Because of a confluence of institutional capture and heavy-handed censorship by big tech companies, I don't think you'll find much except on fringe "anti-vax" websites, and at that point you'll have to wade through everything yourself.

In a perfect world we'd have productive discussions where nuanced topics like this can be explored in depth, but morale narcissism is rampant and everyone believes they know best.

At no point are the anti-vax websites a valid source of information. Every time I stumbled upon such a website they were blatantly lying even when linking to sources stating the opposite of their narrative. All such websites I have encountered relied on readers not checking the sources, and censoring comments. The comments section has always show full support of the narrative of the articles. Either commenters are fully polarized and no outsiders engage with insiders, or there is censoring involved.

There is public centralized data you can analyse for US, EU and others. Data that has clear limitations, and takes skill and knowledge to interpret and actually extract information out of. There are reports that are provided by various national agencies. But these can also be misinterpreted and take careful reading.

Unfortunately, I do not know of a centralised aggregated summary for someone seaking a one stop resource.

"Why do you do your own research? You don't trust The Science?" [0] [1]

[0] https://youtu.be/Y0sg9G5BBVU

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/07/30/you-...

You can look up data on adverse side effects in the US HHS VAERS database: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html but keep in mind that side effects tend to be under-reported. There might be other issues with the VAERS data that I'm not aware of.

When I last checked the data, the risks of Covid-19, particularly the risk of severe infection and/or "long hauler" symptoms, seemed to outweigh the risks of vaccination by ~10:1. But that was several months ago, and I am wondering if/how things have changed when it comes to booster shots and omicron variant.

> keep in mind that side effects tend to be under-reported.

If you're looking at VAERS then this statement is objectively wrong.

VAERS records every medical event that happens within 6 weeks of any vaccination and does not establish causation.

You're right in that when someone creates a VAERS report, every type of post-vaccination medical event is to be included. But you're wrong if you are assuming every event gets reported by the patient, to a doctor who then always creates a VAERS report.

Some people don't associate symptoms with the previous vaccination, don't go to the hospital because symptoms recede, etc. Sometimes health care workers are overworked and can't be bothered, or assume someone else reported, etc.

Case in point: having a fatigue, fever, chills, sore arm, etc. is so common after any of the "big 3" vaccines that people come to expect it and take sick days from work in anticipation. How many of those cases ever get reported to anyone? I definitely didn't report mine.

You should report it, even if it was mild.

Databases like VAERS and EudraVigilence do indeed suffer from both under-reporting (due to patient apathy, and other reasons) and over-reporting (by design, even events with unrelated caused are included). Therefore analysis of such data takes a lot of care, skill, knowledge and effort.

There are ways we could actually increase the trust of the public in such databases.

By allowing selfreporting but separating reports into validated by a physician and not validated, by default only displaying validated. And grouping reports based on patient so that a selfreported incident and a report made by a physician are not counted twice when referring to the same incident.

By allowing patients to verify that a report made on their behalf by an intermediary (physician, national agency for EU) was included into the publicly accessible anonymised dataset.

By improving the UI/UX of the publicly available dataset (for EU, the Oracle made interface, while serviceable, is suboptimal).

By improving granularity for the age variable. (when investigating the under/over 30 difference in heart issues risk for mRNA vaccines, I found the granularity of EudraVigilence unsatisfactory)

By tracking/allowing public access to extra variables. (I found no way to investigate the theory that heart issues caused mRNA were linked to improper administration. A way to filter/categorise based on facility, date and time of vaccine dose would have been helpful)

There are options we can pursue, but these being state institutions, improvements take a lot of time. We are not a pull request away from doing better.

I had a little inflammation in one of my eyes immediately after my second dose. It went away, I didn’t report it to anyone. It might have been an immune reaction, I might have just gotten something in my eye, everything was better in a few days.

It didn’t seem worth the trouble or expense to try to do anything about it.

That is the kind of underreporting.

A second kind of underreporting is having only very mild symptoms which would only be caught with a timely test.

We should strive to make reporting so easy and painless it is routine. I believe this together with finding ways to increase trust is the only way to decrease the first type of under-reporting.

There's a requirement to report, but no legal penalty for failure to report.

