Prostock-Studio/Getty Images

Horowitz: German insurance claims hint at millions of unreported vaccine injuries

What if 1 in 23 individuals jabbed with the COVID bioproduct experienced an adverse reaction strong enough to trigger an insurance claim? Now consider the fact that 5.31 billion people in the world received at least one jab, with hundreds of millions receiving three or four jabs, and you will realize we are in uncharted waters in human history.

According to data from Techniker Krankenkasse, the largest German medical insurance company, there were a total of 437,593 insurance claims billed under the four diagnostic codes for vaccine injury in 2021. To put those numbers in perspective, the total numbers billed for a vaccine injury code in the two preceding years was 13,777 and 15,044, respectively. As the Daily Skeptic notes, given that TK insures 11 million people, that means 1 in 23, or 4.3%, had a medical treatment billed for vaccine injury. And that assumes all 11 million were vaccinated. The background vaccination rate in Germany is 78%, although most of the unvaccinated are children, so the rate of injury per vaccinated person is likely even higher (5.1%).

Putting aside confounding factors, but just to provide a rough estimate to open your mind to the scope of this problem, a 4.3% clinical level injury rate, if extrapolated for the 223 million vaccinated in the United Sates, would equal approximately 9.6 million injured Americans. While that number sounds unconscionable, remember that this data harmonizes almost perfectly with the Israeli health ministry survey that found a 4.5% rate of neurological side effects just from those who received booster shots (not total doses, which is likely more).

However, this data, and the extrapolation for the U.S. population, is even more credible when you look at the VAERS data. The total number of reported hospitalizations, urgent care visits, or doctor’s visits reported to VAERS (just for the U.S.) for the COVID shots as of Aug. 5 is 337,579.

An underreporting factor of roughly 28 would get you 9.6 million clinical-level injuries. Leading VAERS expert Dr. Jessica Rose estimated, using independent rates of anaphylaxis events from a Mass General study, an underreporting factor as high as 41 for serious adverse events in VAERS.

Obviously, vaccine injury billing codes, VAERS data for doctor visits, and the Israeli health ministry survey are not the exact same data point, but they all seem to coalesce around a rate of several percentage points of injury beyond the typical mild symptoms one would expect to experience from the shot. Moreover, we can actually independently verify the German billing data more precisely by using the same diagnostic codes for vaccine injury in the U.S. military. The four codes tabulated in the German TK billing data for 2021 are the following:

  • T.88.0: Infection following immunisation
  • T.88.1: Other complications after immunisation
  • U.12.9: Adverse effects after Covid-19 immunisation
  • Y.59.9: Complications due to vaccines or biological substances

I asked a source in the military with access to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) system to pull equivalent data on vaccine injury. While some of these codes did not come up, here is the data for T50.B95, “Adverse Effect of Other Viral Vaccine.”

The rate of increase is 11.6-fold, not as dramatic as the 30-fold increase in Germany, but this is just one code. Also, it’s likely that the military population would have a higher baseline background rate of reported adverse effects annually than a civilian population because they receive many more vaccines every year per capita.

When using ICD codes to extrapolate the scope of vaccine injury, keep in mind that these numbers likely substantially understate the total adverse events. Most doctors worship the vaccine with religious fervor, and there is a virulent stigma against implicating the vaccine for a particular malady or injury. So the fact that medical billing codes are hinting at this degree of cataclysmic injury is astounding. Moreover, there are no billing codes for death, which is clearly being underreported.

That the shots are still even being made available, much less coerced upon the public in many circumstances, represents the greatest violation of the Nuremberg Code of all time. It’s not even the fact that they are experimenting on all of humanity. The data is in and the shots have affirmatively been proven dangerous. They are no longer even experimental.

In a shocking letter, the incoming president of the Australian Medical Professionals Society, Christopher Neil, made it clear that Australian doctors must not be gagged in speaking out and offering informed consent. “Indeed, now 17 months later and after numerous forms of pressure to take up the COVID-19 injectables in various age categories, a tremendous amount of data is available to more fully and accurately inform clinicians about these products,” wrote Dr. Neil to the Australian Colleges and Associations of Medicine, Health, and Science, and members of Parliament. “This literature includes over one thousand peer reviewed studies reporting of the harms being seen around the world, up to December 2021.”

