If you read the "fact-check" article, and actually think about the implications, there may be some serious issues here. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/scicheck-instagram-post-makes-invalid-comparison-between-covid-19-and-flu-vaccines/ The article is saying that you can just throw away the VAERS data for now because there have been no medical reviews as to whether the vaccine was related to each death. But that is a SEVERELY simplistic analysis. The VAERS reports aren't required; in all likelihood even a lot of the medical professionals administering the vaccine don't know about it. If anything, the current number may be massively UNDER-reported. Who is sending in these reports anyway? Maybe medical facilities that have older people in their care, and whom have a patient die while still in their care and got the vaccine? In that case the number would be over-reported, as older people die at way greater rates anyway. Indeed it's possible that the number is higher in general because the only people so far going out of their way to take it are the old/infirm/immunicompromised. But, again, this number may be underreported right now, and indeed the vaccine may have a much higher death count than traditional, normal vaccines. Making sweeping claims like you can just throw out the VAERS data is of course shenanigans. I would be curious to see more detailed data, especially how soon after the vaccine these people died. It's very possible that vaccines like this can have a high death rate, as they do something totally new - they alter your DNA/RNA and high jack your own cells to produce a protein which then produces an immune response. For the most part this works mechanistically and the body uptakese RNA and then starts producing protein with it, but what if there's a high incidence of some yet unknown adverse reaction? What were the statistics on animal trials of previously attempted RNA vaccines? And I still don't understand how someone could still spread the virus if they're immune, as the authorities have been saying. If you're immune, your body will quickly kill and virus particles before you can really host them. Why wouldn't this stop transmission?

If you read the "fact-check" article, and actually think about the implications, there may be some serious issues here.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/scicheck-instagram-post-makes-invalid-comparison-between-covid-19-and-flu-vaccines/

The article is saying that you can just throw away the VAERS data for now because there have been no medical reviews as to whether the vaccine was related to each death.

But that is a SEVERELY simplistic analysis. The VAERS reports aren't required; in all likelihood even a lot of the medical professionals administering the vaccine don't know about it. If anything, the current number may be massively UNDER-reported. Who is sending in these reports anyway? Maybe medical facilities that have older people in their care, and whom have a patient die while still in their care and got the vaccine? In that case the number would be over-reported, as older people die at way greater rates anyway. Indeed it's possible that the number is higher in general because the only people so far going out of their way to take it are the old/infirm/immunicompromised.

But, again, this number may be underreported right now, and indeed the vaccine may have a much higher death count than traditional, normal vaccines. Making sweeping claims like you can just throw out the VAERS data is of course shenanigans.

I would be curious to see more detailed data, especially how soon after the vaccine these people died.

And I still don't understand how someone could still spread the virus if they're immune, as the authorities have been saying. If you're immune, your body will quickly kill and virus particles before you can really host them. Why wouldn't this stop transmission?