So, we're now up to a potential of 3% of Excess Deaths caused by the highly profitable injection they pretend was "a SAFE & EFFECTIVE vaccine"! The figure could never be truly known because there are many that might have apparently 'dodged the bullet' and will now live with uncertainty of how much their LIFE EXPECTANCY might have been impacted by the DEADLY INJECTION? So - you could easily double the 'depopulation CULL' to 6%. We'll never really know!
The conclusion we must draw from the 4.5 years of lies, manufactured diseases, deadly injections, pre-meditated murder by injection for their man-enhanced disease, along with the depopulation CULL by Vax is ....................... 'Do Not Trust Your Doctor' He/She's only in it for profit! They no longer have morals or scruples or just plain scared of retribution from the New World Order (WEF) system!
No doubt the FDA will deny the credibility of 99,000,000 who contributed evidence to the Vax Injuries and Vax RELATED DEATHS issue! Not enough participants for the FDA (WEF's New World Order).
The FDA will allow mass-murder to continue under the guise of justifiable 'ZERO LIABILITY' for deadly injection makers like Pfizer, et al,.
There are so many 'cons' within the FDA and establishment's statistics. Did you realise that an injected person is not regarded as 'vaccinated' until 21 days have passed since the deadly jab was applied. Every Adverse Reaction or Vax related DEATH that occurs in the mean-time is irrelevant!
Dr Stock was totally right...I would bet upwards of 5 million were killed in the US by the graphene hydroxide shots...my 56 years as an RN informs my opinion.
"I think we have to assume that we’re much higher than 1 percent territory. I’ve been working with the assumption that on deaths from the Covid vaccine, between 10 and 20 percent are reported to VAERS"
Actually, this is the wrong assumption to make, and also particularly why assumptions (with human expectations) are so dangerous. The actual reporting figure is below 1%, and I do believe Steve Kirsch presented evidence showing why it was a fallacy to assume higher awareness = higher rates of reporting, by comparing the reporting rate against the number of vaccines (I believe, but don't quote me, that he found it to be a .1% reporting rate).
"doctors are required by law to report deaths that occur not long after a vaccine"
A flaw with this argument is this law has always applied prior to the COVID-19 shots, which means you wouldn't magically see an increase in reporting rates as a result (I.E. it would still be below 1%).
I can't remember if it was whistleblower Brook Jackson (my attribution could be horribly wrong) but they mentioned most medical staff do not fill out VAERS on account of it requiring more than 30 minutes to fill in via a horribly messy User Interface. I also recall in one case a nurse had tried to encourage other staff to fill in VAERS and they scoffed because, remember - the shots were "safe and effective". Biggest propaganda campaign on the planet, to the tune of trillions.
Additionally, ignorance on the harms the shots cause is overwhelmingly rife, made evident by the fact 'healthcare professionals' still administer the shots (either that, or worse; they have no conscience, at which point the law is irrelevant anyway).
Even being aware of the law does not guarantee a doctor would fill it out, because it strongly depends on when the event occurs. If it occurs immediately after, it is pretty obvious. But most onset symptoms don't occur instantly.
As a result, the treating doctor at the hospital may not even know or think of writing in the COVID-19 shot as the cause. Plus, the individual is likely to acquire additional shots in the interim (including the so-called "boosters" from different manufacturers and flu shots), so which shot does the doctor attribute cause to? Most don't or won't.
The 1% underreporting figure comes from the Lazarus report. The reason why it still persists is because no action was undertaken to address the problem. Not even basic action such as having a major awareness campaign. As a result, the needle hasn't meaningfully moved.
Doctors reporting deaths to VAERS is not equal to doctors reporting all possible side effects to VAERS, a distinction that has been overlooked. Doctors are required by law to report deaths and some other serious health events, but are only "strongly encouraged" to report other possible adverse events. The Harvard study did not make a distinction, but looked at all possible adverse events, including death, in coming up with its less than 1 percent finding. Interestingly, I just saw that a scientist working with Steve Kirsch on some data arrived at an underreporting factor of 17, which would place my rough estimate of 10-20 percent right about on target. Of course, we'll never really know for sure.
"Doctors reporting deaths to VAERS is not equal to doctors reporting all possible side effects to VAERS"
Deaths are part of the adverse outcome make-up, and would still be proportionate. You can't have health harms go up but deaths go down, or have harms go up and deaths remain static. As harms go up, deaths will go up in proportion.
The death figures we also have an actual insight for from the hidden database (there's a couple of other figures pulled as well, disabilities included - all screenshots are on the articles as linked).
I figured there was a hidden database because no matter what I did I could not replicate my results.
You should also find the "official" VAERS doesn't even have 2 million entries for *all* types of VAERS side effects (including *all* vaccines).
"a scientist working with Steve Kirsch on some data arrived at an underreporting factor of 17"
"Steve Kirsch [2] and Dr. Jessica Rose [3] have calculated the URF at 31x to 51x in a number of different ways — basically in the middle of the range originally calculated by Lazarus and Klompas."