Neil observes the obvious – that the degree of adverse event reporting is sky-high. “To be clear, the TGA has received more Adverse Event reports in 2021 through June 2022 for the COVID-19 vaccines, than they have been seen for all other vaccines in the preceding 50-year period.”

If you just take the data from VAERS and the EudraVigilance system of the European Medicines Agency, there were a total of 76,253 dead and 6,033,218 injured, as of mid-July. That in itself is mind-blowing, but if you adjust for an underreporting factor of 41, that would total nearly 1.9 million deaths and 247 million injuries! Amazingly, yet sickeningly, 247 million injuries would equal 4.6% of all the people jabbed on this third rock from the sun – nearly exactly the extrapolated rate of injury from the German medical billing data!

Some are asking whether Steve Deace and I were overly dramatic in calling this the Fourth Reich and demanding a Nuremberg trial. But as the days pass and the sheer horror of this becomes apparent, the public will want to know why there was no demand to abide by the Nuremberg Code from day one.
Matt Hunt/Getty Images

Horowitz: Not a single vaccine injury compensated by US government, even as other countries begin payouts

What do you call a governmental system that partners with, funds, markets, distributes, and mandates a private biological product and then absolves government officials and the partner company of all liability for death and illness? It sure is not freedom.

To ignore the sheer magnitude of vaccine injury and death at this point is gross insouciance, and to cover it up is willful misinformation. The only question remaining is the exact scope. But even a small percentage of the injuries, given that most adults throughout the country got at least 2-3 jabs, would be a large number of people injured. Even with the underreporting factor, there are over 1.3 million injuries and nearly 30,000 deaths reported to VAERS, including over 170,000 hospitalizations and 200,000 doctor’s visits. There are over 50,000 reports of myocarditis/pericarditis and over 55,000 reports of permanent disabilities.

After the government has spent over $10 trillion dollars in fiscal and monetary spending on COVID, including hundreds of billions lining the pockets of Big Pharma and hospital chains, compensating the citizenry – including those forced to get the jab – for vaccine injury is one thing on which they have failed to spend a penny. Meanwhile, many other countries have already begun paying out compensation for injuries. Japan, Taiwan, Canada, the U.K., and Thailand have all initiated some sort of compensation scheme. Even Australia plans to pay something to at least 79,000 individuals. Yet America, the home of Pfizer, remains silent on this front.

The culprit for this is a 2005 bill whose repeal must be the lead campaign promise of Republicans.

In the frenetic desire to protect against a bio-terror attack in the wake of 9/11, Congress passed the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act in 2005, which absolved the entire health care industry and the government from any liability for damages in the event of a public health emergency. So while the 1986 bill exempted all of the manufacturers of childhood vaccines from liability, the PREP Act, if invoked during a declared emergency, as it was in February 2020, exempts every therapeutic or treatment (or lack of treatment) from any maker, administrator, provider, or government entity of all liability from death and injury. As Rep. Thomas Massie recently warned, we are living under “medical malpractice martial law.”

Here is just a sense of how broad the PREP Act is, as codified in 42 U.S.C. 247d-6d:

In other words, a qualified “person” is everyone in the public or private sector with almost no exception. Thus, there is quite literally nobody who can be held accountable for causing harm to the individual or society – up to and including death. The PREP Act also overrrides all state tort laws, which is likely unconstitutional.

Now this would be bad enough if govenrment merely allowed private companies to manufacture products or offer treatments during a pandemic and granted them immunity. However, our government not only marketed and funded them but actually mandated them in many respects. To be fair, the statute is quite clear that emergency use products cannot be mandated:

However, given that the court system dogmatically adheres to the liability exemption part of the statute but not to the anti-mandate part, it is quite clear that the PREP Act needs to be gutted wholesale.

