I feel an enormous amount of disappointment when I allow myself to ponder how I completely distrust every institution now. I just can’t believe the fraud is that widespread. My Dad went to the Hospital for “Covid” pneumonia (mid 70’s), he refused Remdesivir and asked to only be treated for Pneumonia, he was out in a day. The doctor was so irritated they slapped a DNR bracelet on him (he had no idea what that meant). It just saddens me how malicious people have become. Every institution in our world has proven themselves not worthy of any trust at all.
The smoking gun the lack of an explanation for the changes- if it is data fraud, then any fabricated explanation was going to be taken apart quickly. So, the fraudsters made the changes and hoped no one would notice, and if someone did notice, stonewalling is still an option.
Well written. If this were a "data glich", it seems to me it should have applied to any data up until the Jan/22 revision. Thus, we ought to expect that 2021 numbers would soar at the same rates, once the "glich" was resolved. But alas, not the case, I presume. I smell a rat. Keep your eyes open and your powder dry, team.
Brilliant assessment and trust you will make them listen and have them act to stop this proposterous manipulation of data and the associated fraudulent activities
Based on what the Military did to the enlisted with the anthrax vaccine, I would fully expect them to revise the data as a matter of course, to hide the damage they have done mandating the vaccine. Our current crop of idiots running the military are capable of anything but winning wars and taking responsibility.
Mar 22, 2022·edited Mar 22, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Poking around in Wayback there are some old reports that download archived copies for me & might be helpful for you just in terms of totals that have not been adjusted.
I picked one report that seemed targeted enough to be potentially helpful from the description but there's lots of options so maybe there's an easier way to see how the numbers changed.. always angle for the work around that leaves time for playing hookie! *smirk*
Feb 2017 Wayback capture - April 2016 - Volume 23 / 4
Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Hospitalizations among members of the active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Ambulatory visits among members of the active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, reserve component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, recruit trainees, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, non-service member beneficiaries of the Military Health System, 2015
DoD will take lessons from the FBI. First, DoD will not answer questions because "there is an active investigation." Then, the DoD will not answer questions because of "national security concerns." They will cover up until after the mid terms.
But even if there is a good explanation for this glitch, until it was discovered to be a glitch, why did no agency stop the vaccines until the data was explained( I mean , until 1/2022 that was true data but military , CDC etc raised no eyebrows, asked no questions, put out no warnings, voiced no concerns????)
One might consider another source of "contamination": When a "production" database (i.e. that is which isn't a "test" or an old copy (typically valid up to a certain time/date)) is updated, this should typically be handled carefully. Procedural controls should be identified to verify any batch update type process with control values (produced by SQL queries and scripts) that ensure that the integrity of the original data isn't compromised by the process, which is double or triple checked. Only after all verification tests and reports have been completed should the database be allowed to be moved back into "production". The integrity of this process and the data can be compromised by many factors: Online demand for services that use the database can't wait until all checks have been performed - big data updates take time; some older databases and technologies require skills that might not be readily available; Management doesn't always demand or define data quality standards. Either way there should be "before" and "after" database instances available for comparative purposes. If not, someone is not doing their job. I don't rule out ignorance/incompetence either.
A few years ago (2017? 2018?), I read a great book that showed, in effect, that the less money you made at a job, the MORE important your work was (schoolteachers, cooks, etc). And vice versa (useless BSers get paid a lot). The author said, however, "doctors might be the one exemption" to that rule. And yes, while there are good doctors (and good lawyers and politicians, etc) out there, it's now abundantly obvious that doctors-as-a-whole are definitely in the class of overpaid, useless BSers.
I feel an enormous amount of disappointment when I allow myself to ponder how I completely distrust every institution now. I just can’t believe the fraud is that widespread. My Dad went to the Hospital for “Covid” pneumonia (mid 70’s), he refused Remdesivir and asked to only be treated for Pneumonia, he was out in a day. The doctor was so irritated they slapped a DNR bracelet on him (he had no idea what that meant). It just saddens me how malicious people have become. Every institution in our world has proven themselves not worthy of any trust at all.
Amazing dedication and analysis. So glad you’re working for the legal team. Stay safe!
The smoking gun the lack of an explanation for the changes- if it is data fraud, then any fabricated explanation was going to be taken apart quickly. So, the fraudsters made the changes and hoped no one would notice, and if someone did notice, stonewalling is still an option.
