Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

What percentage of VAERS reports are confirmed as vaccine-caused deaths?

Checked on November 10, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive Summary

VAERS is a passive reporting system that collects unverified reports of adverse events after vaccination; reports are not confirmations of causality and public‑health reviews find that confirmed vaccine‑caused deaths are effectively zero or an extremely tiny fraction of VAERS death reports. Multiple analyses supplied here conclude that while tens of thousands of deaths have been reported after COVID‑19 vaccination, only a handful have been medically reviewed and causally linked to vaccines, producing a confirmed percentage well under 0.01% (effectively 0%) of VAERS death reports [1] [2] [3].

1. What people are claiming and the short answer that cuts through the noise

Public claims often treat VAERS death entries as a direct count of vaccine‑caused fatalities; that interpretation is incorrect because VAERS accepts any report but does not adjudicate cause. The core claim under scrutiny — “what percentage of VAERS reports are confirmed as vaccine‑caused deaths” — is answered by noting that CDC and independent fact‑checks report only a vanishingly small number of deaths have been confirmed as caused by vaccination after clinical review, amounting to essentially 0% of VAERS reports. Analyses in the dossier emphasize the difference between raw counts of reported deaths and medically confirmed causal links, repeatedly noting that VAERS data alone cannot establish causality [3] [1].

2. How VAERS works and why raw counts mislead the public

VAERS is a passive surveillance database intended to detect signals that merit further study; it is not designed to provide proof of causation. Anyone — clinicians, manufacturers, patients, or family members — can submit reports, and reporting requirements for COVID‑19 expanded, increasing the volume of entries without increasing verification. The CDC’s surveillance manuals and experts stress that reports require follow‑up, medical records review, autopsy and death certificate assessment to determine causality. Because of this design, a high number of post‑vaccination death reports can coexist with a near‑zero confirmed vaccine‑caused death rate once clinical reviews are completed [4] [3].

3. The numbers cited in the supplied analyses and what they mean

The supplied analyses cite differing figures: one item references roughly 33,469 deaths reported to VAERS for COVID‑19 vaccines, another notes that U.S. authorities verified nine deaths after detailed review, and yet another frames the confirmed rate as effectively 0% or under 0.01%. Those figures are not contradictory once you separate reported events from causally confirmed events: tens of thousands of reports entered into VAERS do not translate into confirmed vaccine fatalities because the majority involve deaths from unrelated medical conditions, coincident timing, or insufficient evidence for a causal link [5] [2] [1].

4. How public‑health reviewers decide if a reported death was vaccine‑caused

Public‑health investigators review death certificates, autopsy findings, and medical records to assess plausibility and temporal relationships; only after such review can a causal association be asserted. The materials provided note that only a tiny minority of VAERS death reports undergo this full clinical review and are then attributed to vaccination. For COVID‑19 vaccines, the body of evidence and peer‑reviewed analyses referenced here conclude that clinical reviews have not identified a meaningful number of vaccine‑caused deaths relative to the number of doses administered, reinforcing that VAERS raw counts overstate causal risk unless verified [2] [1].

5. Why the discrepancy fuels competing narratives and how to read claims responsibly

The gap between raw VAERS numbers and confirmed causal determinations creates fertile ground for misleading narratives. Advocates of vaccine safety often emphasize the rigorous review processes and negligible confirmed rates, while critics of vaccination may highlight raw report totals without context. The supplied analyses flag misuse of VAERS by anti‑vaccine actors and emphasize peer‑reviewed studies and CDC communications to counter misinterpretation. Readers should expect agendas on both sides: one side minimizing risk by pointing to confirmed‑causation rarity, the other amplifying raw reports to imply greater danger; careful reading requires checking whether a source discusses raw reports or validated causal findings [6] [1].

6. Bottom line and practical takeaway for readers seeking facts

The best available synthesis in the provided analyses is clear: VAERS death reports are mostly unverified and only an extremely small fraction, effectively 0%, are confirmed as vaccine‑caused after medical review. Concrete numbers in the dossier include tens of thousands of reported deaths versus only a handful medically linked to vaccines, producing a confirmed percentage well under 0.01% [5] [2] [1]. For accurate risk assessment, rely on clinical reviews, peer‑reviewed studies, and official public‑health adjudications rather than raw VAERS counts, because the latter are signals for investigation, not definitive proof of vaccine causation [4] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
What is VAERS and how reliable is its data for vaccine safety?
How does the CDC investigate and confirm vaccine-related deaths from VAERS?
What percentage of VAERS adverse events are serious or fatal?
Common myths and facts about VAERS reporting for COVID-19 vaccines
Comparison of VAERS data to peer-reviewed vaccine safety studies