We were discussing how we could reliably establish whether the suggestion in the link Bubba posted that vaccines might be causing an increase in cases of breast cancer, based on VAERS data, was correct.
Here are the reporting requirements for the Covid "vaccines", from HHS:
VAERS Reporting Requirements for COVID-19 Vaccines
It states that any serious AE is required by law to be reported, whether or not the reporter thinks it's vaccine related. However, there is no time interval listed. It seems highly unlikely to me that if the "vaccines" are affecting Type I Interferon response which may lead to future higher incidence of cancers, that reporters will decide to file a VAERS report in the interval required for the cancer to develop. If it's going to be detected, it won't be through VAERS.
If deaths that are really due to the treatment for breast cancer are wrongly being attributed to breast cancer (and I make no comment as to the accuracy of that claim) then that's been going on for years. The data on the incidence of breast cancer in 2021 will still tell us whether there has been a rise that requires explanation. An analysis of the data will tell us whether that rise is correlated with the vaccine rollout, present only in the vaccinated, etc.
I was using breast cancer analogy as an example for why surveillance based on mortality data is a problem, especially when it's possible or even likely that toxic treatments (and/or "vaccines") increase mortality which is then blamed on the disease.
If vaccines are increasing the incidence of, or deaths from, any cause, that will show up in the data. Indeed, it already has - a small increase in a rare type of blood clot has already been identified, and attributed to a couple of the vaccines. So the system is already working, and there is no good reason to think that any other such effects of the vaccines will not be similarly identified and attributed.
There are about 1.9M adverse events and 22000 deaths reported on VAERS, you can browse them here:
https://openvaers.com/
If the reporting rate is anywhere near 1% (which I do not believe it is), then obviously the actual number of adverse events and deaths is a large multiple of those two numbers. Even if the reporting rate is considerably higher, the actual adverse events will still be a multiple of those numbers, which is unacceptably high, even next to the inflated bogus US Covid death toll of ~900,000, and made worse in the context of this disease having effective early treatment options which are being denied in favor of selling a perpetual vaccine boosters. Who knows how many of those purported 900,000 could have been saved by actual effective protocols, or even just basic treatments that are known to be effective like monoclonal antibodies which are now being suppressed by the Federal Government (claims are that they aren't effective vs. Omicron).
I know a friend personally who had an adverse reaction that he characterized as moderate, where he passed out and had extremely low blood pressure, and there was no VAERS record submitted. I suspect that given the lengthy amount of time and paperwork required, the underreporting rate is still relatively high even given the ostensible scrutiny that you would think should be evident.
For the tens of thousands of people who have died at the hands of the experimental gene therapies, and the millions who have had severe adverse reactions, and who were denied effective treatments, the system is clearly not working.
