Literally the title.
U.S. Government data confirms a 143,233% increase in Cancer cases due to COVID Vaccination
They compared incident reports in VAERS (which is already bullshit/dirty data) for the flu shot against COVID and extrapolated that relative percentage against the general population and implied it somehow applied there as well.
Don't link shitty clickbait articles like this. They do more harm than they help.
They compared data for the clot shot with data for the flu shot. All sides acknowledge that the VAERS data is an under-reporting of actual numbers.
The headline is misleading. It's not "cancer cases" in the general population. It's frequency of reports of "cancer related adverse events" to the VAERS database. Also, the "US Government" didn't confirm jack shit. It's a voluntary reporting system. When you change terminology deceptively, the entire point gets written off.
Cancer related adverse events are 1,432 times more common per dose for COVID vaccine vs. baseline influenza vaccine in VAERS database
That's a relatively accurate title that can't be torn apart by NPCs and fact checkers, like the original piece of shit title was designed to be.
They know how to write honest headlines and choose not to. They are clearly writing these headlines deceptively to maximize sensationalism and potential click-bait ad revenue.
Given that the VAERS data is the government data, (albeit self reported and as such unverified) I think the headline is valid. If the government were to offer any better figures they would be preferable but they don’t so we must all work with what we have. I also think the very significant under reporting in the VAERS system is an important factor in the significance of these figures. I do give a certain amount of leeway to editors and journalists in cases such as this, where the nature of the information is so extraordinary and the under reporting so extreme, that pushing the envelope in the competition for attention is to some extent understandable. All that being said I agree that your title would have been far better, and if you were to publish articles on these types of figures I would post them in preference to the more click bait styled offerings.
(post is archived)