Also, putting the law aside, how can our government drop over $60 billion for Ukrainians but not pay for Americans injured by a shot the government promoted and shamed people into getting, if not mandated? As of last month, not a single American had been awarded any compensation for damages from the COVID shots, according to the Health Resources and Service Administration. That is simply astounding given that even CDC researchers admitted in JAMA that the tens of thousands of myocarditis claims in VAERS are “more likely” underreported relative to the true scope of heart injury in the general population than overreported.

How is it that we have gone two and a half years under this form of martial law and Republicans haven’t even made the PREP Act a campaign issue, even as the federal government is on the cusp of declaring a second public health emergency for monkeypox?

Imagine being someone injured by the shots. Doctors are too scared to diagnose the injury, all medical literature on diagnosis, detection, and treatment has been censored, and insurance companies often won’t cover any expensive diagnostics (such as cardiac MRIs) or treatment because by definition it’s all off label. There are millions of people who are on their own, and none of us hear a cavalry of GOP congressional candidates running on this issue.

The issue of liability is not even about collecting millions for those injured. It’s about judicial discovery serving as a deterrent against bad products. As World Bank President David Malpass recently said, “Pfizer has been hesitant to go into some of the countries because they don’t have a liability shield.” That should scare everyone. What did Pfizer know and when? While the PREP Act still allows for lawsuits alleging willful misconduct, it is an extremely difficult legal standard to clear. Here is how the Congressional Research Service describes that arduous process:

The process by which injured persons (or their representatives) may prove willful misconduct under the PREP Act is limited in several ways. Before filing a lawsuit claiming willful misconduct, injured persons must first seek compensation through CICP (see below), and they cannot sue if they elect to receive that compensation. If they choose to file a lawsuit, injured persons may sue only in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Such lawsuits must meet heightened standards for pleading and discovery, and are subject to procedural provisions generally favorable to defendants. Injured persons must prove willful misconduct by clear and convincing evidence (a higher standard than in a typical civil case), and recovery for noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering is limited.

Also, the report notes that officials may rely on a defense that they “acted consistent with applicable directions, guidelines, or recommendations by the Secretary regarding the administration or use of a covered countermeasure.” In other words, it’s checkmate for the victims, even though we have numerous FOIAed and court-released documents that show willful misconduct from day one.

For example, a newly released document between Pfizer and the European Commission titled “Advance Purchase Agreement” reveals how Pfizer officials conceded to governments up front that they couldn’t vouch for the safety of the shots. “The Participating Member State further acknowledges the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known,” stipulates Pfizer in the document labeled “sensitive” in November 2020. “Further, to the extent applicable, the Participating Member State acknowledges that the Vaccine shall not be serialized.”

How can these countries agree to a contract that required them not only to purchase, but also “promote … as a global public good” (p.56) a product that they can’t stand behind and then hide any serial numbers to track adverse reactions? Other documents also show how they sought to have all clinical trial participants report adverse events through postal mail or phone, almost as if they were trying to cover it up so there’d be no electronic trail? Track and trace for the citizenry, but not for Pfizer!

Also, a recently released Canadian document showed that Pfizer knew 100 micrograms was toxic in rats, yet failed to disclose this or even present all the data in the document. Keep in mind that three doses of Pfizer and two doses of Moderna are roughly 100 micrograms. This stuff is pretty damning, but still very hard to prove willful misconduct in court, and even if we did, Pfizer can always say it was following the government’s pandemic objectives.

Again, how can government sell the bodies of human beings to private entities and not take responsibility, especially after mandating their products or at least shaming people into getting them? A lack of informed consent violates basic human rights, but the lack of consent mixed with pure immunity for those doing the coercion is evil.

We seem to understand this concept when it comes to any other industry. Just consider the fact that Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee recently passed a bill subjecting gun manufacturers to a degree of liability no other industry assumes, namely to hold them liable if a criminal shoots someone with a gun. Like every other maker of a product, gun manufacturers are 100% liable if they sell a faulty gun, but just like Toyota is not responsible if someone chooses to kill another person by vehicular homicide, gun manufacturers shouldn’t be on the hook for that either.

