Skip to main content
VaccineWatch
VaccinesSymptomsStatesAnalysisToolsDashboardCompare

VaccineWatch

Transparent access to VAERS data for informed decision-making. We present the data as-is, with appropriate context and disclaimers.

Explore Data

  • Vaccines
  • Symptoms
  • Manufacturers
  • States
  • Dashboard
  • Compare Tool
  • Search

Deep Dives

  • The Denominator Problem
  • Onset Timing
  • Lot Number Analysis
  • COVID Impact
  • Myocarditis
  • Death Reports
  • Interactive Tools
  • Reporting Rate Calculator
  • Signal Detection
  • All 23 Articles →

Resources

  • About
  • Methodology
  • FAQ
  • Glossary
  • Side Effects Guide
  • Vaccine Schedule
  • Vaccine Safety
  • Safety Timeline
  • Adverse Events
  • Is VAERS Reliable?
  • Myocarditis
  • Guillain-Barré
  • Allergic Reactions
  • Report an Event
  • Disclaimer
  • VAERS Official Site ↗

Sister Sites

  • OpenMedicaid
  • OpenFeds
  • OpenImmigration
  • OpenCrime
  • OpenSpending
  • OpenMedicare
  • OpenLobby
  • WarCosts
  • OpenPrescriber
  • GiveScope
  • SPACGraveyard
  • AI Exposure
  • AutoPilotWatch
  • TariffTax
  • ShelterScope
  • PermitCore
  • OpenPrices
  • TheDataProject.ai

Data source: VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System)

Data through 2026 · Updated quarterly

Built by TheDataProject.ai · © 2026 VaccineWatch

Important: VAERS accepts reports of adverse events following vaccination. For any given report, there is no certainty that the reported event was caused by the vaccine. Reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This data cannot be used to determine if vaccines cause or contribute to adverse events.

⚠️

Important: VAERS reports alone cannot determine if a vaccine caused an adverse event. Reports may contain incomplete, inaccurate, or unverified information. Correlation does not equal causation.

  1. Home
  2. Analysis
  3. Age Patterns in VAERS Reports
6 min read
Share

Age Patterns in VAERS Reports

Who reports the most adverse events, and who experiences the most serious outcomes? Age is one of the most important factors in understanding VAERS data.

15,591
death reports in the 65+ age group — 56% of all death reports, despite being 20% of total reports

The Age Distribution

VAERS reports span all ages, from newborns to the elderly. But the distribution is far from uniform. Adults aged 18-49 file the most reports (558,025), which makes sense given this is the largest demographic group.

However, when we look at serious outcomes, the picture shifts dramatically. The 65+ age group accounts for 56% of all death reports and 40% of hospitalizations, despite representing just 20% of total reports.

The Infant Question (0-2 Years)

The 0-2 age group has 149,466 reports with 3,406 death reports. This is a significant number that requires careful context:

  • Intensive vaccination schedule: Infants receive more vaccine doses in their first two years than any other period, creating more temporal associations
  • SIDS overlap: Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) naturally peaks in the 2-4 month age range — the same period as many infant vaccinations. Temporal coincidence is expected
  • Mandatory reporting: Healthcare providers are required to report certain events in this age group, increasing the reporting rate
  • Heightened parental vigilance: Parents of young children may be more likely to report any health concern following vaccination

Why the Elderly Have More Serious Outcomes

The concentration of death reports in the 65+ group reflects a fundamental reality: older adults have higher baseline mortality rates. When millions of elderly people are vaccinated, some will experience serious health events purely by coincidence in the days and weeks following vaccination.

During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, the elderly were prioritized for early vaccination. This population was already at highest risk for COVID-19 and had the highest baseline mortality rate. The temporal proximity of vaccination and natural health events creates inevitable coincidental reports.

0-2
149,466 reports
3,406 deaths
15,134 hospitalizations
Death rate: 2.3% of reports
3-17
231,796 reports
486 deaths
9,354 hospitalizations
Death rate: 0.2% of reports
18-49
558,025 reports
1,774 deaths
27,382 hospitalizations
Death rate: 0.3% of reports
50-64
357,371 reports
3,290 deaths
25,540 hospitalizations
Death rate: 0.9% of reports
65+
398,940 reports
15,591 deaths
57,201 hospitalizations
Death rate: 3.9% of reports

Key Takeaways

  • 1.Adults 65+ have the highest rate of serious outcomes in VAERS, reflecting higher baseline health risks
  • 2.Infant reports are driven by intensive vaccination schedules and mandatory reporting, not necessarily higher risk
  • 3.Age-related patterns in VAERS largely mirror age-related patterns in general health outcomes

2026 Data Context

As VAERS reporting normalizes following the COVID-19 pandemic surge, the data landscape for age-related patterns in adverse events is shifting. Annual VAERS reports in 2025-2026 have returned to the 35,000-45,000 range typical of the pre-pandemic era (2015-2019), making year-over-year comparisons more meaningful again.

The HHS administration has signaled increased focus on vaccine safety data analysis, including the development of AI-powered tools for pattern detection in VAERS reports. While these tools are still under development, they represent a potential evolution in how adverse event data is analyzed and interpreted.

New vaccines entering the market — including RSV vaccines for older adults and pregnant women, updated COVID-19 formulations, and potential H5N1 avian flu vaccines — continue to add new data streams to VAERS. Each new vaccine type provides additional context for understanding age-related patterns in adverse events across the full spectrum of vaccine safety surveillance.

