Fact check: Based on real world data, how much issues there are with vaccines? like post-vaccine-symptoms that are bad for health? (so I mean not regular fever or general bad feelings that go away).

1. Summary of the results

Large-scale studies have shown that serious vaccine adverse events are rare but do exist. A comprehensive study of nearly 100 million vaccinated individuals identified specific conditions with slightly elevated risks ^[1]:

• Guillain-Barre syndrome after viral-vector vaccines
• Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after first doses of AstraZeneca and Pfizer
• Myocarditis after mRNA vaccines, particularly Moderna

A South Korean study of 9.2 million people found slight increases in specific autoimmune conditions ^[2]:

• 1.16-fold increased risk of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
• Small increased risks of alopecia areata, psoriasis, and rheumatoid arthritis after boosters

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

There's significant debate about the accuracy of adverse event reporting systems. While VAERS shows substantial numbers of reported events (38,541 deaths, 220,494 hospitalizations) ^[3], it's crucial to understand that:

• VAERS is a passive reporting system accepting all reports without verification of causality ^[4]
• A React19 audit found issues with report processing, including 12% deleted reports and 22% never receiving permanent IDs ^[5]

The benefits vs. risks context is essential:

• Most people experience only minor, temporary side effects ^[6]
• The identified risks are "very low" compared to background health risks ^[1]
• Only 28 deaths were definitively associated with vaccine-induced conditions in the largest global study ^[1]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question's framing could lead to several misconceptions:

• It doesn't acknowledge that determining causality is complex - reported symptoms don't automatically mean they were caused by vaccines
• The focus on "bad" symptoms might overlook that vaccine safety monitoring systems are robust and continue tracking potential adverse events ^[6]

Different groups have varying interests in this debate:

• Government health agencies emphasize the rarity of serious side effects and the overall safety profile ^[4]
• Independent researchers provide more nuanced data about specific conditions and risks ^{[2] [1]}
• Advocacy groups like React19 focus on potential underreporting and system inadequacies ^[5]