Now contrast this to pharmaceutical companies, which can make a vaccine that causes any amount of damage to the body and never be held liable. Plus, unlike with guns, government is demanding that you get one and every “private” medical group will strongly recommend or mandate it upon their patients. Ironically, when Rep. Thomas Massie offered an amendment to pair the gun liability bill with liability for vaccine makers in the PREP Act, every Democrat voted no.

This is not hypocrisy; it’s hierarchy. All guns are bad and all products marketed as vaccines are good, in their quasi-religious worldview. Imagine government embarking on the greatest campaign of all time to make everyone own a gun and get every private entity to mandate the same, and then absolve them of liability if the bullet flies out of the back of the gun and kills the user. Well, this is what they are doing for Pharma, because they are the high priests of the Great Reset agenda. Welcome to the new fascism.

For any Republican running for Congress this year, their answers to your question regarding repeal of the PREP Act is a moral and political IQ test.

Horowitz: COVID supplemental bill is Senate GOP’s final leverage point to fight pharma fascism



Even after Republicans squandered their leverage for the remainder of the fiscal year by approving the omnibus, they still had one more leverage point. The Biden administration was requesting a supplemental spending bill for yet more COVID funding because, evidently, Pfizer’s $54 billion in revenue is not enough. Rather than using the bill as a hostage to ban COVID fascism, compensate those injured by the shots, and establish investigations and oversight of the vaccines and COVID policies, Republicans agreed to more unconditional funding of the same entities responsible for this horror.

Over the past two years, our government has bankrupted us into oblivion – with $5.8 trillion of fiscal bills and trillions more in Federal Reserve monetary manipulation – over funding the pandemic response, which has been destructive in all its policies. Recently, the San Francisco Federal Reserve identified “the combination of direct fiscal support introduced to counteract the economic devastation caused by the pandemic" as one of the major culprits for inflation. Rather than banning lockdowns, mandates, and dangerous shots and instead funding early treatment, Republicans participated in all this spending. Now they think it’s not enough. But the policies undergirded by these expenditures are even worse than the fiscal impact.

Earlier this week, Republicans agreed to a deal to spend another $10 billion on the pandemic, with $5 billion of the funding going into the coffers of Pfizer, Moderna, and Merck to fund their drugs and therapeutics. While negotiators, led by Mitt Romney, claim the money is reprogrammed from unspent accounts, everyone should be asking why the Big Pharma giants need more money. In what way have the shots, Paxlovid, molnupiravir, and remdesivir been shown to slow the pandemic? Why was no funding allocated for researching off-patent, off-label drugs?

Folks, even in the most conservative estimate, the number of people injured by the shots is huge. Earlier this year, the Israeli Health Ministry conducted a survey of those who received boosters and found that 4.5% of them reported neurological side effects, 0.5% reported Bell’s palsy, and 0.3% reported being hospitalized. And this was just in the first 30 days after receiving a shot, with no effort to study long-term effects. If you extrapolate those numbers for 550 million doses administered here in the U.S., that is a cataclysmic number of people who need help.

Now that CDC researchers have agreed that myocarditis entries in VAERS are likely underreported – not overreported – there is no reason to believe the other entries aren’t also a minimum reflection of the scope of safety concerns. How can Republicans agree to throw more money at this injection campaign without banning the shots for children, creating stronger oversight, and helping pay for vaccine injury – given that the manufacturers are exempt?

You can catch an intimate glimpse into the relationship between the two parties from the way this deal was forged. The White House asked for $15 billion, which would include $5 billion in vaccine promotion for the world. Republicans rejected the foreign funding, but agreed to everything domestically. The White House badly wanted this new funding, and Republicans could have used this enormous leverage to finally break open the conversation on the underlying policies of this pandemic response. Instead they agreed to fund the corrupt status quo. Even if they want to spend more money on the Pfizerocracy, Republicans could have pushed for the following conditions:

  • A portion of the funding to be spent researching efficacy of existing safe off-patent drugs on the market.
  • A commission on the origins of the virus and what went wrong with our response.
  • A better monitoring system for people to submit claims of vaccine injury and receive reparations.
  • A provision ensuring that doctors are free to treat COVID patients using their medical judgement and clinical experience.
  • A ban on all mandates.
  • Research into the apparent negative efficacy of the shots and what went wrong with the clinical trials.

