> About the VAERS system

Only 1% of adverse reactions get reported in VAERS.

Deleted a qanon post.

Link to government data, with government instructions and disclaimers, please.

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

Thanks for bumping.
                \
angrylib.gif

The 1% figure is a classic misinterpretation, the researchers did not mean to suggest, for instance, that if 20 people report getting a rash that 2000 probably did.

You have to start by making certain that the vaccine really caused the reported effect.

So of the 20 reporting getting a rash, if you learn 10 of them walked in poison ivy, you can discount those cases.

Then if you learn 8 people have allergies to latex, and latex was used in the health workers gloves, then the answer isn't the vaccine, but be sure to ask the patent and use the right equipment.

Now that you 2 left, maybe those were caused by the vaccine.

What the underreporting factor means is that a researcher should not wait for many reports of a particular effect to begin investigation. Nor should it determine the priority of what should be investigated.


In short: stop listening to conspiracy theorists trying to weaponize what is legitimate data and make it seem like there is some conspiracy to distribute an unsafe product.

The vaccine would be pulled from the market immediately if there were a serious problem detected. As of now, there are none, and with over 200 million people vaccinated, any case now identified would be incredibly rare.

WeHaveAProblem wrote:

"my policy" = anything that triggers my cognitive dissonance and interferes with my confirmation bias.


The same document was available at both links.

phildo is psychotic, deranged, and a total fuqing scumbag fraud.

WeHaveAProblem wrote:

"my policy" = anything that triggers my cognitive dissonance and interferes with my confirmation bias.


The same document was available at both links.

Which is why I felt I could remove the qanon link and still answer your basic point, which is a misunderstanding of a statement made in that paper.


See, some people want their world view to be the correct one so badly that they'll misread legitimate data, or cherry pick statements, or even abandon truth altogether and just say whatever shyt they want to make up.

The virus is a biological machine. Its not a member of a political party. It wants to multiply and be successful. That is it.

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid … are-tactic

Don’t Fall for the ‘VAERS Scare’ Tactic

If I told you that a new vaccine triggered fifteen cases of allergic reactions, would you immediately demand the vaccine be taken off the market? I hope not. Hopefully, you would ask yourself an important question first: compared to what? Fifteen cases is the numerator of a fraction. What is the denominator? Fifteen cases out of how many that received the vaccine? Fifteen out of fifteen? That’s shocking! Fifteen out of a million? Hardly the same.

This is an important limitation of VAERS. It cannot be used, on its own, to figure out if an event following vaccination is common or rare. For example, when vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus started to be used in the population at large, more and more reports of adverse events began to be submitted to VAERS. This should not come as a shock. Obviously, the more a vaccine is used, the more adverse events are likely to be reported. If a vaccine requires two doses instead of one, that’s twice as many opportunities for an undesired event to take place after a shot.

Moreover, if the background rate of the event being reported, meaning how common this event is in the population, goes up, it’s likely that its frequency in VAERS will also go up. If the diagnostic criteria for a condition are expanded, more people will receive the diagnosis, which will make it look like its incidence has suddenly increased. This is what happened with autism over the years, and since the diagnosis for autism is usually made around the time a child receives a number of vaccines, it’s easy to witness more reports of autism being filed following vaccination and to wrongly claim causation. VAERS can also be biased in an interesting way: mild events following a vaccine are less likely to get reported compared to more severe ones. Finally, there is also the fact that as an adverse event gets widely reported in the media, more people will pay attention to it, leading to an increase in reports to VAERS. This is known as stimulated reporting.

WeHaveAProblem wrote:

Full year data incoming............

'qanon' 

Phil deleting government data again

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

It's not government data, it's organized trolling.

Established in 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S.-licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of adverse events (possible side effects) after a person has received a vaccination. Anyone can report an adverse event to VAERS. Healthcare professionals are required to report certain adverse events and vaccine manufacturers are required to report all adverse events that come to their attention.

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences to CDC and FDA. VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine. This way, VAERS can provide CDC and FDA with valuable information that additional work and evaluation is necessary to further assess a possible safety concern.

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

It's not government data, it's organized trolling.

It's a government website designed to collect data.  Why do you lie all the time even about stupid easily provable things?  Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?