The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE UNCOUNTED COVID-19 VACCINE INJURIES

Episode Date: January 19, 2026

Unresolved questions surrounding COVID-19 vaccine injuries have been brought into focus by contrasting public polling with official reporting systems, revealing how many serious adverse events may have gone uncounted. Jefferey exposes the glaring contradiction of vaccine architect Stanley Plotkin now calling for better detection, prevention, and compensation of vaccine injuries—after decades of defending a system that never properly studied or tracked them.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

During the COVID response, which is roughly since vaccine started going into arms, roughly six years ago in the United States with the COVID shot, we still really don't know how many people have been harmed by that shot. We hear a lot of studies saying it saved the world and the pandemic. It ended it because we had the COVID shot and we've shown studies that refuted that point. But there's not a lot of studies showing how many people are hurt by this coerced, mandated shot. And what we have to do is we have to rely on a reporting system, bears, vaccine adverse event reporting system that is really not a robust reporting system, although we're told it is, but we know it's not. So we look at headlines like this with interest. This is a Rasmussen report, a poll, a telephone poll where people were called. This is human intelligence. This is how people talk. They get a telephone call. And here's the headline, millions experience COVID-19 vaccine side effects. And it says more than a third of Americans who were vaccinated against COVID-19 say they have. side effects from the shot and nearly half suspect the vaccines killed many patients.

It goes on to get a little more fine-tuned here. It says, however, 26% say they had minor side effects and 10% reported major side effects from the vaccine. Okay, now stay with me here. This is kind of a back of a napkin calculation, but we have to have approximations here because there's not really any great studies showing this. We just keep hearing bears is great, it catches everything, it's the best in the world, go back to you know, the COVID pandemic's over, you can go back to your normal lives. But there's still a lot of people suffering from this COVID shot. We know this.

And so let's take some really broad approximations from this Rasmussen report and overlay it on Navares and see if we can figure something out. So in this Rasmussen report, they called almost 1,300 people. And of those adults that answered the phone, about 68% of them said they had been vaccinated during the COVID pandemic with the COVID vaccine. So at the time of this report, there's about 258 million adults in the US of this Rasmussen report. So about 68% of that, so about 175.4 million. So again, total approximations here.

People are going to tear this part, but that's fine because that's all we have. Now, let's go to VAIRs. So we have, of that 175.4 million adults who received a COVID shot, we go to VAERS. How many of them really reported what would be considered a serious side effect? Well, a serious side effect, as you can see from Open Bears, you would probably be hospitalizations. You get the shot, you find yourself in the hospital for an extended state, not knowing what the heck just happened. That would probably be a serious side effect. So let's choose that.

221,872. So here we go. Stay with me here. You take that 175.4 million adults who receive that COVID vaccine, according to Rasmussen, according to those phone calls. and you take those hospitalization from VERS, 221-872, and you get about 0.13% of those people ended up with a serious side effect. According to VERS reporting, now this is all to see how robust is VERS. How much is VERS catching?

Is it catching everything? So you have 0.13%. Well, Rasmussen poll, because we're going to compare it to that, with these random telephone calls, said 10% of people said that they had a serious reaction. So you take 10%, you divide that by that 0.13%. VERS is underreporting at a rate of about 77 times when it comes to major side effects. And the caveat to this, again, this is very broad strokes on these calculations. But the caveat to this is those hospitalizations that we chose for VERS, that was children and adults.

So we actually gave VERS some help on this one. We over calculated how many reports were coming in. And even by doing that, 77 times under reporting. And remember, Harvard Pilgrim did the study. And they said less than 1% is what VERS probably was catching before COVID of the vaccine schedule, the flu shot, the childhood vaccine schedule. So again, anytime we do these calculations, VERS never comes in over reporting. In fact, it comes in massively underreporting in this case 77 times.

You know, it's interesting because, I mean, you know, I remember when you were bringing this up And we're looking at, you know, where is VERS at? It's under 1% reported if we're going to go with what Rasmussen says there, which is super interesting. What's fascinating about that article is, you know, remember we were reporting somewhere between 40 and 50% depending on the poll. We're saying they knew someone that they thought had died from the COVID vaccine. But to add in that one third think they're injured and 10% think that they've gotten a serious injury from it, that is a massive. massive number, but I remember when we won the V-Safe data. And, you know, this is the data, this is the app that the CDC created to track any sort of

vaccine injury. And we built the portal in which it, and people can still go check this out at I Can Decide.org, but if you pull up that portal and you could search it any way you want to, what we ended up seeing with those numbers was that it was about, I believe, was like seven, seven and a half somewhere in that zone that we're having serious adverse events. And up to 30% were visiting doctors or missing school or, you know, in some way, it was altering their life. And that actually goes really closely with what Rasmussen is reporting here.

