Some of the reports are coming from doctors, but it's an open-reporting system. Anyone can submit a report for any reason.

It is fraud to suggest you have a symptom that you don't have. If you say you got cancer after the vaccine, and you don't have cancer, or didn't get the vaccine, or both, that's fraud.

If you got cancer after getting the vaccine, but the vaccine didn't cause cancer, you didn't commit fraud by submitting it. That's EXACTLY what you're supposed to do. If your arm hurts, you aren't committing fraud by submitting a report even if your arm hurts for a different reason. You aren't committing fraud if you actually have a toothache after getting the vaccine.

All of those things are SUPPOSED to be submitted. Doctors are required to submit such symptoms, even if they are almost positive that it has nothing to do with the vaccine.

Which is why the data can't be trusted as representative of actual vaccine injury. Which is the point I'm making. VAERS isn't full of fraudulent data. It's just full of data that has not, to date, shown any proven connection between the injuries reported and the vaccine, except that the injuries happened AFTER the vaccine.

Again, correlation does not prove causation. VAERS provides correlation. You are choosing to establish causation. VAERS is NOT designed to prove causation. It's designed to show scientists where to look at the correlation more closely.

Some of the reports are coming from doctors, but it's an open-reporting system. Anyone can submit a report for any reason.

It is fraud to suggest you have a symptom that you don't have. If you say you got cancer after the vaccine, and you don't have cancer, or didn't get the vaccine, or both, that's fraud.

If you got cancer after getting the vaccine, but the vaccine didn't cause cancer, you didn't commit fraud by submitting it. That's EXACTLY what you're supposed to do. If your arm hurts, you aren't committing fraud by submitting a report even if your arm hurts for a different reason. You aren't committing fraud if you actually have a toothache after getting the vaccine.

All of those things are SUPPOSED to be submitted. Doctors are required to submit such symptoms, even if they are almost positive that it has nothing to do with the vaccine.

Which is why the data can't be trusted as representative of actual vaccine injury. Which is the point I'm making. VAERS isn't full of fraudulent data. It's just full of data that has not, to date, shown any proven connection between the injuries reported and the vaccine, except that the injuries happened AFTER the vaccine.

Again, correlation does not prove causation. VAERS provides correlation. You are choosing to establish causation. VAERS is designed to prove causation. It's designed to show scientists where to look at the correlation more closely.