The other important benefit of VAERS

Besides being a good tool for "detecting signals", it can also be used as a "checksum"

When computers transmit information over a network, hardware issues can sometimes cause these “packets” of information to get corrupted.

To solve this problem, the original designers of these networks came up with the concept of a “checksum” - which is quite literally what it means. The sender computes some kind of a “sum” of all the information in the packet it is sending across. The receiver gets the packet AND the sum, and calculates the sum of the information it received, and verifies (“checks”) if the sum matches. If it does, we assume that the packet was not corrupted during transmission.

Link

A very crude analogy would be that you are playing the Telephone game, but once you whisper the word into someone’s ear, you also give them a piece of paper which tells them the first and last letter and the total number of characters in the word.

Suppose the word is elephant.

Your piece of paper might say

e. . . . . . t (8)

While it is possible that the person still mishears the word¹ in such a way that all these conditions match, it is quite unlikely.

In addition to being a “signal detection” tool, VAERS also acts as a pretty good “checksum”.

For example, I have already used it as a “checksum” to cross-verify Pfizer’s pharmacovigilance (PVP) report to the FDA. In fact, I wrote an entire series of posts based on this.

TLDR: to no one’s surprise, the numbers in the Pfizer PVP report do not add up to match what was reported in VAERS

Why do vaccine pushers get so agitated over VAERS analysis?

I think it is because they realize that these kinds of checksums can cast a lot of doubt on the “safe and effective” narrative.

In fact, the CDC has already been doing a lot of things to undermine checksums of vaccine safety monitoring.

For example, they never published anything (not even a simple word cloud) based on the “unsolicited” v-safe free text entries.

They are making efforts to avoid sending injury reports into VAERS for future vaccines

Moreover, why is a monoclonal antibody, which is a therapeutic, being treated as a vaccine, even though it cannot stop infection? Well, of course, the companies treat it like a vaccine so they can place it on the child immunization schedule and enjoy the liability shield from all harm! At the same time, they are treating it like a drug in the sense that it will not be on VAERS reporting!

Source

And of course, they stopped publishing the writeups for EU VAERS reports altogether in November 2022!

The foreign data set was gutted this week in VAERS and the cancer signal was halved, the myocarditis dose 3 response signal was lost and 994 spontaneous abortions/still births were dropped

The reason I am mentioning all this is because I recently realized that I have been using VAERS not for any statistical analysis of vaccine injury rates, but more as a checksum.

I guess I am using it off-label :-)

1. In fact, checksums do sometimes get it wrong for a similar reason