https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/h...=2&isAllowed=y

https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/defau...eport-2011.pdf

Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS Virus

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...ne.0035421.pdf


New Study Confirms the VAERS System is Only Reporting Approximately 1% of Anaphylaxis from COVID-19 Vaccines
April 5, 2021 by Edward Hendrie

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that the Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) reports that occurrence of anaphylaxis from the COVID-19 Vaccines is “4.7 cases/million Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doses administered and 2.5 cases/million Moderna vaccine doses administered, based on information through January 18, 2021.”

In a March 30, 2021 posting, the CDC reported similar statistics alleging that “[a]naphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare and occurred in approximately 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated in the United States based on events reported to VAERS.” (bold emphasis in original)

The problem with that reports from JAMA and the CDC is that they are contradicted by another, more recent, March 8, 2021 report from JAMA. That study of Mass General Brigham (MGB) employees receiving COVID-19 vaccines, was published by the JAMA reveals that “severe reactions consistent with anaphylaxis occurred at a rate of 2.47 per 10,000 vaccinations.”

Aaron Siri and Elizabeth A. Brehma, wrote a letter on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) to Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Siri and Brehma pointed out that the MGB study reveals that the VAERS is under-reporting the accounts of anaphylaxis from the COVID-19 vaccines by a factor of between 50 and 120 times. ICAN complained that “[t]he underreporting of anaphylaxis by the CDC and VAERS is particularly troubling because it is mandatory for medical providers to report anaphylaxis after any COVID-19 vaccine to VAERS.”

The most salient point in the letter from ICAN is the revelation from the MGB study that “the rate of reporting [of COVID-19 vaccine anaphylaxis adverse reactions] still appears to be only around 0.8 to 2 percent of all cases of anaphylaxis.”

The ICAN letter goes on to point out the obvious:

This raises serious concerns regarding (1) under-reporting of other serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, and (2) adverse events following other vaccines for which there has not been the same push to report adverse events. The anaphylaxis study highlights the urgency of the ongoing, well-known problem with adverse event reporting post-vaccination.

The recent MGB study confirms the previous study done by Harvard that indicated that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events” are reported in the VAERS system. Thus you can take any statistic from the VAERS system and multiply it by 100 and you will have a better idea of the real number for that category of adverse events. Thus, deaths reported under VAERS would likely be subject to the same under-reporting as would anaphylaxis. As with anaphylaxis, we can expect that only 1% of all deaths from COVID-19 vaccines are being reported in the VAERS system.

For example, as of March 26, 2021, VAERS reported 50,716 adverse events from the COVID-19 vaccines, which included 1,785 deaths. Thus, according to VAERS, 3.5% of all COVID-19 adverse events were deaths.

Assuming the numbers reported in VAERS represent only 1% of the actual deaths, as of March 26, 2021, we can extrapolate that the actual number of deaths from COVID-19 vaccines would likely be 178,500. In like manner, the actual total number of adverse events from COVID-19 vaccines would likely be 5,071,600.

fck knows what my location has to do with taking a vax tbh

This thread is going exactly as expected. Proof that low iq anti-vaxxers aren't interested in discussion or facts or the truth, they've found their truth on youtube and threads like this are made to attack anyone who disagrees with them.

I don't post YT links, I post studies and medical journals

Vaxcels are officially on Putin Watch and cannot hear or see any of the joocy science coming out that shows vaccines we're harmful/less effective. Our puppet Putin showed up just in time because with the millions of "breakthrough" infections and omicron predictably bringing covid to a close after it's anticipated 2 year streak like various other pandemics, those folks needed a distraction from the truth. In maybe 6 months all the science will be settled and MSM will have overshadowed any real reporting about the vaccines with dozens of articles about Putin each day. Then when fall rolls around and seasonal flu cases tick up, people can get back on the booster bandwagon because "hospital beds are full!", Which they were due to the regular flu before the pandemic. But instead of that being a problem relating to hospitals cutting beds and staff for decades, or the poor general health of your average American making them susceptible to serious illness from common viruses, it'll be spun into "I'm doing my part by getting flu shots and covid boosters! And if you don't then hospital crowding is your fault."

you are welcome to fck off anytime ...........but you cannot.............because deep down .............you know...........you maybe fkd

So what is your take on the released Pfizer documents then? Tell us what the black and white data (and grey redactions) mean.

