McLachlan claims elsewhere that this is verifiable by anyone who downloads the VAERS data. I and several others did not see this when looking at the downloaded data for multiple VAERS entries listed in the paper.
McLachlan claims elsewhere that this is verifiable by anyone who downloads the VAERS data. I and several others did not see this when looking at the downloaded data for multiple VAERS entries listed in the paper.
I went and emailed the VAERS officials and they contradicted the claim that there is an internal classification coding all COVID-19 vaccine deaths as COVID-19 deaths. This was several weeks ago, but I can dig up the address and their quote if you're interested.
As of October 18, I was doing my damnedest to see if there was any evidence that the covid categorization claim was true, other than the say-so of the author. I resent the implication that I was not.
Now, given that he replies to your communications, he may have given you information that I do not have. Or given that I later decided the chance of resolution was no longer worth my time, there may be publicly available info about it now. If the latter, I’d appreciate you pointing me to it.
Or you might mean that he said in the linked thread that the the database may have changed. This leaves me at square one. Personally I was not able to download past database copies from standard archive websites. Perhaps there’s a way. But unless someone out there has trustworthy archived database copies, we’re relying on this person’s word for a fairly radical claim.
McLachlan claims elsewhere that this is verifiable by anyone who downloads the VAERS data. I and several others did not see this when looking at the downloaded data for multiple VAERS entries listed in the paper.
https://twitter.com/mormo_music/status/1429334592230678528
I went and emailed the VAERS officials and they contradicted the claim that there is an internal classification coding all COVID-19 vaccine deaths as COVID-19 deaths. This was several weeks ago, but I can dig up the address and their quote if you're interested.
The database was altered. You aren't keeping up with the conversation.
As of October 18, I was doing my damnedest to see if there was any evidence that the covid categorization claim was true, other than the say-so of the author. I resent the implication that I was not.
Now, given that he replies to your communications, he may have given you information that I do not have. Or given that I later decided the chance of resolution was no longer worth my time, there may be publicly available info about it now. If the latter, I’d appreciate you pointing me to it.
Or you might mean that he said in the linked thread that the the database may have changed. This leaves me at square one. Personally I was not able to download past database copies from standard archive websites. Perhaps there’s a way. But unless someone out there has trustworthy archived database copies, we’re relying on this person’s word for a fairly radical claim.