TGA DAEN Overview Update (to 5/11/2021)
3 days since the last report, showing an increase of 1,196 adverse event reports, and 8 more deaths across Australia.
Reported COVID-19 "Vaccine" Product Adverse Events
-- up to November 5th, 2021
USA Data from OpenVaers.com Red Boxes (US Only Toggle):
- Doses Administered: 446,000,000 [Google]
- Adverse Events: 643,956
- Deaths: 8,456
- 0.14% of administered doses resulted in an adverse event (1 in 714 doses)
- 1.31% of adverse events results in death (1 in 76 cases)
- 0.0019% of administered doses resulted in death (1 in 52,631 doses)
AUS Data from TGA DAEN ('COVID-19' Products):
- Doses Administered: 38,200,000 [Google]
- Adverse Events: 79,492
- Deaths: 650
- 0.21% of administered doses resulted in an adverse event (1 in 476 doses)
- 0.94% of adverse events results in death (1 in 106 cases)
- 0.0017% of administered doses resulted in death (1 in 58,823 doses)
When we break the numbers down like this it shows that the chances of death from taking any dose of the jab is going to be approximately 1 person in every 55,000 doses. When you consider each person is required to take 3 doses (so far), this group size gets divided by three and presents as 1 person in each group of 18,333 people will die from the jab.
The more boosters are pushed, the higher the risk per person. It has been reported that each additional jab impacts the body more adversely than the last. This is logical considering the design behind the mRNA production of spike proteins attacking the body from within.
Some reports state the VAERS reporting system could account for only 1% of all adverse events. So, even if we were conservative about this and said it was closer to 20%, then multiply the chance of death from the jab by a factor of 5, which would result in a probability of 1 in every 3,666 people (receiving 3 jabs) to die, but I am skeptical about this.
We know that these reporting systems are not a catch-all, however despite these assumption, the numbers across these two separate reporting systems are quite similar, which puts some doubt into the idea that reports are being missed (or deleted) on a large scale, unless missed uniformly across both platform. I'm not saying this is not possible though, as the same tyrannical governing bodies have the power to control the information.
Reading a little into this analysis, I would suspect VAERS reports of a (more mild) adverse event are less likely to be recorded than what we see on the TGA DAEN. Whereas deaths are assumed to be reported more routinely on both systems. From what I have heard from videos online, a VAERS report can take some time (upwards of 30 minutes) as a unique case summary is also included with each report. Whereas the TGA DAEN is assumed to be simpler to submit as only basic patient details (age, gender, etc) and a selection of organ class and symptoms are recorded. The TGA DAEN does not appear to include an individual case summary, but perhaps this is just not made public like VAERS.
I am not advising anyone take part in this trial "vaccine" product in any way, but reading into this data a bit further has given me a little bit of relief when considering family and friends who have already opted in. The danger of initial death from the shots appears to be quite rare (1 in tens of thousands), but still far from acceptable to consider these products "safe".
The hope I am holding is that our friends and family who took part in this trial, will not find themselves in a complete state of ill health from simply taking the initial few jabs. However, the long term affects still remain publicly unknown — I am positive the manufacturers know of their intended outcome.
As the "vaccine" products produce negative efficacy for stopping the spread of the virus (due to an impacted immune system), it becomes clear the psychological, cognitive and hypnotic effects of these products appear to be far more intended than any potential "side effect" ailments or death by jab — eliminating the "kill shot" theory.
The best thing we can do now is to simply observe. Continue to study this as a trial as subjects develop further symptoms, neurological and/or emotional disorders, impacted cognition, and more entrenched hive-minded thought patterns. Or adversely (with some kind of divine intervention), they will become stronger, healthier and turn the whole thing around. Maybe booster shot #6 will be the winner!
Cynicism aside, I am hopeful there is an antidote for the spike protein factory mRNA damage inflicted by these products. If DNA can be altered through mRNA technology, then potentionally, what was switched on could in turn be switched off again.