I.E. still within the Lazarus report range. The VAERS figures we're seeing are underreported, or, if you follow my theory - hidden.
37,000 * 100 = 3, 700, 000 (or 3.7 million deaths), which wouldn't be too far off what I found from the secret database. Pending the litigation from American First Legal.
Just to be clear, the hidden database isn't speculation - it is verified by the BMJ. We just don't know what's in the hidden database sans whatever TDB managed to pull out (and that will be out-of-date by now).
No, not Jessica Rose. A mathematician whose name Kirsch didn't reveal. He used an underreporting factor of 17 but arrived at an estimated 600,000 deaths from the vaccine. From what I remember, this is the rough number Kirsch arrived at last year also.
Perhaps he also quoted that figure as well. He has also quoted Jessica Rose's figures, and she specialises in biostatistical analysis (regularly covers VAERS datasets), plus her accreditation is public and vettable. Naturally you'll understand if I lean towards her assessment.
One other aspect to note is even if death rates aren't instantly fatal, many of the conditions listed have later-stage fatality rates. For example, NIH attempted to scrub evidence of myocarditis' 50% fatality rate after 5 years (again, caught by the Daily Beagle: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/nih-deletes-myocarditis-fatality).
That is not to say 50% will drop dead the moment the clock hits 5 years, but over the duration of the 5 years, 50% with myocarditis will have dropped dead.
To follow up, I think people don't appreciate how large 1% can be in numbers of scale.
If you assume for demonstration purposes 100 million Americans took the shot, 1% wouldn't be 37,000.
1% would be 1 million.
37,000 of 100 million would be a mere 0.037%.
We know the data is suppressed based on The Daily Beagle's findings and BMJ confirmation.
The death row record we got was over 2 million. For 100 million Americans that would be a 2% fatality rate. I believe in reality more than 200 million Americans took the shot, which would be a <1% fatality rate.
So, we're now up to a potential of 3% of Excess Deaths caused by the highly profitable injection they pretend was "a SAFE & EFFECTIVE vaccine"! The figure could never be truly known because there are many that might have apparently 'dodged the bullet' and will now live with uncertainty of how much their LIFE EXPECTANCY might have been impacted by the DEADLY INJECTION? So - you could easily double the 'depopulation CULL' to 6%. We'll never really know!
The conclusion we must draw from the 4.5 years of lies, manufactured diseases, deadly injections, pre-meditated murder by injection for their man-enhanced disease, along with the depopulation CULL by Vax is ....................... 'Do Not Trust Your Doctor' He/She's only in it for profit! They no longer have morals or scruples or just plain scared of retribution from the New World Order (WEF) system!
No doubt the FDA will deny the credibility of 99,000,000 who contributed evidence to the Vax Injuries and Vax RELATED DEATHS issue! Not enough participants for the FDA (WEF's New World Order).
The FDA will allow mass-murder to continue under the guise of justifiable 'ZERO LIABILITY' for deadly injection makers like Pfizer, et al,.
There are so many 'cons' within the FDA and establishment's statistics. Did you realise that an injected person is not regarded as 'vaccinated' until 21 days have passed since the deadly jab was applied. Every Adverse Reaction or Vax related DEATH that occurs in the mean-time is irrelevant!
Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed to live longer!
Dr Stock was totally right...I would bet upwards of 5 million were killed in the US by the graphene hydroxide shots...my 56 years as an RN informs my opinion.
"I think we have to assume that we’re much higher than 1 percent territory. I’ve been working with the assumption that on deaths from the Covid vaccine, between 10 and 20 percent are reported to VAERS"
Actually, this is the wrong assumption to make, and also particularly why assumptions (with human expectations) are so dangerous. The actual reporting figure is below 1%, and I do believe Steve Kirsch presented evidence showing why it was a fallacy to assume higher awareness = higher rates of reporting, by comparing the reporting rate against the number of vaccines (I believe, but don't quote me, that he found it to be a .1% reporting rate).
"doctors are required by law to report deaths that occur not long after a vaccine"
A flaw with this argument is this law has always applied prior to the COVID-19 shots, which means you wouldn't magically see an increase in reporting rates as a result (I.E. it would still be below 1%).
I can't remember if it was whistleblower Brook Jackson (my attribution could be horribly wrong) but they mentioned most medical staff do not fill out VAERS on account of it requiring more than 30 minutes to fill in via a horribly messy User Interface. I also recall in one case a nurse had tried to encourage other staff to fill in VAERS and they scoffed because, remember - the shots were "safe and effective". Biggest propaganda campaign on the planet, to the tune of trillions.
Additionally, ignorance on the harms the shots cause is overwhelmingly rife, made evident by the fact 'healthcare professionals' still administer the shots (either that, or worse; they have no conscience, at which point the law is irrelevant anyway).