Can you share a link to the source of the quotes?

The first 2 links don't support your claim. The paper is from 2012, so it's unrelated to covid vaccines.

Lold
Hard

That's why I linked a paper on the Covid vaccines..

I too wonder why someone continues on here if they have decided that most of the posters are so awful.

You hate it here? Okay, so go somewhere else.If I knew it would come up so so often I would have kept this on file, or maybe have just gotten a tattoo to save time.

Harvard Study of VAERS done prior to the pandemic:Adverse events [all kinds] under reported by as much as 99% [IOW only 1 case reported in 100]. This could include things as mild as a headache, slight fever, or a minor rash. Severe Adverse Events and Deaths under reported by an estimated 90%, meaning out of 10 SAEs or deaths only 1 may get reported to VAERS.

Of course I can't say for certain what percentage of effects have been unreported for the mRNA injections, however only 1 in 10 reported is the lowest estimate and a German health insurer found that among their insured 4% to 5% experience some health effect post injection that lead them to seek medial attention.

And this completely ignores the original point...the vaccine is not NEEDED. You can jump through all the hurdles you want to prove those things you listed but at the end of the day, it should be an option because it ain't needed. If you're old or fat, get the vaccine. Otherwise, whose gives a ****? You're still spreading it. You're still getting infected. With that knowledge now, it should be an option, nor a requirement.

Don't agree with me, then leave! Derp

And no I'm not worried in the least. I trust what the good people at John Hopkins Medical have to say over CT youtube videos.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/heal...9-vaccine-safe





Of course you can't say for certain because you're talking out of your ass.

Brutal if true

It's from 2012. Covid vaccines were not available in 2012.

April 5, 2021 by Edward Hendrie

notsureifserious

cope

The link

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...ne.0035421.pdf

The title

Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to
Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the
SARS Virus

The dates

Received January 31, 2012; Accepted March 15, 2012; Published April 20, 2012

Can you share the source of the quotes?

I'll try this one more time..

New Study Confirms the VAERS System is Only Reporting Approximately 1% of Anaphylaxis from COVID-19 Vaccines
April 5, 2021 by Edward Hendrie

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that the Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) reports that occurrence of anaphylaxis from the COVID-19 Vaccines is “4.7 cases/million Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doses administered and 2.5 cases/million Moderna vaccine doses administered, based on information through January 18, 2021.”

In a March 30, 2021 posting, the CDC reported similar statistics alleging that “[a]naphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare and occurred in approximately 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated in the United States based on events reported to VAERS.” (bold emphasis in original)

The problem with that reports from JAMA and the CDC is that they are contradicted by another, more recent, March 8, 2021 report from JAMA. That study of Mass General Brigham (MGB) employees receiving COVID-19 vaccines, was published by the JAMA reveals that “severe reactions consistent with anaphylaxis occurred at a rate of 2.47 per 10,000 vaccinations.”

Aaron Siri and Elizabeth A. Brehma, wrote a letter on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) to Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Siri and Brehma pointed out that the MGB study reveals that the VAERS is under-reporting the accounts of anaphylaxis from the COVID-19 vaccines by a factor of between 50 and 120 times. ICAN complained that “[t]he underreporting of anaphylaxis by the CDC and VAERS is particularly troubling because it is mandatory for medical providers to report anaphylaxis after any COVID-19 vaccine to VAERS.”

The most salient point in the letter from ICAN is the revelation from the MGB study that “the rate of reporting [of COVID-19 vaccine anaphylaxis adverse reactions] still appears to be only around 0.8 to 2 percent of all cases of anaphylaxis.”

The ICAN letter goes on to point out the obvious:

This raises serious concerns regarding (1) under-reporting of other serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, and (2) adverse events following other vaccines for which there has not been the same push to report adverse events. The anaphylaxis study highlights the urgency of the ongoing, well-known problem with adverse event reporting post-vaccination.

The recent MGB study confirms the previous study done by Harvard that indicated that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events” are reported in the VAERS system. Thus you can take any statistic from the VAERS system and multiply it by 100 and you will have a better idea of the real number for that category of adverse events. Thus, deaths reported under VAERS would likely be subject to the same under-reporting as would anaphylaxis. As with anaphylaxis, we can expect that only 1% of all deaths from COVID-19 vaccines are being reported in the VAERS system.

