Let Me Tell You How Many Reports Pfizer Cross-walked Into VAERS!

393 page Adverse Reaction Post Marketing Data Sources Report.

“Cumulative and Interval Summary Tabulation of Serious and Non-Serious Adverse Reactions from Post-Marketing Data Sources”

It seems like everybody has been talking about this new revealing document from Jessica Rose to Neomi Wolf to Jon Rappoport and beyond and rightfully so. It’s very damning evidence that Pfizer knew about a avalanche of adverse events (~1.48M) reports by at least the end of June 2022?

The real question: How many of these reports have made it into the VAERS system?

Here is the variables we are looking at plucked from page 1 of the Pfizer document:

Dr. Jessica Rose does a pretty efficient job diving into the weeds about effectively the 4.9M (Cumulative) symptoms of 1.49M reports generated.

Pfizer Appendix 2.2 document compared to VAERS

Today on June 21, 2023 this is what Pfizer C19 depop shots reports/symptoms correlation looks like:

Pfizer’s ratio (3.3) is a bit different than VAERS ratio (4.8) or 480.1%? Said another way, 4.5M symptoms for 937,962 cases doesn’t seem to square up with Pfizer’s report of 1.48M cases to 4.9M symptoms? I’m try to determine what Interval vs Cumulative really means? I’m almost thinking the 1,591,026 Total Number of Adverse Events (PT) (Interval) Pfizer references to is the number of “AE Outcomes”? We know the “PT” means Preferred Terms aka the symptoms.

This is what I’m eluding too:

It still doesn’t make sense to me if I interpret Pfizer as saying this document of 507K reports during this “interval” in time produced 1.5M event outcomes because that’s a 3:1 ratio? Conversely we see are not seeing that ratio out of VAERS or are we?

I gave a very deep explanation of double counting adverse event “outcomes” versus applying a technique of priority coding or simply coding a single report to it’s highest Adverse Event outcome only. There is a humongous gray area in the lowest level “None of the Above”. On the one hand these reports are there because NO adverse event box is checked off, and on the other hand there are tens of thousands of SAE’s like death, cardiac arrest, myocarditis, massive strokes, massive embolisms, etc. hiding in there.

With all these variables put on the table, let’s ask ourselves a couple simple questions…

1. Do we believe Pfizer doesn’t know or at least have access to every adverse event reported around the world?

2. Are there reports that Pfizer has and are NOT obligated to crosswalk to VAERS, Yellowcard, EudraVigilance, TGA, etc?

3. Is Pfizer cross-walking reports into these pharmacovigilance on time and without delay?

How many reports, if any is the CDC/FDA needing to delete from VAERS that are coming directly from Pfizer? Stands to reason a extra level of rigorous vetting from manufacturers would help?

The potential answers to these questions:

Let’s start here for question 1 & 2:

Q1 & Q2 are fraught with uncertainty and ambiguity, but according to this blurb from the CDC the answer is unequivocally YES Pfizer has reports in their possession and they are not obligated to forward onto the VAERS or any other pharmacovigilance agency. Otherwise why the blurb? My next thought is an assumption, but with regards to domestic reports, I assume the same obligations to forward reports to VAERS when applicable as well.

Who or what is a foreign subsidiary? I’m going to go out on a limb and call MHRA and EMA and TGA, etc. a foreign subsidiary. In a matter of fact I would call all governments in the world a foreign subsidiary. who are we kidding, the world is big pharma’s bitch! We are the bottom pocket bitch, pharma can take us anywhere and go make a “track”! Famous words from old San Francisco pimp Fillmore Slim. Sadly Pfizer has Slim beat by a mile. The world has been bamboozled into worshipping the golden cow, vaca-cines. So to wrap up question 1, Pfizer probably knows every adverse event in the world and what you had for breakfast on the fateful day you injected big pharma’s Kool-Aid into your shoulder. They can probably triangulate all databases and every phone and bank company and determine who hasn’t complied with the depop agenda yet, but I digress.

The answer to question #3: We can easily tell which reports came directly from the manufactures by the SPLIT_TYPE field in VAERS.:

I only give these four examples to point out the alpha-numeric structure of Pfizer’s “time stamp” is comingled with what ever other vax types they produce like the pneumo vax in example #3. I’ve brought up examples like #4 a million times showing that Pfizer and all manufacturers cross-walk low level stuff, not just the serious and/or unexpected they CDC/VAERS claimed in their guidelines. Could this be another reason why foreign data was scrubbed from system, to clean-up the evidence of not following protocol?

Does Pfizer delay submitting reports to VAERS? The answer is a big fat sweaty and stinky oh hells YES! I’ve pointed this out a bunch of times to and I have the receipts on many clear cut examples, however I want to present this example to ponder:

This report above originates in Canada, I guess the Canadian government was so busy processing reports that it took two years to submit through Pfizer? Pfizer in all their efficiency quickly shot it off to VAERS, who quickly published to the world? Oh that’s international you say, and it doesn’t prove anything?

The smoking gun!:

Click to launch

What does that Pfizer time stamp say? How much time elapsed before VAERS received it? Somebody is serving me up a turd sandwich and calling it filet mignon!

Lot’s of questions abound, I’m just waiting for someone to ask the right one. I will definitely circle back on this later.

You want to know how many Pfizer reports were cross-walked into VAERS by the manufacturer? How many of these cross-walked were subsequently deleted perhaps? Well stay tuned, more will be revealed! God Bless