Kyle: Dr. Seheult, could you explain what VAERS or the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System that we use in the United States is and how that data should be interpreted?

Dr. Seheult: Yeah. Thanks, Kyle. So, to back up a little bit, let's talk about a six-month period of time here. So, if we look at December, January, and February of just a few months ago, that was a period of time at least where I'm working in Southern California where there was a lot of COVID. In fact, we had to build an entire new ICU with isolation precautions. We had to have nurses trained. We basically used a lot of resources because surgeries weren't happening at the time. And compare that with the next three months after that, which would be March, April, and May. So, the reason why those two groups of three months are very different is the first group of three months had a lot of COVID-19 patients coming in. We were very full. And then after that wave went away, we basically disbanded the second intensive care unit. We were able to contract back to what we were doing before, and this despite the fact that in March, April, and May of 2021, we were vaccinating millions of people a day. And so, again, I just want to underline what Dr. Patrick was saying there. If the spike protein from the vaccine was so dangerous, how were we able to contract down our hospital ICU intensive care services during that period of time? However, what did happen during that time was that there was a huge spike of...so the argument may be made, for instance, that maybe the spike protein is not causing disease or conditions that would get people into the intensive care unit, but it might be causing more mild symptoms or more mild problems. And that might show up in something called the VAERS systems. Let's talk about the VAERS.

So, as you can see here on the screen, there's this chart that has made the rounds on the internet, and what it does is it shows the total reported deaths post-vaccine. And you can see obviously not post-COVID vaccine because the COVID vaccine didn't exist back during these years. And we're going back way back into the early 2000s. And then all of a sudden, there's this huge spike here in 2000, and these, again, are reported deaths. So this is evidence, some say, that these patients that are receiving the COVID-19 vaccine are dying. So, again, I don't know how they could be dying without going through the intensive care unit. I guess it's possible they could be dying at home and never making it to the hospital. So let's investigate exactly what it is that's going on here. The thing that you've got to understand about this reporting system is that...first of all, a couple of things. Number one, you have to understand that because the vaccines that were given emergency use authorization in the late 2020, because of this, they expanded the reporting requirements for the VAERS. In other words, before a physician would make a report to the VAERS if he suspected that a vaccination led to a death, and they were under suspicion that something was connected. Now that was completely eliminated. Now, no matter what happens, if a patient gets a vaccine, and anything happens, hospitalization, death, anything, it should be reported under law.

So, I wanted to take a look at this a little bit more, and what I did was I looked at this paper that was published back in 2016, so pretty early. And it was looking at the flu vaccine because a lot of people say that this has never happened before. This huge increase in reporting from the vaccine has never happened. But yet there is a situation that occurred, and it was published here in December of 2016 titled, "Surveillance of Adverse Events After Seasonal Influenza Vaccination in Pregnant Women and Their Infants in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system, July 2010 to May 2016." So, as you may recall, in 2009, we had a flu epidemic called the swine flu epidemic, and in that year, there was a huge amount of H1N1 influenza. And you can see that here on the screen with that red bar. So you can see the blue is sort of the endemic influenza, and then in 2009, this massive increase in H1N1 reports. And so what you also see here is that purple line is the amount of vaccinations that happened. So because there was a lot of influenza that was going around, a lot of people were being vaccinated. So what you're actually seeing here, these bar graphs, is the number of reports of adverse events. Okay. So that's key to understand that. Even though the vaccine had not changed, the makeup of the vaccine had not changed, what we saw was because there was more vaccinations being given, there were more reports being given. But there's something actually more to it than that even still, and that is that there was more understanding and more awareness of influenza. So what I've done here is I've superimposed Google trends. So how often somebody would get on the internet and search for influenza, you can see clearly there at the same point in time that we're seeing increased reported spikes, we're seeing an increased interest in influenza in general. In fact, the highest that there ever was during that time because it was a very important news item at that time. Now, again, this was under strict reporting system. So, they only could report whether they felt that there was a connection. But even that after they looked at it, and published this paper, this is the conclusion that they came to. Despite the increase in reporting events, they said that the peak in the number of pregnancy reports observed during 2009 to 2010 followed by a decrease in reporting suggest that the 2009 spike in pregnancy reports after 2009 H1N1 inactivated vaccines may have been due to stimulated reporting. In other words, the vaccine hadn't changed, the side effects hadn't changed, and so their conclusion was is that as in 2000 and 2009-2010, no new or unexpected patterns in maternal or fetal outcomes were observed during 2010 and 2016.

