is not the cause. That's how VAERS works.

Same thing with very young babies, per VAERS:

Millions of vaccines are given each year to children less than 1 year old in the United States, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence. These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination. Therefore, vaccine providers are encouraged to report all adverse events following vaccination, whether or not they believe the vaccination was the cause.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

5. I don't find it an interesting coincidence that young, healthy people die after taking the vaccine. Young, healthy people die for weird, random reasons all the time regardless of whether or not they're vaccinated. And when you have tens of millions of people vaccinated, some proportion of those people are going to experience weird, random deaths. You'd need a LOT more than a few to rise above statistical significance, which is why no actual researchers are sounding the alarm bells yet. Because you're stressing out about a baseline of garbage data.

6. I know that nothing in the VAERS system is verified because VAERS tells us that nothing in the VAERS system is verified. I can read the directions that VAERS helpfully provides on how to interpret the data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

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.

8. As I said, VAERS was NOT given to you, as a layperson, to use for the reasons you're using it. It was given as open-access to scientists and researchers who are studying the data for localized, batch-related problems that jump above that baseline of garbage data that I was referring to.

What they HAVE given you is what you guys choose to distrust and ignore, which is information from the CDC, which IS designed for layperson understanding, and features conclusions reached after people who know what they're doing sort through data from systems like VAERS.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety.html

As I said, just because VAERS is open TO you does not mean it's designed FOR you. It is not the only data you have been given. It's just the only data that you're choosing to use, because it's the only data that you seem to think supports your conclusion about vaccine safety, even though it does not.