Peter McCullough on health: what the evidence says · JRE #1747

What the evidence says 01 / RECORD

McCullough's 45,000 figure rests on multiplying VAERS death reports by an underreporting factor of about four to five, which he attributes to CMS-derived analysis in an FDA whistleblower lawsuit rather than a validated study of vaccine deaths specifically. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that accepts unverified reports of any health event occurring after vaccination without confirming the vaccine caused it, so a count of deaths following vaccination, whether taken raw or scaled up, is not equivalent to deaths caused by vaccination. No peer-reviewed, validated underreporting factor exists for vaccine-associated deaths; underreporting multipliers that have been derived from studied adverse events, such as anaphylaxis (roughly 1.3x to 8x depending on vaccine) or myocarditis (roughly 2x to 2.7x), are well below the larger multipliers, including 30x or more, that anti-vaccine advocates such as McCullough have applied to death counts elsewhere, and even those studied multipliers do not establish causation for any individual death. Vaccine-safety researchers and fact-checkers have specifically criticized McCullough's practice of applying single, unvalidated underreporting multipliers to VAERS death data to produce large casualty estimates. Larger controlled studies, including a 2022 Vaccine Safety Datalink analysis of nearly 7 million people, found vaccinated individuals were less likely to die than matched unvaccinated comparison groups, contradicting the premise that vaccination substantially elevated mortality. The claim is considered false and methodologically unsupported by the vaccine-safety research community and by fact-checking organizations that have repeatedly reviewed this style of VAERS-based death extrapolation.