So, if we take the same kind of methodology that we've done, we've looked at this huge spike here with COVID-19, and this is supposed to be evidence that people are dying from the COVID vaccine, we see a very interesting pattern because, if we look at Google trends, and we type in COVID vaccine, obviously, there's a massive spike at the same time, the same kind of recipe that we would see with the influenza. And then also, again, just to make sure that we understand here, this is the deputy director for the Centers for Disease Control, and this is what he says. He says, "Health care providers' reporting requirements are much broader than for other vaccines. After someone receives the COVID-19 vaccine, their health care provider is required by law to report all serious adverse health events, that would include death, even if the provider does not think the vaccine caused that event. These events can include death, inpatient hospitalization, or a serious case of COVID-19. That reporting protocol is due to the fact that the FDA authorized the COVID-19 vaccines for emergency use." So you can see that the rules have changed in the middle of the game, and so we have to look at that. If we were to give a placebo injection, the question is is we would still see deaths associated with the vaccine. Why? Because we're vaccinating so many people and because of just chance.

I did a little bit of an epidemiological exercise. So bear with me. If you look at the U.S. death rate per 100,000 population per year, it's around 870 deaths. So, in other words, if you were to take at random 100,000 people in the United States and follow them for a year, you would find at the end of that year that about 870 people would have died. Obviously, as the age goes up, that can go up to as high as 4,000. Here in the 75 to 84-year-old age group that's much higher. So let's just take the average. We'll be conservative. And also if you were to look over the period of the last seven months, going from January this year to August, seven or eight months, you'll see that there's a fairly linear...if you want to take that approach, fairly linear increase in the amount of vaccinations over that seven month period of time. And in fact, over that 7 month period of time, there's been about 166 million people that have been vaccinated. So, if that's over a seven month period of time, the average period of time that someone's been vaccinated is about three and a half months. And over that period of time, which started in January, that's when we have the highest death rates, but then as we go through the year, it comes down to the lowest death rate. So that's over that period of time, there's about an average death rate in the United States.

So let's do a little bit of calculating. If there is 870 dead people per 100,000 people per year, and we adjust that for the 166 million people that we've vaccinated in 1 campaign, and then we adjust that for instead of 12 months just 3 and a half months, which is the average period of time that people have been on average vaccinated, we come to this number of about 421,000 people that should be dead just by chance from getting the vaccine. And clearly, that's not the number of people that we're seeing. The reports show maybe 10,000 or 15,000. So, clearly, there is a huge amount of underreporting occurring. Now, realize that, again, most of the people who are being vaccinated at least in the country are actually much older. So this number should actually be higher. And number two, that most of the people that were vaccinated very early on and therefore have a longer range of vaccination were the older group as well. And so when you look at that, you can see here that the reported deaths totaling about 5,000 or 6,000 is a huge underreporting of the number of deaths that we should have if we just put a little red dot on their shoulder or gave them a placebo injection. That's very important to understand because some people...some disingenuous people will show this and say, "Look, the vaccine is causing these deaths," and that cannot be gotten from that type of data.

The other graph that you might see is this graph, which shows the number of days after vaccination that deaths are reported. So, based on our 400,000 number that we've come up with, if we were to prorate that on a daily basis, we would come up with about 4,000 people dying on a daily basis on average. Obviously, that gets bigger as more and more people get vaccinated. But what we're seeing here after a vaccination is only 600 to 700 deaths per day. Again, huge underreporting here at this point. And again, so because there's huge underreporting occurring, one might think that what would be the most likely reporting situation, someone who got a vaccine and died the next day, or someone who died maybe a month later? Obviously, when you have a death occurring close to an event that has to be reported, the reporting is going to happen more likely in that situation, and you're going to have underreporting occurring much more likely a month later. And that's exactly what is demonstrated here with this graph. We see that the most reporting occurs within one or two days, and then it goes down precipitously consistent with that type of pattern.

The other last thing I'll leave you with here as well is that with the mRNA vaccines, with Moderna, for instance, it's a four-week interval between shots, and for Pfizer, it's a three-week interval. If, in fact, that second shot is causing the problems that we see with myocarditis, myocardial infarction that's been proposed or been suggested, I would expect to see another peak here about three to four weeks out, but, in fact, we don't see any such peak. And so that, again, lends me to believe that this graph is the result of reporting events and human psychology rather than an actual spike protein that's causing deaths in these patients. I agree that we should look for this stuff. This stuff needs to be taken seriously, and that is exactly the purpose of the VAERS system is to look to see if there are patterns. But to go out and say that simply because there are deaths, that that must mean that the vaccine is causing deaths. I think that is disingenuous and not supported by the data.