Disband VAERS? The problem wasn't that there was VAERS, the problem was that the reporting on myocarditis and pericarditis were present in significant amounts early in 2021 (ie March), enough that people insisted the data be addressed in meetings by the CDC, and the CDC dithered, said they would raise the issue in May 2021, they dithered…
Disband VAERS? The problem wasn't that there was VAERS, the problem was that the reporting on myocarditis and pericarditis were present in significant amounts early in 2021 (ie March), enough that people insisted the data be addressed in meetings by the CDC, and the CDC dithered, said they would raise the issue in May 2021, they dithered and ignored it. It was the non-response of otherwise responsible parties in the US who in years past would have suspended any "vaccines" with similar early data reporting, but they did nothing, that was the problem. VAERS data clearly showed significant trend differences with past data because prior data covered decades and that comparison was useful and informative. Anyone with access to VAERS could see something was wrong with the vaccine. Replacing or disbanding VAERS would make all that history go away or make comparisons difficult. But I had heard or read that some VAERS reporting was being deleted. The ability to conveniently delete inconvenient reports would make VAERS less useful both for the public and medical community. I can see that as a downside. Anything that replaces VAERS ought to be independent of the existing medical establishment which has proven itself corrupt.
Disband VAERS? The problem wasn't that there was VAERS, the problem was that the reporting on myocarditis and pericarditis were present in significant amounts early in 2021 (ie March), enough that people insisted the data be addressed in meetings by the CDC, and the CDC dithered, said they would raise the issue in May 2021, they dithered and ignored it. It was the non-response of otherwise responsible parties in the US who in years past would have suspended any "vaccines" with similar early data reporting, but they did nothing, that was the problem. VAERS data clearly showed significant trend differences with past data because prior data covered decades and that comparison was useful and informative. Anyone with access to VAERS could see something was wrong with the vaccine. Replacing or disbanding VAERS would make all that history go away or make comparisons difficult. But I had heard or read that some VAERS reporting was being deleted. The ability to conveniently delete inconvenient reports would make VAERS less useful both for the public and medical community. I can see that as a downside. Anything that replaces VAERS ought to be independent of the existing medical establishment which has proven itself corrupt.