At a minimum, Republicans could have demanded a termination of the mask mandate on 2-year-olds on airplanes in return for giving Pfizer and Moderna more Monopoly money. That issue has become near consensus among the public, and even some Senate Democrats agreed to pass a bill ending the national airplane mandate. It passed the Senate 57-40 in March. Why not demand that it be attached to this bill as leverage against Biden and Pelosi?

Ultimately, because Biden announced the termination of Title 42 at the border, Republicans finally grew a backbone and have demanded that the continuation of Title 42 border removals be included in the bill. So that is at least something to celebrate. But why did it take a non-COVID-related issue for them to grow a backbone?

That Republicans can’t speak with moral clarity against the lockdowns, masks, mass vaccination campaign, and war on early treatment – even after two years of being mugged by reality – doesn’t bode well for us on the other side of the much-anticipated electoral victory in November.

Horowitz: 5 ways DOD’s recalibrated health surveillance data looks like a fraudulent attempt to cover vaccine injury



For the past two months, and possibly even earlier, the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division has been systematically changing the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) health surveillance data for active-duty soldiers without any transparency. Where are the congressional inquiries?

On Jan. 24, attorney Thomas Renz brought three named military doctors as whistleblowers to Sen. Ron Johnson, and many more who submitted private affidavits, attesting to the fact that DMED showed a massive increase in numerous diagnosis codes ranging from cancers, blood disorders, and heart ailments to strokes, nervous system disorders, and reproductive issues. They attested in sworn statements that the increase in the data reflected their clinical experience in the military over the past year and is, in their professional opinion, the result primarily of mass vaccine injury from the COVID shots.

In a bizarre twist, the military went on to change the data in the ensuing days without ever conducting a formal investigation into what went wrong or releasing a statement to the public. Rather, a week later, in a terse statement to PolitiFact, of all places, officials claimed the high numbers for 2021 were indeed correct, but that there was a glitch in the data for 2016-2020 used by the whistleblowers to establish a baseline, rendering those years way too low.

A four-page document the DOD submitted in Navy SEAL 1 vs. Austin to Florida federal Judge Douglas Merryday provided more information. In that document, officials make it clear that the 2021 numbers were accurate, that the glitch for 2016-2020 only presented itself from September 2021 through the end of January 2022, following a “server migration” last August, that the new data was corrected on Jan. 29, 2022, that DMED was restored the following day, and that by Feb. 2, they had recreated the proper data. That document is extremely terse, alleges no formal investigation, contains no letterhead, and is completely unsigned.

Yet numerous data points suggest that the government is lying about this narrative. Indeed, data was changed numerous times, 2021 data in some instances was slid backwards, and other data points demonstrate that the current data is corrupt. In general, according to the current data, it would mean we have had a terribly sick military for years. It would also mean there was zero increase in most categories for 2021, absurdly indicating that COVID itself never visited the military. Hundreds of pages can be written on the implausible nature of thousands of their updated diagnosis codes, but let’s consider just a few of them for this part of our investigation.

1) Pericarditis:

Both the whistleblowers and DOD agree there were 1,038 diagnosis codes for ambulatory pericarditis in 2021. The divergence is in 2016-2020, for which the whistleblowers pulled data (on Jan. 10, 2022) showing an average of 525 diagnoses per year, thereby revealing a massive increase for 2021, while the new “updated” DMED data, after the DOD claims to have fixed a glitch, shows an average of 1,047.

Here is the whistleblower data pulled before the military “fixed” the “glitch:

And here is the data after they updated the system:

It should be noted that the 2021 numbers are likely consistent, and the changes merely reflect adding the month of November. The final numbers with December stand at 1,038. However, the previous high baseline is what’s problematic.

Right off the bat, this is completely implausible because A) the baseline of pericarditis from 2016-2020 is simply too high, and B) it would mean that there was absolutely zero increase in pericarditis, either from COVID or from the vaccines. That has already been proven.

