Significantly increased rates of sudden death shortly after vaccination point to toxic injections

It is a fallacy to conclude that because B happened after A, B was caused by A. See:

Post hoc ergo propter hoc ('after this, therefore because of this')
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

In general, it is a fallacy to conclude that because there is a relation between 2 events (correlation), one of them MUST have caused the other (causation). Correlation is not causation.

If A and B are strongly correlated, A could have caused B, B could have caused A, C could have caused both A and B, or it could be a coincidence (you might find that stock prices are correlated with butter production in Bangladesh, for instance).

However, there are certain criteria that one can use to determine if a correlation is also likely to be causation. See: Bradford Hill criteria
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Hill_criteria

One of the strongest of these criteria is a relationship in time (temporal relationship): if B consistently happens shortly after A at a rate significantly above the background rate, B is likely caused by A.

Sudden Death Syndrome happens at significantly increased rates shortly after vaccination, both in children (SIDS = Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) and adults (SADS = Sudden Adult Death Syndrome).

This is a strong danger signal that these deaths are not coincidences, but are caused by vaccination. We need to introduce a new term: VISDS = Vaccine Induced Sudden Death Syndrome.

See for instance:

Vaccines and sudden infant death: An analysis of the VAERS database 1990-2019 and review of the medical literature
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34258234/

The author starts out with a blatant problem that is almost certainly intentional:

"[H]ealth authorities eliminated "prophylactic vaccination" as an official cause of death, so medical examiners are compelled to misclassify and conceal vaccine-related fatalities under alternate cause-of-death classifications."

The authorities want maximum vaccine uptake (vaccine maximization). One of the ways to help achieve that, is to make them vaccines SEEM safe. How do you do that? One way is to put as many barriers as possible in the way of reporting and publishing toxicity. That will of course do nothing for ACTUAL perception of safety, but it will influence the PERCEPTION of safety.

VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) is a voluntary reporting system that is difficult, inconvenient, and time-consuming to use. From the perspective of vaccine maximizing authorities, this is not a bug, but a feature. It helps to maximally reduce the amount of adverse event reports, which helps vaccines SEEM safe.

VAERS is severely underreported: the ACTUAL number of adverse events is 10-100x larger than the REPORTED adverse events.

One of the many problems with stingy and shoddy data, is that they are contrary to informed consent: citizens have the RIGHT to make well informed decision regarding health risks and benefits of certain medical procedures.

SEE ALSO

Healthy young people are dying suddenly and unexpectedly from a mysterious syndrome - as doctors seek answers through a new national register | Daily Mail
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10895067/Doctors-trying-determine-young-people-suddenly-dying.html

COVID jabs causing large numbers of deaths according to Bradford Hill criteria | dr. Peter McCullough
https://rumble.com/vul01e-covid-jabs-causing-large-numbers-of-deaths-according-to-bradford-hill-crite.html

Dr. Jessica Rose: VAERS: Key Ways to Prove C19 Jab Harm Causation
https://odysee.com/@WorldCouncilForHealth:3/uvc-jessica-dr-jessica-rose-vaers-prove-harm:0

SOURCE

Episode 271 of The HighWire (segment starts around 18m30)
https://rumble.com/v17y064-episode-271-the-immune-compromise.html