And again, data that we only have, Jeffrey, because of Aaron Siri and millions of dollars spent to both get to the Pfizer data, which the FDA wanted to hide for 75 years, would be in hiding for 75 years if it weren't for the work that ICANN does. The Moderna data is available to the public because of the work that we do here, but that V-Safe data, which anyone can read through and go through our dashboard, which is super interesting. You can see that, too. But again, what we're seeing is what has been reported. Harvard has said in their, you know, experience when they were tasked, I think they were paid, we're paying. A million dollars investigated. Bears is capturing less than 1% of the total amount of injuries.

There's that study that does that. And so, you know, and this matters. This matters when you're going to rush a totally experimental product onto all the population and have your president of the United States say, everyone's going to have to get it or they can't go to work or they can't go to school or they can't get on a plane. It matters that your one major capture system is so flawed. And that you want to hide your V-Safe system. And you want to hide your Pfizer data and your Medicare data.

Dernadena data. This is what I think America's waking up to and why we're seeing such change, you know, as we're moving along now. Right. And so we just want to remember adults. Let's talk about children. So here's a headline somewhat recently out of the Atlantic. Yes, some children may have died from COVID shots. Well, we've come a long way since safe and effective or, you know, anti-vaxxers have a crazy conspiracy that the COVID shots may kill people. We're actually getting these headlines that from from legacy media outlets that they're admitting this. And this brings us to a study out of Spain. And this study found something kind of accidentally. They were looking at the safety and the effectiveness of the COVID-MRNA vaccines in children ages 6 to 11. And they used the

entire population database of Madrid's health system. And they looked at it really during the hot years of the pandemic around May 2021 to December 2020. So a lot of deaths going on there. And remember, they rush these vaccines into children's arms. There is typically unanimous voting for from Verbach, from ASIP to vote these in, despite massive problems, despite the fact that children were not dropping like flies from COVID. So this study looks at that time period. It looks at a lot of children. And where did they find no deaths attributable to COVID-19 occurred?

Now let's look at the numbers, because there's some questions here. I'm sure people are watching going, well, this is a vaccinated study. So isn't that proving that? You can say that. But let's look at the image here from the study. This is the table. vaccinated 183,273. The controls.

So they chose five times the controls of basically unvaccinated compared to vaccinated for six to 11 year old and 12 to 17 year old. So you add up those controls. It's about 2.7 million children. And if you go into this study, it says during the follow-up period, a certain percentage of those children and those controls received one vaccination. And so bottom line is about almost 1.4 million children. in this study and they were monitoring them for hospitalization, for mortality.

No children died. You would think if they hit the dart board, you know, they threw a dart like that with that many children. If this, if COVID was as dangerous we were told, that every child, every child had to get this shot, every infant had to get this shot. In fact, the West Coast Alliance and East Coast Alliance are still making their own recommendations to put them in the arms of infants. As we speak right now, you think that they would have captured a death or two in this just by a blind chance and they did not. And so that brings us kind of to the next question. We talk about the reporting systems, but there's people that are injured from this.

There's children that are injured from this, myocarditis, and the list goes on. You can look and what are we doing here in the United States? Well, we have the countermeasures injury compensation program. It pays out almost nothing to people that have been injured. It was never meant for a pandemic. It was that reporting system and a compensation system never meant for that. And we have basically trying to move that into something else to get compensation. But in the UK, as of last week, they're putting forward bills in their parliament to try and get

compensation for their citizens. Here's one of them. COVID-19 vaccine damage payments bill. And you go into and read about this. It says a bill to place a duty in the Secretary of State to make provisions about financial assistance to persons who have suffered disablement following vaccination against COVID-19 and to the next account of persons who have died shortly after vaccination. So that's what the UK is doing.

What's the U.S. doing? And I want to bring people to a time really quickly because there's a lot of polarization out there with RFK Jr. at the head of HHS. There's a lot of people thinking the vaccination schedule should have stayed the way it was, should have continued to be mandated without giving informed consent and choice to parents and children. So I want to talk about both camps. We have the camp of informed consent. We have the people that kind of want the old guard back, we'll call it now.

I call it the dark ages of medicine now. It seems like returning the page. And that's represented by people like Stanley Plotkin, Walter Ornstein. These are legacy researchers who laid the groundwork for the current vaccination program over decades of research and vaccine development that we have lived under until Kennedy took office. Well, they wrote a paper. Well, before we get to that, to be clear, if someone happens to be watching the show for the first time, our own Aaron Siri, the lawyer that, you know, brings all of our cases, went represented us.

and had a deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who is considered to be the reigning godfather of our vaccine program, was a nine hour deposition. You can find excerpts of that in the entire thing at the highwire.com, just search for the Plotkin deposition. But under that deposition, he admitted things like lack of safety testing and things like that. He was caught off guard, was not ready for it.