Limitations of This Analysis

This analysis is based entirely on VAERS passive surveillance data, which carries important limitations that must be understood:

  • Underreporting: Studies estimate that only 1-10% of adverse events are reported to VAERS. This means the true number of events is likely much higher than what appears in the data.
  • Stimulated reporting: Media coverage and public awareness can temporarily increase reporting rates for specific vaccines, independent of any change in actual safety.
  • No control group: VAERS does not include a comparison group of unvaccinated individuals, making it impossible to determine whether reported events occurred at a higher rate than expected.
  • Variable data quality: VAERS reports range from detailed medical records submitted by healthcare providers to brief descriptions from patients. Not all reports are verified for medical accuracy.
  • Duplicate reports: The same event may be reported by multiple people (patient, doctor, manufacturer), and some duplicates may remain in the data.

For these reasons, VAERS data is best used for signal detection — identifying potential safety concerns that warrant further investigation — rather than for definitive risk assessment. When VAERS surfaces a potential signal, it is investigated using more rigorous systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and controlled epidemiological studies.

About This Data

All data on VaccineWatch comes from the official VAERS public-use datasets published by the CDC and FDA. Our current dataset covers reports from 1990 through early 2026. We process the raw data without filtering or editorializing — every metric is a transparent aggregation of official government data.

Our Methodology →FAQ →Disclaimer →

2026 Data Context

As VAERS reporting normalizes following the COVID-19 pandemic surge, the data landscape for age-related patterns in adverse events is shifting. Annual VAERS reports in 2025-2026 have returned to the 35,000-45,000 range typical of the pre-pandemic era (2015-2019), making year-over-year comparisons more meaningful again.

The HHS administration has signaled increased focus on vaccine safety data analysis, including the development of AI-powered tools for pattern detection in VAERS reports. While these tools are still under development, they represent a potential evolution in how adverse event data is analyzed and interpreted.

New vaccines entering the market — including RSV vaccines for older adults and pregnant women, updated COVID-19 formulations, and potential H5N1 avian flu vaccines — continue to add new data streams to VAERS. Each new vaccine type provides additional context for understanding age-related patterns in adverse events across the full spectrum of vaccine safety surveillance.

Limitations of This Analysis

This analysis is based entirely on VAERS passive surveillance data, which carries important limitations that must be understood:

  • Underreporting: Studies estimate that only 1-10% of adverse events are reported to VAERS. This means the true number of events is likely much higher than what appears in the data.
  • Stimulated reporting: Media coverage and public awareness can temporarily increase reporting rates for specific vaccines, independent of any change in actual safety.
  • No control group: VAERS does not include a comparison group of unvaccinated individuals, making it impossible to determine whether reported events occurred at a higher rate than expected.
  • Variable data quality: VAERS reports range from detailed medical records submitted by healthcare providers to brief descriptions from patients. Not all reports are verified for medical accuracy.
  • Duplicate reports: The same event may be reported by multiple people (patient, doctor, manufacturer), and some duplicates may remain in the data.

For these reasons, VAERS data is best used for signal detection — identifying potential safety concerns that warrant further investigation — rather than for definitive risk assessment. When VAERS surfaces a potential signal, it is investigated using more rigorous systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and controlled epidemiological studies.

About This Data

All data on VaccineWatch comes from the official VAERS public-use datasets published by the CDC and FDA. Our current dataset covers reports from 1990 through early 2026. We process the raw data without filtering or editorializing — every metric is a transparent aggregation of official government data.

Our Methodology →FAQ →Disclaimer →

2026 Data Context

As VAERS reporting normalizes following the COVID-19 pandemic surge, the data landscape for age-related patterns in adverse events is shifting. Annual VAERS reports in 2025-2026 have returned to the 35,000-45,000 range typical of the pre-pandemic era (2015-2019), making year-over-year comparisons more meaningful again.

The HHS administration has signaled increased focus on vaccine safety data analysis, including the development of AI-powered tools for pattern detection in VAERS reports. While these tools are still under development, they represent a potential evolution in how adverse event data is analyzed and interpreted.

New vaccines entering the market — including RSV vaccines for older adults and pregnant women, updated COVID-19 formulations, and potential H5N1 avian flu vaccines — continue to add new data streams to VAERS. Each new vaccine type provides additional context for understanding age-related patterns in adverse events across the full spectrum of vaccine safety surveillance.

Limitations of This Analysis

This analysis is based entirely on VAERS passive surveillance data, which carries important limitations that must be understood:

  • Underreporting: Studies estimate that only 1-10% of adverse events are reported to VAERS. This means the true number of events is likely much higher than what appears in the data.
  • Stimulated reporting: Media coverage and public awareness can temporarily increase reporting rates for specific vaccines, independent of any change in actual safety.
  • No control group: VAERS does not include a comparison group of unvaccinated individuals, making it impossible to determine whether reported events occurred at a higher rate than expected.
  • Variable data quality: VAERS reports range from detailed medical records submitted by healthcare providers to brief descriptions from patients. Not all reports are verified for medical accuracy.
  • Duplicate reports: The same event may be reported by multiple people (patient, doctor, manufacturer), and some duplicates may remain in the data.

For these reasons, VAERS data is best used for signal detection — identifying potential safety concerns that warrant further investigation — rather than for definitive risk assessment. When VAERS surfaces a potential signal, it is investigated using more rigorous systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and controlled epidemiological studies.

About This Data

All data on VaccineWatch comes from the official VAERS public-use datasets published by the CDC and FDA. Our current dataset covers reports from 1990 through early 2026. We process the raw data without filtering or editorializing — every metric is a transparent aggregation of official government data.

Our Methodology →FAQ →Disclaimer →

Related Analysis

Understanding Death Reports
Context for death reports in VAERS
Gender Disparities
Why women report more often
The 65+ Age Group
Why older adults have the highest serious-outcome rates