Massive collection of online anecdotal examples of peoples reactions to novel GM "Vaccine"



The 50x/100x numbers comes from the last 30 years of data from the VAERS database set up by the FDA to track vaccines adverse reactions.

I have been using the Influenza vaccines as the control. Influenza has the same kind of pathogen, pathology and epidemiology. And deaths rates. Except for those under 70. Who have much higher mortality risk from Influenza.

Basically every year there are about 150 million flu shots in the US. With about 30 to 50 adverse reaction deaths reported. A very safe vaccine. So far with under 100 million full vaccinations starting to enter the recording system (the recording lag can be up to 3 to 6 months) there are more than 5000 adverse reaction deaths recorded for the various SARs CoV 2 vaccines in the US. Same recording methodology , same system, as with the influenza vaccines.

What should be also factored in is that one of the most well know problems will all adverse reaction database is an under counting of actual cases. Studies have show the the under-reporting rate could be as high as 90%. So the eventual final vaccination death toll could be in the 40,000 to 50,000 range. Which would make it about the same or greater than the total number of viral pneumonia deaths which were not substitute case deaths. The actual annual death rate did not budge that much because most of the people who died FROM SARs 2 were very likely to die of some respiratory infection / pneumonia anyway. The non substitute case deaths, true excess deaths, is unlikely to be greater than 10% / 15% of all SARS viral pneumonia deaths, when the final numbers are crunched.

But the 50x/100x greater risk still holds. For general population adult mass vaccination.


Yea @jmc called that startling figure weeks, many weeks in advance here, well before it got reported widely on the net when it got more traction afaics, but that stat is will circulated at this point wide and far. I think I posted some graphs form a later source probably on the main coronavirus thread.



We all know the first people to receive the Covid vaccine were the oldest / most vulnerable in society, so just to be clear, you have taken the experience of that group, arbitrarily multiplied it by a factor of 10 and compared this rate with the rate of adverse reactions of other vaccines given to the general population (i.e. a population including the healthies and strongest people in society) to arrive at your conclusion that Covid vaccines are related to 50x/100x more serious adverse reactions



MY read is @jmc is using VAERS is the US. Where the experimental genetic injections have been open to a very wide range of people for a longer time and they started last year. Young and old alike.

Ireland is a skinner box pretending to be a country and serves only as a guide to such.


That’s not true. JMC says the stats are from 3-6 months ago. By start of Feb less than 10% of US population had been vaccinated, by March less than 20%. Young and healthy had not been vaccinated


I’ll let @jmc clarify his own numerous posts if you don’t mind :slight_smile:

However digging back to my own contribution on the subject from May, here Jon Rappoport seems to deal with the same assertion as you make aimed @jmc:

Jon Rapporport

“There has been a massive increase in deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) this year. That’s not a ‘conspiracy theory’, that’s an indisputable fact.”

“We’re talking about a huge and unprecedented increase—so massive that in the last 4 months alone, VAERS has received over 40% of all death reports it has ever received in its entire 30+year history.”

“The increase in VAERS death reports is not due to more vaccination.”

“Most recently, the death count went from 2794 on April 5, to 3005 on April 12, to 3848 on April 26….1054 deaths in 21 days.”

“One hypothesis…is that the elderly and infirm, many in long-term care facilities, were the first to be targeted by the COVID-19 vaccine campaign, and they are much more likely to die coincidentally. These coincidental deaths then lead to an increase in suspected vaccine-induced deaths reported to VAERS.”

“VAERS data just does not support that hypothesis. First, because all age groups—not just seniors—had a dramatic increase in VAERS death reports from COVID-19 vaccines…Across the board, all age groups experienced a dramatic increase in deaths reported to VAERS from the COVID-19 shots—even the under 18 group, which has had very few COVID-19 shots (so far).”

Original post from May 11th:

A point made by @jmc some time ago.

We’re not talking about a modest increase in death reports, something we might chat about in concerned voices over Chai tea and bagels at a company mixer. We’re talking about a huge and unprecedented increase —so massive that in the last 4 months alone, VAERS has received over 40% of all death reports it has ever received in its entire 30+year history. So massive it’s literally “off the chart.”

VAERS deaths reported 1990-2021-0501.jpg
VAERS+deaths+reported+1990-2021-0501.jpg921x440 55 KB

Virginia Stoner Writing & Art

The Deadly COVID-19 Vaccine Coverup — Virginia Stoner Writing & Art

FACT: There has been a massive increase in deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from the COVID-19 vaccines. Why?

VAERS vaccines administered & deaths reported by age group - complilation.jpg
VAERS+vaccines+administered+%26+deaths+reported+by+age+group±+complilation.jpg1129x480 97.1 KB

Same story covered by Jon Rappoport

Src original post from: Coronavirus 2020

If any or all this data has since proven incorrect, then it’s open to correction.


The first few months of VAERS deaths were around 90% over 70’s. As the lower age cohorts have been added up to 1/3 of all adverse deaths now are under 70’s. Which is about the same kind of age demographics as with the influenza vaccine.

The current vaccination age profile in the US for SARs is little different from the flu shot. The numbers of those who have received the vaccine is about 2/3rds the number of those who get the annual flu shot. There are currently 5000 SARs vaccines deaths recorded versus an annual 30/50 death related to the flu shot.

Thats a 100x difference for you right there. Same data set recording method.

The fact that VAERS under count adverse reactions by up to 90% does not change that relative rsik number. Because it will effect all vaccines data set so the relative risk numbers stay the same. Because of the reasons for under-reporting.