There's a legal penalty for incorrect/false reporting, i.e. reporting = risk.

In the current contested environment, there can be institutional pressure against reporting.

> VAERS records every medical event that happens

This statement is also objectively wrong. VAERS has no data for unreported medical events.

I tried to find the information on that website, and could not; is it there? If it is there, how do I find it?

It’s a list of tables with a breakdown of each side effect. What are you looking for that isn’t there?

Was hard to find the J&J page (parent commenter linked to Pfizer), and I can't find anything about Guillain-Barré Syndrome.

In my view, the CDC site seems to be designed to promote confidence and authority, and hide any reason for doubt.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/jansse...

This preprint paper was published 7 days ago. The CDC doesn't move that fast on non-urgent updates with only a single paper published.

As per the paper though, the FDA does have a warning about this potential side effect.

For global data, search for "covid-19 vaccine" at http://vigiaccess.org/. Be sure to read the long disclaimer on the page.

> VigiAccess was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2015 to provide public access to information in VigiBase, the WHO global database of reported potential side effects of medicinal products. Side effects – known technically as adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) – are reported by national pharmacovigilance centres or national drug regulatory authorities that are members of the WHO Programme for International Drug Monitoring (PIDM). WHO PIDM was created in 1968 to ensure the safer and more effective use of medicinal products.

The US VAERS database has about 50/50 US and foreign reports. It is simultaneously criticized as unverified (i.e. GIGO) and missing data due to disincentives against reporting. If you have a vaccine lot number, replace the last six characters in this sample query URL, for a summary of adverse events. The raw data can be download and imported into a SQL database for deeper analysis: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=...

US Vaccine Safety Datalink (the source for the paper in this article) has data from some HMOs. The raw data is not available to the public. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21502240/

> The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project is a collaborative project between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 8 managed care organizations (MCOs) in the United States. Established in 1990 to conduct postmarketing evaluations of vaccine safety, the project has created an infrastructure that allows for high-quality research and surveillance. The 8 participating MCOs comprise a large population of 8.8 million members annually (3% of the US population), which enables researchers to conduct studies that assess adverse events after immunization.

You won't find it in the USA or from the CDC because the USA doesn't have comprehensive centralized medical databases. Look for data from the UK or Israel

Of course, you've already done a search on the disease's side effects, right?

I mean, just for comparison with whatever you learn about the vaccine's side effects?

Yep, mostly curious for deciding which vaccine I want to boost with.

This seems to just be random data from VAERS. So the "deaths" column includes things like people who got hit by a bus 6 months after being vaccinated. I think OP is looking for a comparison of side effects caused by the vaccine (for example, comparing death rates b/w vaccinated and the general population, without falling into the common traps you see on websites like this one that is hawking "miracle cures for cancer")

VAERS is a voluntary reporting system, it does not include any deaths by bus. Nor does Sharyl Attkisson hawk miracle cures so you seem to be talking complete nonsense.

>Nor does Sharyl Attkisson hawk miracle cures

When I go to her website I haven't been able to re-find the "doctors don't want you know about this cancer cure" link, but I have seen "A Teaspoon On An Empty Stomach Burns 4 Lbs Of Fat A Week Safely". Sounds like BS to me, but I'm not an expert

>VAERS is a voluntary reporting system, it does not include any deaths by bus

You're right that it's a voluntary system where anyone can report a negative outcome. If you look at VAERS, it includes a ton of reports like "I saw on Facebook that someone died". For example, look at VAERS report 1429304-1 it says "This spontaneous report received from a consumer via social media concerned multiple patients of unspecified ages with unknown ethnicity and race. The patient's weight, height, and medical history were not reported.". Literally, shitposting on the Johnson & Johnson facebook page leads to a VAERS report. There's quite a few from Pfizer's facebook page as well.

I couldn't find any deaths by bus, but I did find a death from a car crash (1180840-1). There's also a VAERS report (1082804-1) for someone who stepped in front of a semi truck on the highway.

VAERS also includes multiple people who died after being vaccinated while they were already in hospice. I think if someone was already in hospice for their terminal condition, it's unlikely that the vaccine is the cause of death (e.g. VAERS IDs 0921880-1, a 96 man who was vaccinated while in hospice and died the following day)