[pfisch]

>Up to 2019, there are some studies that clearly show that the VAERS data underestimates the bad side effects of (some) vaccines, up to a factor of 100.

You mean before vaccines became extremely politicized? I think we can safely assume those numbers aren't useful anymore now that the well has been poisoned.

>But this has to be objectively studied.

There were plenty of double blind studies on the covid vaccines. Those are the gold standard. I'm not even sure what you are asking for here.

[mharig]

What? The numbers from before the poisening are not useful, because of the poisoning?

I asked for studies on the reliability of VAERS data about the Covid vaccines.

RCTs are just one brick of the science building. And of the plenty you think exist, I have encountered only a few good ones, yet. The Cleveland Clincs study is one of them, but they justctested for infection and didn't include the outcome all-cause mortality or hospitalization for some unknown reasons. The US veterans study seems to prove a lower mortality for vaccinated, but the cohort is for sure not representative. Btw, those two showed a clearly monotonic increasing probability of acquiring a Covid19 infection with number of vaccinations.

RCT fanatism is not helpful.