A scientific paper, "A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination," examined 325 autopsy cases and concluded that73.9 percent of deaths were either directly due to or significantly contributed to by the Covid-19 vax. The paper was originally at the medical journal The Lancet, but was removed within 24 hours, supposedly because the papers conclusions were not supported by its methodology. It is now here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073824001968. However as noted at the Daily Sceptic; https://dailysceptic.org/2023/07/06/lancet-study-on-covid-vaccine-autopsies-finds-74-were-caused-by-vaccine-journal-removes-study-within-24-hours/:
"Without further detail from the Preprints with the Lancet staff who removed the paper it is hard to know what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has. A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line. Keep in mind that the CDC has not yet acknowledged a single death being caused by the Covid mRNA vaccines. Autopsy evidence demonstrating otherwise is clearly not what the U.S. public health establishment wants to hear.
Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-Chair of the HART pandemic advisory group, says that in her view the approach taken in the study is sound. She told the Daily Sceptic:
The VAERS system [of vaccine adverse event reporting] is designed to alert to potential harms without necessarily being the best way of measuring the extent of those harms.
Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country.
However, this is imperfect as a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious.
An alternative approach of auditing such deaths through autopsy is sound.
There may be a bias [in the study] towards reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation might be exaggerated by that bias. For example, 19 of the 325 deaths were due to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators' willingness to acknowledge such deaths.
Nevertheless, it is important that attempts are made to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, rather than open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people."
One of the authors regarded the issue of being "pure Government-directed censorship, even after the Missouri v. Biden injunction".
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/06/lancet-journal-study-finds-73-9-deaths-following/
"A previously censored paper from The Lancet has now undergone peer review and is available online.
The study, titled "A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination," analyzed 325 autopsy cases and found that a staggering 73.9% of deaths were either directly due to or significantly contributed to by the COVID-19 vaccination.
The paper's lead author, Dr. Nicolas Hulscher, faced significant opposition in bringing these findings to light. After initially being downloaded over 100,000 times, The Lancet removed the paper within 24 hours, according to Dr. William Makis.
According to The Daily Sceptic, the reason given at the time was, "This preprint has been removed by Preprints with the Lancet because the study's conclusions are not supported by the study methodology."
The news outlet added:
"Without further detail from the Preprints with the Lancet staff who removed the paper it is hard to know what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has. A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line. Keep in mind that the CDC has not yet acknowledged a single death being caused by the Covid mRNA vaccines. Autopsy evidence demonstrating otherwise is clearly not what the U.S. public health establishment wants to hear."