Some Back Story On Last Weeks House Oversight Meeting Song & Dance.

House Oversight Video: HERE

Bri Dressen (React.19.org) summary of meeting released today Feb 21 HERE, but short snippet of VAERS details here:

Backstory:

Michael Nevradakis reached out to me for a quote about the meeting. It’s the second or third time Michael has kindly asked for my opinion on the VAERS portion. Brianne is my friend now and I helped react19.org with their “VAERS Audit” which she refers to in the video:

click to launch study article

There are a few things I’d like to clarify about what Michael and Bri said about VAERS in the hopes people get a better understanding on what’s going on.

1. Follow-ups: Bri explains VAERS how VAERS is not following up on reports! I’d like to clarify the distinction between follow-up during the adjudication phase (before publication) and follow-up after publication.

   

   Using the CDC’s guidelines as reference you can see (#6) there can be up to 4-6 week adjudication period. You can also see (1-5) that only initial reports are made public, if they happen to update info during this adjudication period we can consider this of the initial report.

   Bri was describing both scenarios pre and post publication! Some victims have never had their initial report published, and now are being followed-up on after two and three years supposedly to get their initial report published?

   There is an example used in this video of a female physician that submitted 11 death reports before she submitted her own report. Per Bri, not a single one was follow-up on, meaning not a single one was ever published. As of today it still sounds like this lady has not had an initial report published out of 12 total reports? This lady is a great example of what our audit clarified and some of the confusion people were and are going through. Some people wanted their initial published reports “updated”, especially to reflect the victim was now since dead or now since permanently disabled. Some people in effect submitted another “initial report”, which would now be considered a “duplicate” and basically tossed out during the adjudication process, all the while generating another temporary ID#. There is a proper way to submit follow-up data which entails a activation key, like the one the CDC sends you at the automatic time intervals at 60, 90, 360days:

   

   If the CDC is not asking for follow-up data, but you take the initiative and want to submit follow-up data anyways, an extra step needs to be taken to get access to this upload key.

   Brianne’s own VAERS report was never published. Bri’s report is slightly more tricky but should not be cause for CDC to hold it up. You see, Bri was injured during a AstraZeneca C19 trial before the official roll-out but here on American soil and in the state of Utah where she is from. That’s not a problem, the vax type should be COVID19 and the manufacturer should be classified as UNKNOWN, because there is no menu selection for AstraZeneca.

   This lady physician with 12 submissions is interesting because it would beg the question of what those new ID# will be (in theory) once reports are finalized and published? Final ID#’s and automatic initial temporary ID#’s are closely related, it’s almost like a final ID# is ear marked to a temporary ID#. To present date there is at least ~30,000 final ID# that have never been published. Vaersaware.com has capture every report that has been published and deleted back to the beginning of medalerts.org, therefore we know exactly which ID#’s have never been published at all. VaersAware (me) is the only outfit in the world that has done and analysis/audit on temporary ID# vs final ID#’s. I’ve written about it before but it’s almost time to find another victim to submit a report so I can the latest temp/final ID# combo we are at. This is proof there is either a bottleneck or it’s deliberate. I believe VAERS does not publish ALL legitimate reports received. Bottleneck my ass.:

   

2. Fake and False reports: Michael was quoting me as saying there is only a couple dozen “car accident” reports (death reports). I want to correct Michael or myself as I was trying to say there are only a couple dozen MVA motor vehicle accident reports in VAERS total, alive or dead, but mostly alive! I’m actually surprised there is not more considering we see how fast they collapse soccer, football, and basketball fields.

   The point is the VAERS system is intended to be an early warning meta data system pharmacovigilance tool, so any injury indicative of a possible vaccine injury should be submitted if there is a immediate history of vaccine. What is immediate? I’m not sure, I have not seen any definition for immediate. But I presented and it’s known full well that it’s a federal crime to submit a fake or false report. That’s a felony folks, and I haven’t heard that yet in one of these song and dance oversight committees.

BTW, here is my little blurb I sent to Michael, so thankful to Mike for plucking a couple comments out of here:

God Bless

click to launch