And in our own FOIA requests, we found requests the CDC and FDA that Dr. Stanley Plotkin then reached out to Walter Ornstein and others that are the heads of the departments inside the United States of America and their health system saying, I just had a very uncomfortable experience with a lawyer essentially and we have to start preparing ourselves for the argument they're making. I wasn't prepared. So very interesting. I think it sets up this article that you're about to describe. Absolutely. And so this article, and just put in context, this was in summer of 24, July, to be specific. Robert F. Kennedy didn't drop out of the presidential race until a month later in August.

So Kennedy was not at HHS. He wasn't talking about going to HHS. He wasn't really even talking about vaccines. In fact, I remember when he was running for president, he did an interview, a couple podcasts, and he said, you know what? I'm not talking about vaccines anymore, because I'm running for president. There's also other issues that I want to talk about. So it wasn't really on the docket. And out of the woodwork comes Stanley Plotkin. When Stanley Plotkin speaks, a lot of people in medicine listen. And he published this study in the New England Journal of Medicine, not a small journal, talking about vaccine safety science.

I piqued our interest. This is what we had to say about it. He said the widespread vaccine hesitancy observed during the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that the public is no longer satisfied with traditional safety goal of simply detecting and quantifying the associated risk of a vaccine after a vaccine has been authorized for use. The public also wants public health authorities to mitigate and prevent rare but serious. serious adverse reactions, which no longer seem rare when vaccines are given to millions or billions of people. Huh, it kind of sounds like the entire group of people that help Kennedy ascend to his presidency and into office. It sounds like he's one of them. He's actually saying because millions and billions of people are having these rare side effects, they kind of add up

and we need better safety science. And he goes on and say this. Identifying the biologic mechanisms of adverse reactions, how and in whom they occur is critical for developing safer vaccines, preventing adverse reactions by expanding contraindications and equitably compensating vaccinase for true adverse reactions. Kennedy himself couldn't say it any better. It's really amazing. I mean, I want to really drill down on this because these things can fly up. Bring up that last paragraph, you know, because this is what we're arguing. This is what mainstream keeps arguing. We have identified. We know everything about the vaccine. You don't. Here's the got by the vaccine saying, you know what we should do. We should be identifying

the biological mechanisms of adverse reactions, meaning we know they exist, they have to be happening. You know, we study rare diseases. Why don't we study rare injuries from vaccines? Why aren't we giving it the same concern instead of gaslighting people and saying that this doesn't happen? And I want to go back to the original paragraph because I think it's critical as you fly through that. Sometimes I'm like, oh, what that really mean? But however, the widespread vaccine hesitancy observed during the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that the public is no longer satisfied. with the traditional safety goal of simply detecting and quantifying the associated risks after a vaccine has been authorized for use.

There should have been bolded when you read that. What they're saying is what we have proven, there are no placebo trials of any of the childhood vaccines that was totally acceptable back in the day by Stanley Parkin and Walter Ornstein. But now, as it turns out, because of Jeffrey Jackson and Robert Kennedy Jr. and Del Bathtry and others like us saying, you know, why are we doing safety tests like we do on every other drug we take? I guess we're going to have to start doing those safety tests and figuring out before the vaccine is being injected and mandated on every child and, you know,

with COVID, every adult. So it's amazing. You're right. It's actually what good science is supposed to be in that article also says the only reason we didn't do it is we didn't have the funding. I mean, you're talking about an industry that makes $100 billion on the COVID vaccine. Doesn't have the funding to do proper safety tests like they deal on every other drug. But now that we have someone at HHS, to your point, doing exactly what Dr. Stanley Plotkin would have done himself, he needs to be torn down. Oh, my God, this guy's a danger and a menace to society because he's actually got Marty McReyer, saying we're not going to prove any more vaccines without a placebo trial.

And you're going to have to prove that the flu shot actually stops the flu that that season has to offer. And God forbid this be happening. This is why we're winning this argument, Jeffrey. It's why we're going to continue to win, why I think it's going to affect elections from here to come, you know, until everyone gets on over the fact that we all just want safety. And there's only one side that would prefer authoritarianism over safety. And, you know, behind closed doors, what this says is the both sides are intellectually shaking hands. They're patting each other on the back. They're saying, we know what direction we're going and let's walk there together.

This is what they're saying. This is a kumbaya moment. So let's talk about. Behind the closed door. I will love him when they actually come out in public and shake hands. And Stanley Plotkin says, Bobby, thank God for you. Thank for you for getting the funding into what I wish we could have done all along.