BOMBSHELL! Finally The Analysis Proving VAERS Does Not Publish All Legit Reports Received! Unequivocal!

Written by Welcometheegale88 on June 18, 2024. Posted in Current News

For those not familiar with the VAERS submission process, the submitter is issued a Temporary ID# a.k.a E-Report# immediately upon submission.

It will be shown to you on your screen and automatically sent to your email if you added your voluntary email as part of the submission.

However, the submitter needs to additionally request your Final Published ID# under separate email request to [email protected] now updated to [email protected].

This is the very first step of how the VAERS scam works and how the CDC/FDA is able to game the system and not publish all legitimate reports received! Before we go further I want to show you what a confirmation email and Final ID# looks like with my own uncle’s VAERS report:

You can correlate my uncle’s temp and final ID to being report #9 on my graph above. As you can see I’m using 28 reports in my analysis, however report #28 is currently the very last report in the VAERS system with and estimated temp ID# based on my expert educated estimation and based on VAERS being my thing.

Think of report #28 as newest report in VAERS, there is no other ID# higher or larger than ID# 2770096 and it was submitted on May 31, 2024.

Adding on to details in the newest report above, Merck was somehow notified of this administration error against a baby from Maine and quickly submitted to VAERS as indicated in the Spilt Type field.

My expert eyeballs tell me a backwards date “2405” is probably a cryptic time stamp embedded in the code. The most important part of this example and exercise to understand is that reports from manufacturer are not triggering a temporary ID#.

The whole temp ID system is for everybody outside the club. Health Departments, and maybe even VSAFE is apart of the club. I’ve done deep analysis on Spilt Type field and found about ~36,000 “v-safe” or “vsafe” word in the Split Type field.

Above is an example of a “vsafe” report and State/County Health Department reports? There is no automatic cross pollination of VAERS and VSAFE. VSAFE was always promoted over VAERS.

VAERS was recommending to also submit a report to VSAFE on their website as I remember when I submitted a report. However studying VSAFE there is no recommendation on the VSAFE website to also submit to VAERS, unless a scheduled interval check-in was missed.

The verbiage in VSAFE is a very softly worded recommendation at that, and you wouldn’t even know you could submit to VAERS if you didn’t read the fine print like I have done.

Keep in mind, my South Carolina examples are Pfizers and Modernas and if they came directly from manufacturer then it would have been indicated like the rest. Also notice how tight together some of the S.C. ID#s are. These reports are also coming in “batches” or in bulk.

VIP users? The regular rank and file can’t do any of this. I can file a report in a just a few minutes if I have the data prepped and ready to cut/paste.

This is just like medical billing and the biller or submitter could be working on many claims/reports simultaneously and as they become completed, could be sent off in bulk at the end of the day.

Weather these bulk reports get issued a bulk temp ID or individual temp IDs or none at all is the question and a variance in my expert analysis. No regular submitter can enter any info into the spilt type field. It does not exist in the external submission environment.

The other existing variance in this analysis would be duplicate reports submitted by the non-healthcare professional but is identified during the adjudication process and maybe “merged” data internally, but will not generate another initial report nor addendum to any existing published report.

In all this minutiae it can be calculated within a reasonable variance and making reasonable assumptions based on data at hand, based on General Dynamics FOIA’d data, based on deleted reports after publication, and a couple other clever observations. There is no way in hell VAERS is publishing all legitimate reports received!!!!!

React19.org has a group of victims who submitted but are still trying to get their report published, see https://www.react19.org/research-studies-surveys/react19-research-vaers-audit

A nurse from Ohio has 9 people in the same boat, where this nurse filed over 85 reports herself and never got ~9 reports published?

In the beginning of this story and analysis which I will qualify and quantify deeply at a future date, I said “this is the first step of the scam”…

Think about it, VAERS knows which reports “in-process” have eyeballs on them and which one do not. They know which reports need a finalized confirmation email (like mine) and which do not.

They know which reports are more vulnerable and can be shimmey-shammed with the least amount of exposure.

It’s really hard to bullshit a bullshitter, and I’ve been sniffing out bullshit like a truffle pig for a long time as an HMO Claims Auditor, Medical Billing company owner, or even just a bad ass medical biller extraordinaire. Hang tight, more will be revealed. God Bless

Bri Dressen of React-19 knows of my analysis and she’s onboard or at least open to back it and authenticate it themselves. I wouldn’t be surprised if this analysis isn’t apart of her case against AstraZeneca, or at least elements of it.

For those who don’t know, Bri’s report as a trial patient victim was never published either.

Thanks to my new friend “T-Bird” from Canada who shared her temp ID# with me. T-Bird hadn’t seen her VAERS report and had any idea what to do to figure out if the report had been published. I was the right person in the right place at the right time and found her report and it was just published this past Friday June 7th.

T-Bird’s report and situation is actually very special for this VAERS expert, she filed her report directly into VAERS from outside the USA. I wasn’t even sure that was possible, but I now know what these reports will look like.

Reports like T-Bird will say location: ‘FR’ and will have summary narrative populated but WITHOUT a split type identifier indicating submission from a international manufacturer subsidiary. Like This:

I make the distinction of “Foreign” reports having summary narratives and spilt type fields populated or not because since November 2022 and retroactively, reports originating from Europe will have those data elements scrubbed per a new VAERS edict.

Straight talk, reports coming directly from EdurdaVigilance and MHRA’s YellowCard system will be scrubbed of critical data such that we CAN NOT even determine what is the country of origin, etc.

Unknown foreign report location like T-Bird’s is very rare in the big picture but within the scope of this analysis. I already know there are no more than about ~2k reports at most.

Update:

This is Vaccine Injured Ms. Tanya from Canada please give her a follow on Twitter-X

This is Ms. Tanya T-Bird’s Temporary ID (presented with Tanya’s permission):

See more here Substack

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.