The HHS also have a second VAERS database that is hidden - this was exposed by The Daily Beagle (even got some of the numbers, see: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/discussion-did-the-daily-beagle-accidentally), confirmed by the BMJ (British Medical Journal, see: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/bmj-accuses-fda-cdc-of-secret-vaers) and is now being litigated by American First Legal (see: https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-sues-hhs-on-behalf-of-john-solomon-to-uncover-secret-government-data-about-covid-19-vaccine-morbidity-and-adverse-effects/).
Even being aware of the law does not guarantee a doctor would fill it out, because it strongly depends on when the event occurs. If it occurs immediately after, it is pretty obvious. But most onset symptoms don't occur instantly.
They can take weeks, months or even years to emerge (ironically, in flawed studies, anyone who has had the shot for less than <21 days isn't counted as vaccinated, ONS do this, for example: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/ons-wont-explain-why-they-changed).
As a result, the treating doctor at the hospital may not even know or think of writing in the COVID-19 shot as the cause. Plus, the individual is likely to acquire additional shots in the interim (including the so-called "boosters" from different manufacturers and flu shots), so which shot does the doctor attribute cause to? Most don't or won't.
The 1% underreporting figure comes from the Lazarus report. The reason why it still persists is because no action was undertaken to address the problem. Not even basic action such as having a major awareness campaign. As a result, the needle hasn't meaningfully moved.
Doctors reporting deaths to VAERS is not equal to doctors reporting all possible side effects to VAERS, a distinction that has been overlooked. Doctors are required by law to report deaths and some other serious health events, but are only "strongly encouraged" to report other possible adverse events. The Harvard study did not make a distinction, but looked at all possible adverse events, including death, in coming up with its less than 1 percent finding. Interestingly, I just saw that a scientist working with Steve Kirsch on some data arrived at an underreporting factor of 17, which would place my rough estimate of 10-20 percent right about on target. Of course, we'll never really know for sure.
"Doctors reporting deaths to VAERS is not equal to doctors reporting all possible side effects to VAERS"
Deaths are part of the adverse outcome make-up, and would still be proportionate. You can't have health harms go up but deaths go down, or have harms go up and deaths remain static. As harms go up, deaths will go up in proportion.
The death figures we also have an actual insight for from the hidden database (there's a couple of other figures pulled as well, disabilities included - all screenshots are on the articles as linked).
I figured there was a hidden database because no matter what I did I could not replicate my results.
You should also find the "official" VAERS doesn't even have 2 million entries for *all* types of VAERS side effects (including *all* vaccines).
"a scientist working with Steve Kirsch on some data arrived at an underreporting factor of 17"
I think you meant Jessica Rose? Who found a URF of 31x to 51x, quoting her article (https://jessicar.substack.com/p/the-under-reporting-factor-in-vaers):
"Steve Kirsch [2] and Dr. Jessica Rose [3] have calculated the URF at 31x to 51x in a number of different ways — basically in the middle of the range originally calculated by Lazarus and Klompas."
I.E. still within the Lazarus report range. The VAERS figures we're seeing are underreported, or, if you follow my theory - hidden.
37,000 * 100 = 3, 700, 000 (or 3.7 million deaths), which wouldn't be too far off what I found from the secret database. Pending the litigation from American First Legal.
Just to be clear, the hidden database isn't speculation - it is verified by the BMJ. We just don't know what's in the hidden database sans whatever TDB managed to pull out (and that will be out-of-date by now).
No, not Jessica Rose. A mathematician whose name Kirsch didn't reveal. He used an underreporting factor of 17 but arrived at an estimated 600,000 deaths from the vaccine. From what I remember, this is the rough number Kirsch arrived at last year also.
Perhaps he also quoted that figure as well. He has also quoted Jessica Rose's figures, and she specialises in biostatistical analysis (regularly covers VAERS datasets), plus her accreditation is public and vettable. Naturally you'll understand if I lean towards her assessment.
One other aspect to note is even if death rates aren't instantly fatal, many of the conditions listed have later-stage fatality rates. For example, NIH attempted to scrub evidence of myocarditis' 50% fatality rate after 5 years (again, caught by the Daily Beagle: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/nih-deletes-myocarditis-fatality).
That is not to say 50% will drop dead the moment the clock hits 5 years, but over the duration of the 5 years, 50% with myocarditis will have dropped dead.
To follow up, I think people don't appreciate how large 1% can be in numbers of scale.
If you assume for demonstration purposes 100 million Americans took the shot, 1% wouldn't be 37,000.
1% would be 1 million.
37,000 of 100 million would be a mere 0.037%.
We know the data is suppressed based on The Daily Beagle's findings and BMJ confirmation.
The death row record we got was over 2 million. For 100 million Americans that would be a 2% fatality rate. I believe in reality more than 200 million Americans took the shot, which would be a <1% fatality rate.
Although frankly the CDC's dataset only has a 72% coverage which is strongly bias to only city regions of States making true coverage about 58% (see: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/cdc-denies-deaths-datasets-fudgegate), so you could argue the number is half what it should be.
Is the 1% underreporting factor caused by CDC VAERS censorship of reports? Who knows.