Thread by @EmpireinWinter

This is an important point. You'll appreciate that if we rest at 'see no way these can be unequivocally connected' then this would be a comment on the quality & trustworthiness of our pharmacovigilance system.

https://twitter.com/godfriedpimlott/status/1474174616423657493

That is, if this mental shrug *were* reflective of the state of our system, there would not really be any basis for making claims about safety that we should heed.

That said, there are systems for investigating causality, & the one Health Canada used for deaths appears to be this one: the WHO-UMC causality assessment categories.

But you intuited one of the criteria, temporal proximity, which obviously is less important for the long-term effects we know little of yet, but, yes, if someone goes into anaphylactic shock 5 minutes after administration, that will be a factor.

If we look at US VAERS, one can track by temporal proximity; and based on the graph we might start digging into the 5000 or so deaths occurring within the first 3 days, or the 2400 in the first 24 hours. Temporal proximity; mechanism of death; autopsy...
openvaers.com/covid-data

Elsewhere on that page you'll notice also that, even before under-reporting factor, VAERS deaths are reported at 50x ours in 🇨🇦. So, with you, if we used our data, I'd be that much less uncomfortable.

You may have noticed I opened the thread w/ a similar statement. 253 deaths...I can see arguments for that being acceptable risk for--the key part here--individuals to make their decisions on.

In the wilds of BC, retired, going to town every fortnight for supplies, I have a certain appreciation of my risk of contracting C19, another estimate of my odds of weathering it.
If a parent of an athletic teenaged boy, the net risk of vaxx injury vs. Omicron is very different.