Lots of published literature on this subject.

The same kind of numbers and patterns are see in other countries adverse response database. The SARs vaccines are about two orders of magnitude more dangerous than other general use vaccines.

Thats the data.


I said there was up to 3 to 6 month lag for VAERS. Its follows the usual distribution curve with a 50% reporting rate reached about 4 weeks after time of vaccination. The 80% report rate seems to about week 12. With 90% around week 26. This is pretty standard data input time distribution with theses systems.

So if you look at a VAERS snapshot on a particular and take the full vaccination count from at least 2 to 4 weeks prior you can start working rough numbers. You need to actually do a bit more complex statistical analysis to get more accurate numbers. But if you are looking for trends and just doing relative risk, which is what I have done since December 2020, those estimate techniques give you good ball park numbers. This is pretty basic stuff.


Archived link:

Original study:

On day 18, he was admitted to hospital for worsening diarrhea. Since he did not present with any clinical signs of COVID-19, isolation in a specific setting did not occur. Laboratory testing revealed hypochromic anemia and increased creatinine serum levels. Antigen test and PCR for SARS-CoV-2 were negative.

Postmortem molecular mapping by real-time polymerase chain reaction revealed relevant SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold values in all organs examined (oropharynx, olfactory mucosa, trachea, lungs, heart, kidney and cerebrum) except for the liver and olfactory bulb.

Archived link:


Despite your assertions above, the Covid vaccination age profile in the US is very different to the flu vaccine age profile (based on CDC stats).

CDC data base show that over the average flu season, approx 40% of people receiving the flu vaccine were under the age of 40. By March 2021 (allowing for the lag in data, later data not being credible), just 8% of people receiving the flu vaccine were under 40 and they were predominantly those classified as vulnerable. Your Covid data is highly skewed to the experience of older more vulnerable people and that’s a fact, you cannot dispute that. You simply cannot compare the relative experience credibly until you have a full data set and that will be some time yet

Similarly, you are allowing for the lag on VAERS for Covid to “follow the usual distribution curve”. Given how Covid was politicised, do you not think that suggesting any reporting around it follows the same pattern as the flu, is just insane. Do you not thing that maybe there’s a chance it might be a little different?

Data, in time, could well show your estimate to be correct but right now, there is now way to credibly determine that figure. Anyone claiming they can, either does not understand basic statistics or is lying.


Well if you have been reading the VAERS data since January 2021 and following the roll out of vaccines in the big states starting in December 2020 you would have seen the inflection point in the age demographic in VAERS entries data of vaccination when the under 60’s started getting vaccinated in March/April. First four month 90% plus of the moralities were over 70% with a low number of anaphylactic shock deaths. Then when the younger age groups started getting vacation the age distribution quickly started moving towards the expected 1/3 under 60, 2/3’rds over 60. Which reflected the mortality profile of illness that greatly stress the human immune system like influenza and pneumonia.

When I’ve been looking at the data I’ve always made sure to sort by date of vaccination not date of system entry. Because thats the only way you can compare with approximate daily vaccination numbers from other sources.

Yes I do expect the adverse response reporting rate to be much lower for SARs vaccine as against flu vaccines. Thats a given. But the systems are the same for both. And it does not stop one dong comparisons with other vaccines. The much lower reporting rate just means that the most probably adverse response rate confidence interval for the SARs vaccine is going to have a much higher upper bounds than for influenza. Thats all.

Dealing with these kind of partial / unreliable data sets is par for the course with epidemiological and public health statistics. In fact most of the data used for public health decisions is even flakier than the VAERS data. But thats just the way it works.

I suppose it could be worse. It could be the total fantasy world of government econometrics.


According to these screen grabs, it looks like the whole team got injected.


No, the screen grabs do not show “the whole team” got injected.

It shows Vidal got injected while in South America, for the Copa America, with the Chile team

Eriksen is in Denmark for Euro 2020 with the Danish team.

The fact that they play for the same club is irrelevant, unless there is some other information.


Unless Shedding!… well I knew should have stayed away from this one. I didn’t even do Ordinary level Sport :soccer: in the Leaving ffs. :wink:

Anyway does he play for Milan?

If so maybe this is interview with the teams doctor from May 18th, has been the source of the speculation/controversy, that is wrong?

ON PLAYERS - "They deserve great credit. They became experts on the subject, I found myself confronted with them on the pandemic theme and I found them very well prepared. I say more: there is no category in the world, not even us doctors, who have undergone to a screening as accurate as football. It will be good not to disperse this treasure: what has been done can be scientific material to be explored in the future, as well as a model to follow. In the next championship the players will continue to be monitored. But at the start everyone will be vaccinated ".

It’s a G Translate -

There is also this:

And there it is: although I must warn I don’t have firsthand knowledge of this interview - can someone provide a direct link if possible?


But maybe it’s all been re-clarified since and this info is out of date and totally wrong?

Maybe it’s this simple




Fact checker CIA


archived link:

“For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination”


And it seems from this they are using very conservative estimates for vaccine adverse reactions.

“The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations”.

Sweden was seeing about 3% adverse reactions to Astrazeneca out of 700K vaccinated. That Doctor in Canada was seeing a similar percentage in his patients (900 vaccinations given I believe) to the Moderna vaccine. These were short term adverse reactions, let alone the medium to long term ones. Hopefully the data keeps coming and public opinion begins to turn, over the next few months.


Sometimes… I just… there are not enough facepalm smileys on the planet…