Well written. If this were a "data glich", it seems to me it should have applied to any data up until the Jan/22 revision. Thus, we ought to expect that 2021 numbers would soar at the same rates, once the "glich" was resolved. But alas, not the case, I presume. I smell a rat. Keep your eyes open and your powder dry, team.
Brilliant assessment and trust you will make them listen and have them act to stop this proposterous manipulation of data and the associated fraudulent activities
You are truly amazing. Thank you, and thank you again for helping TR of aflds.
Based on what the Military did to the enlisted with the anthrax vaccine, I would fully expect them to revise the data as a matter of course, to hide the damage they have done mandating the vaccine. Our current crop of idiots running the military are capable of anything but winning wars and taking responsibility.
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/the-real-story-on-hot-covid-19-lots?s=r
The Real Story on “Hot” COVID-19 Lots is Much Worse than We Ever Imagined
That stunt was pulled with the military’s experimental anthrax vaccine
Poking around in Wayback there are some old reports that download archived copies for me & might be helpful for you just in terms of totals that have not been adjusted.
I picked one report that seemed targeted enough to be potentially helpful from the description but there's lots of options so maybe there's an easier way to see how the numbers changed.. always angle for the work around that leaves time for playing hookie! *smirk*
Feb 2017 Wayback capture - April 2016 - Volume 23 / 4
Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Hospitalizations among members of the active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Ambulatory visits among members of the active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, reserve component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, recruit trainees, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2015
Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, non-service member beneficiaries of the Military Health System, 2015
https://web.archive.org/web/20170224024713/http://www.health.mil/~/link.aspx?_id=534E26BD8E5D4ECC8CAA8ABA47679691&_z=z
another helpful looking source
https://web.archive.org/web/20161207120545/https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Health-Readiness/Armed-Forces-Health-Surveillance-Branch/Reports-and-Publications/~/link.aspx?_id=534E26BD8E5D4ECC8CAA8ABA47679691&_z=z
And yet you also found time to write about education. Take care of yourself my friend, and get enough sleep. You are needed.
DoD will take lessons from the FBI. First, DoD will not answer questions because "there is an active investigation." Then, the DoD will not answer questions because of "national security concerns." They will cover up until after the mid terms.
But even if there is a good explanation for this glitch, until it was discovered to be a glitch, why did no agency stop the vaccines until the data was explained( I mean , until 1/2022 that was true data but military , CDC etc raised no eyebrows, asked no questions, put out no warnings, voiced no concerns????)
One might consider another source of "contamination": When a "production" database (i.e. that is which isn't a "test" or an old copy (typically valid up to a certain time/date)) is updated, this should typically be handled carefully. Procedural controls should be identified to verify any batch update type process with control values (produced by SQL queries and scripts) that ensure that the integrity of the original data isn't compromised by the process, which is double or triple checked. Only after all verification tests and reports have been completed should the database be allowed to be moved back into "production". The integrity of this process and the data can be compromised by many factors: Online demand for services that use the database can't wait until all checks have been performed - big data updates take time; some older databases and technologies require skills that might not be readily available; Management doesn't always demand or define data quality standards. Either way there should be "before" and "after" database instances available for comparative purposes. If not, someone is not doing their job. I don't rule out ignorance/incompetence either.
Matt, another person with a statistical bent that is looking to sue the government is Edward Dowd. Like you, he has a Wall Street background. You may well be aware of him but if not here is a very interesting interview with Bobby Kennedy: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/chd-tv-rfk-jr-defender-blackrock-edward-dowd-fda-cover-up/
Perhaps you two can brainstorm a bit together.
A few years ago (2017? 2018?), I read a great book that showed, in effect, that the less money you made at a job, the MORE important your work was (schoolteachers, cooks, etc). And vice versa (useless BSers get paid a lot). The author said, however, "doctors might be the one exemption" to that rule. And yes, while there are good doctors (and good lawyers and politicians, etc) out there, it's now abundantly obvious that doctors-as-a-whole are definitely in the class of overpaid, useless BSers.
This can only be sorted out in courts, with depositions, witnesses, and all the hoopla.
"Glitch."
It seems I remember a "glitch" from one of the Alien movies. It didn't end well.