However, there is something officials are forgetting. They are alleging that the glitch was only for 2016-2020 simply because those are the arbitrary years chosen by the military doctors to establish a baseline average. However, one of the whistleblowers who signed an affidavit for Sen. Johnson pulled the data prior to 2016, and guess what? That data matches the baseline found by the whistleblowers and makes the new “updated” data out of sync with historical context.

Here is the presentation shown to me by one of the whistleblowers for ambulatory pericarditis diagnoses from 2001 to 2015.

As you can see, this data establishes a nice 15-year baseline average annual pericarditis diagnoses of 569, much closer to the 2016-2020 average originally found by the whistleblowers (525) than the newly updated DOD data (1,047).

The only reason why the whistleblowers used 2016 and onward with their original data dump is because that is when the medical system changed to ICD-10. Prior data worked with ICD-9, with different diagnosis code. However, this is only a problem when comparing broad categories and tallies of codes. But to isolate a specific code for a single malady, even though the diagnostic number might have changed, the data should still provide a solid apples-to-apples comparison.

2) Myocarditis

2021 ended with 339 instances of myocarditis in DMED, based on the current data. According to the whistleblowers’ data pulled on Jan. 21, the average annual number of cases from 2016 to 2020 was 111.8. According to the new data updated in Feb., it was 165.8, which would still show an obvious increase but not as dramatic. But once again, when you go back to the previous 10-year baseline of ICD-9 codes from 2006 to 2015, it nets an average of 99.4 cases per year, much closer to the original, untampered-with data for 2016-2020.

It’s also important to keep in mind that the whistleblowers are alleging that for the myocarditis category, the DOD had already changed the DMED data earlier in 2021 after Dr. Theresa Long mentioned she pulled the data at the previous hearing held by Sen. Johnson last November. Long disclosed in a sworn affidavit to Sen. Johnson that on Aug. 28, 2021, with video proof to back up her claim, she pulled data from DMED showing that just between Jan. and July 31, 2021, there were already 1,239 cases of myocarditis. An exponential increase in a population full of young males would be much more likely than a simple doubling of the rate, given the VAERS myocarditis data and the CDC’s own studies showing exponential increases over the background rate.

At some point, those numbers were slid back, but bizarrely they never caught the “glitch” at the time, and only after attorney Thomas Renz presented the data in late Jan. did they say the 2016-2020 baseline was broken. It sure seems that the glitch only shadows the points the whistleblowers make at the time they make it.

Then, there were at least four changes that were attested to by the whistleblowers in 2022. Here is the data they shared with me of the constantly changing numbers over the past few months.

They are alleging that A) there were multiple changes; B) there were changes before DHA alleges they knew about the “glitch”; C) at least at one point the 2021 numbers were slid backward; and D) they changed numbers multiple times during the same month. This contradicts four assertions in the court document (linked to above); namely, that they didn’t know about the glitch until Renz’s testimony, that the changes were all fixed at once in late January, that the 2021 numbers did not have a glitch, and that the numbers only update once a month.

3) Infertility

During the hearing with Sen. Ron Johnson, Thomas Renz presented data that was pulled earlier in January by the military doctors showing a 472% increase in female infertility diagnoses in 2021, with 11,748 reported codes (just for the first 10 months), up from a five-year average of 2,274 per year. When the DHA “fixed” the data, they massively increased the numbers for the previous five years, but they changed it at least three times! It doesn’t mean it wasn’t changed even more, but here is what the whistleblowers found when they pulled the data before the Johnson hearing vs. three separate occasions afterwards.

There are numerous problems with this. It means that they tampered with the data several times, and it means that, at one point, they not only increased the previous five years but also slid back data on 2021 that supposedly was not affected by the glitch. The previous differences could be explained because the data for the final month or two of 2021 was not yet available. But just as with myocarditis, we see that they did temporarily play around with 2021 numbers when they claim those numbers were all solid and unaffected by the glitch. It’s also clear that they did not “solve” the problem with a one-time update in late January, as they claim in the court document, but that they likely continuously played around with the data.

