Correct, its unreliable, as I stated, the various independent research shows the most conservative estimate is that it underreports by a factor of 16. 

Do you have any research that contradicts this? Saying "its unreliable" without context is nothing but a dodge, because it's explicitly unreliable by missing the overwhelming majority of cases. 

If any of these institutions weren't malicious, they would do a thorough and case by case investigation of what has been reported *because that's exactly how you confirm this one way or the other.* The most alarming part of all of this is their total dismissal of something *they aren't even investigating.* To make a claim about something for which they haven't even done the **most basic investigation** of on the very reporting system created for this exact issue, is just flat lying. They cannot defend the statements they make because they have explicitly NOT investigated it.

The fact that they dismiss it without any exploration is gross negligence, at best. If they think some of these have nothing to do with the vaccine, it's almost like one ought to look to find out.