For example, as of March 26, 2021, VAERS reported 50,716 adverse events from the COVID-19 vaccines, which included 1,785 deaths. Thus, according to VAERS, 3.5% of all COVID-19 adverse events were deaths.

Assuming the numbers reported in VAERS represent only 1% of the actual deaths, as of March 26, 2021, we can extrapolate that the actual number of deaths from COVID-19 vaccines would likely be 178,500. In like manner, the actual total number of adverse events from COVID-19 vaccines would likely be 5,071,600.












April 5, 2021

or JHU take on the data from the manufacturer?

Yeah, those are the quotes. Can you share a link to the site?

This Edward Hendrie?https://apnews.com/article/coronavir...e78e80f85f12cb

I think we are all well aware of the jabs causing both severe cases and numbers of myocarditis...that's not really a debate anymore..

AP...really?

Just shows the quality of the guy you're hanging your hat on. Funny how every time I check up on people making claims the results are always very similar.

Lmao here he is touting "Dr" Mercola. Lol

https://jamesfetzer.org/2021/04/edwa...ne-recipients/

Ah, it's a blog. Perhaps that explains the hesitancy to share the source.

more cope

But Hendrie was correct...I don't understand your argument..


A RECENT STUDY PUBLISHED ON JANUARY 25, 2022, ON JAMA NETWORK, HAS SHOWN THAT THE RISK OF MYOCARDITIS FOLLOWING MRNA COVID VACCINATION IS AROUND 133 TIMES GREATER THAN THE BACKGROUND RISK IN THE POPULATION.

The study, conducted by researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) as well as from several U.S. universities and hospitals, examined the effects of vaccination with products manufactured by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna. The study’s authors used data obtained from the CDC’s VAERS reporting system which were cross-checked to ensure they complied with CDC’s definition of myocarditis; they also noted that given the passive nature of the VAERS system, the number of reported incidents is likely to be an underestimate of the extent of the phenomenon.

1626 cases of myocarditis were studied, and the results showed that the Pfizer-BioNTech product was most associated with higher risk, with 105.9 cases per million doses after the second vaccine shot in the 16 to 17 age group for males, and 70.7 cases per million doses after the second shot in the 12 to 15 age group for males. The 18 to 24 male age group also saw significantly higher rates of myocarditis for both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products (52.4 and 56.3 cases per million respectively).


https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/321238?s=08

I agree people here blow this chit out of proportion getting their info from literal blog sites. However lets not pretend there is MUCH regarding these 'vaccines' that are shady and not only dishonest but straight unknown long term consequences. Pointing to literal scammers/hoaxes of years past regarding proven vaccines is not evidence of a safety profile for this new untested mRNA tech. And if you don't believe that's fine, but pointing to religious extremism is dishonest representation of those with faith.

Let's just say I'm not surprised you're going to defend him and think he's 100% right. Carry on.

Again..he was correct..can you prove otherwise?


A RECENT STUDY PUBLISHED ON JANUARY 25, 2022, ON JAMA NETWORK, HAS SHOWN THAT THE RISK OF MYOCARDITIS FOLLOWING MRNA COVID VACCINATION IS AROUND 133 TIMES GREATER THAN THE BACKGROUND RISK IN THE POPULATION.

The study, conducted by researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) as well as from several U.S. universities and hospitals, examined the effects of vaccination with products manufactured by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna. The study’s authors used data obtained from the CDC’s VAERS reporting system which were cross-checked to ensure they complied with CDC’s definition of myocarditis; they also noted that given the passive nature of the VAERS system, the number of reported incidents is likely to be an underestimate of the extent of the phenomenon.

1626 cases of myocarditis were studied, and the results showed that the Pfizer-BioNTech product was most associated with higher risk, with 105.9 cases per million doses after the second vaccine shot in the 16 to 17 age group for males, and 70.7 cases per million doses after the second shot in the 12 to 15 age group for males. The 18 to 24 male age group also saw significantly higher rates of myocarditis for both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products (52.4 and 56.3 cases per million respectively).


https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/321238?s=08