Nonetheless, let’s go with the latest data they posted, verified by a military health official on my behalf just this Tuesday. They are now claiming a five-year average baseline of outpatient female infertility diagnoses of 13,545 a year and conveniently showing that 2021 actually showed a bizarre drop. Again, the original data from the whistleblowers showed a five-year average of 2,274 per year. So they are light-years apart. Which one is correct?

Well, it so happens that there is a congressional report from Aug. 31, 2020, prepared by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division for members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on infertility among active-duty military service members. What are their numbers? Take a look on page 9 of the report, and you will see it attests to 20,356 female infertility ICD codes for the seven years from 2013 through 2019.

These years don’t perfectly overlap with the 2016-2020 baseline of the whistleblowers, but the numbers average out to 2,934 diagnoses per year, well within the standard deviation from the whistleblowers’ numbers for similar years (2,274) and far away from the current “fixed” data (13,545).

Now, remember that in the court document, the military claims the data was only glitched beginning in August 2021 because of a “server migration” at the time. The congressional report is from a year prior to their glitch data, so that data, according to their own narrative, should be correct and would corroborate the numbers from the whistleblowers.

4) 38% increase in strokes

Although DHA changed most of the data, there were a few data points that, even after the changes, still show alarming and unexplained increases in diagnoses. For example, even after they changed the data for strokes, the incident rate is still up 38% over the five-year average.

As you can see, just as the whistleblowers have seen with hundreds of data points, the government workers changed the data numerous times and before they allegedly knew about the glitch. The changes in 2021 appear to all be consistent with adding the data from the final month of the year (although not perfectly, based on the monthly data I was shown), but the numbers for previous years changed slightly before the Johnson hearing and dramatically thereafter.

Either way, a 38% increase in strokes is very concerning, and four of the whistleblowers who spoke to TheBlaze on condition of anonymity attested to dealing with an unusual number of young, healthy stroke victims in the military who suffered recent strokes, aneurisms, or other neurological damage. Why wouldn’t the military find any interest in investigating this?

5) Exponential increase in vaccine injury diagnoses codes

For all of the changes DHA made to DMED in recent months, they seem to have forgotten to change the most obvious codes: forms of vaccine injury. Or perhaps, they were spared by the “glitch.” The following three ICD codes for various types of vaccine injury still show anywhere from a six- to a 17-fold increase in 2021 over the previous five years.

These numbers harmonize very well with the VAERS data that show a 10-fold increase in reported deaths and hospitalizations from the shots. Except the DMED data are actually from military doctors who identified vaccines as a possible cause of melody.

While it’s true that the COVID shots added to the denominator of vaccines in the military this year, it’s not like they are the only show in town. Everyone is required to get the flu shot every year, there are other annual shots, deployment shots, and then the intake of all the new recruits who must get numerous shots. So, there is no way, if the COVID shots are just as safe as the others, we would see exponential increase to the tune of seventeen-fold increases.

Thus, if the current DMED data shows this much vaccine injury, it is hard to imagine the cardio, neurological, and hematological codes didn’t increase along with it, especially given the degree of these injuries already confirmed by Pfizer in a FOIAed document.

Conclusion

It’s very possible that two things can be true at the same time — that coincidently, there was a long-standing problem with the military health surveillance and there was mass vaccine injury. But what is clear is that the government’s current data appears to be fraudulent, its narrative behind the data problem is nearly impossible to believe, and officials’ behavior and statements since January are unacceptable. A clear overview of the progression of the data changes reflects more of an attempt to cover for the vaccine or/and long-term systemic data problems rather than a plausible glitch in the system.

Based on what we already know from VAERS, excess mortality rates, and insurance data around the world, there clearly is a degree of vaccine injury that is not being reported. The totality of the DMED data still shows these concerns in many categories. At the same time, the data is now completely sabotaged, and it’s unclear whether there were long-standing problems with the data from day one. The concern of vaccine injury and a damaged health surveillance system are vital to national security and are equally as problematic. Yet, our government wants us to believe that the first problem doesn’t exist and the second problem was instantly fixed. Clearly, there is more to the story.