In the course of my usual morning news browse, I came across this on one of those fact check sites:

Flawed Paper on COVID-19 Vaccines, Deaths Spreads Widely Before Retraction

I took a look, yes, yadda yadda... "..a paper.." yadda yadda, "...the paper..." yadda yadda, but no mention of the title of the paper! Not one, not a single reference to the actual title of the paper. So my first question is, what is the point of this so called article? In essence, due to any specificity, it calls into question any and every "paper on covid-19 vaccines" that doesn't agree with the narrative.

Fortunately, in their sources, because apparently they still have some lingering shred of accountability, they were forced to include the source of the retraction, and that source, in it's title, included the title of the paper:

“Retraction: Walach et al. The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy. Vaccines 2021, 9, 693.” Vaccines Editorial Office. 2 Jul 2021.

The paper itself can be found here

The retraction is clear enough and it does lay reasonable grounds for retraction, but it also raises some important areas of concern.

The full retraction reads:

The journal retracts the article, The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy [1], cited above.

Serious concerns were brought to the attention of the publisher regarding misinterpretation of data, leading to incorrect and distorted conclusions.

The article was evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief with the support of several Editorial Board Members. They found that the article contained several errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings.

These include, but are not limited to:

The data from the Lareb report (https://www.lareb.nl/coronameldingen) in The Netherlands were used to calculate the number of severe and fatal side effects per 100,000 vaccinations. Unfortunately, in the manuscript by Harald Walach et al. these data were incorrectly interpreted which led to erroneous conclusions. The data was presented as being causally related to adverse events by the authors. This is inaccurate. In The Netherlands, healthcare professionals and patients are invited to report suspicions of adverse events that may be associated with vaccination. For this type of reporting a causal relation between the event and the vaccine is not needed, therefore a reported event that occurred after vaccination is not necessarily attributable to vaccination. Thus, reporting of a death following vaccination does not imply that this is a vaccine-related event. There are several other inaccuracies in the paper by Harald Walach et al. one of which is that fatal cases were certified by medical specialists. It should be known that even this false claim does not imply causation, which the authors imply. Further, the authors have called the events ‘effects’ and ‘reactions’ when this is not established, and until causality is established they are ‘events’ that may or may not be caused by exposure to a vaccine. It does not matter what statistics one may apply, this is incorrect and misleading.

The authors were asked to respond to the claims, but were not able to do so satisfactorily. The authors were notified of the retraction and did not agree.

So it appears the retraction was based on sound science. The problem is, nobody appears to be actually, aggressively researching to what extent there is a causative relationship between the vaccines and reported adverse events. With regards to this boy who died, we're told it will be MONTHS before we know the cause of his death. Months. So I presume it's going to be years before any sort of major study is done, if at all, on all these reports of adverse events.

Of course, this is what should have been done before the vaccines were thrust upon the world. I'm afraid we'll never really know the truth.