[BoHerfVJrEsq]

OK. VAERS just sounds the alarm, at which point we have to investigate further. Peter Schirmacher apparently did autopsies and established a lower bound that about 30% of the victims died due to the vaccines. D-dimer tests have apparently shown clotting. Troponin levels are apparently indicating heart damage. Is the system not working exactly as intended, except that the inconvenient results are being suppressed?

[shadowgovt]

No; the system is working as intended, but you're naming outliers that haven't been replicated or confirmed. It's not "suppression;" it's "This result was weird, and other people aren't seeing it." Which is far more often study error or misinterpretation or confounding factor than an actual issue.

... and that's the problem. The general populace doesn't know how rigorous medical testing works. And when they get their hands on something that sounds serious (but isn't actually at a scale that causation can be confirmed), or someone with an axe to grind decides to push a counter-narrative that doesn't stand up to scrutiny (but who cares whether it does if the general populace doesn't know how "scrutiny" works and is weighing the evidence of the medical community and the CDC vs. one pathologist in Germany as if their words have equal weight), it becomes a general problem for public health.

One that, apparently, Google has decided it doesn't want to be part of.