Vaccine Safety: “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”
Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it
— Lloyd Chambers
re: Trust the Process of Science over Time, NOT Scientists and “Experts”
VAERS is the government system for reporting adverse medical events. How competent is this system in tracking problems with drugs, vaccines, etc?
A study found on an offical website of the US Department of Health and Human Services in essence states that it is incompetent at revealing problems with drugs or vaccines.
The COVID-19 vaccines are all (as a matter of public record as of Jan 2021) experimental.
Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
Preliminary data were collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals. Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions (2.6 percent of vaccinations) were identified. This is an average of 890 possible events, an average of 1.3 events per clinician, per month. These data were presented at the 2009 AMIA conference.
In addition, ESP:VAERS investigators participated on a panel to explore the perspective of clinicians, electronic health record (EHR) vendors, the pharmaceutical industry, and the FDA towards systems that use proactive, automated adverse event reporting.
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 “problem” 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 clinicians’ usual workflow, takes time, and is duplicative. Proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting imbedded within EHRs 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.
WIND: the FDA is asleep at the wheel.
This study emphatically supports my claim which I’ve had for years that the Metronidazole antibiotic which gave me peripheral neuropathy is in fact very dangerous. Yet it is deemed “safe” because problems are just not reported—as I explicitly stated both in my own case, and as a general claim. Emails from frightened readers suffering the same horrible neurological effects confirm that I am not alone.
The statin scourge comes to mind—massive underreporting of very serious side effects as well as degrading quality of life. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose—there is nothing new here, except for fools and a cadre of trained medical doctors who actually believe this dangerously inaccurate shit (99% missing data!), and quote it to patients (as one did to me for Metronidazole).
And we’re supposed to believe that the COVID-19 vaccine is “safe and effective”? Before any long-term effects can even be reported, let alone studied?