I really appreciate that you don’t paywall Mr. Crawford. I’m disabled and can’t afford anything like this anymore. I had already bought your book Why We Drive however, if that counts for anything. Great book. John Waters had talked about it in an interview with Dave Cullen.
thank you!! I did especially like your discussion of math whiz kids.
Did you write the piece about the necessity/virtue of working with your hands? John Waters also mentioned “Mathew Crawford” in that context as well. I think the Double T Matthew should change HIS name. Maybe…”Matt Crawdad” and let you dominate the Mathew B. Crawford space for statistical analysis.
But there is another universe in which I worked more with my hands, and my wife and I have accumulated some tools over the years that we plan to use a lot when we buy our farm in a few months.
Have you ever met or communicated with Matthew? I was once introduced to a guy with the same name as mine by a mutual friend who liked to instigate weird things. This other David was a VP for an insurance company and I was/am a guitar player. We didn't have much to talk about.
Seconded! Being semi-retired and on disability myself I can't but agree with your praise of mr Crawford and his colleagues, and as a teacher I must say I also approve on a professional basis (or should that be bias?) - spreading information and knowlege and letting people think for themselves without coercing them to think "the one true right way" is what my former profession used to be about, indeed should be about.
I agree. I am a teacher too, and it has been disheartening at times to see the level of indoctrination imbedded in the curriculum. I try to avoid doing so with my college group. Having said that, I'm teaching a course that has a large number of expectations related to the Canadian government. I had to qualify at the outset, that I'd be sharing how it is supposed to work, not necessarily how it is currently working (or not)!
I find the very notion offensive, despite that word having been worn out to the point of self-parody, that it even has to be said that one presents the facts as they are known (and when applicable as they are known according to different perspectives - playing Devil's advocate as needed).
I can accept that it may be necessary when addressing a class of pupils or students (indeed, the difficulties with trying to be impartial may even be used as a basis for discussion and debate), but not in internal discourse among the faculty or with other teachers. There impartial, objective and factual representation should be the default position in all subjects.
More likely the data will be stored with a different system than the blockchain, like Interplanetry File System (IPFS), but a cryptocurrency may be involved in the payment for storage, access, and querying of the data. Blockchains do not make good storage systems for large amounts of data. They are "intentionally dumb databases" whose only purpose is to attach maximal security per stored data unit. So, what would be stored on a blockchain would be digital pointers to data locations, or tags associated with the data.
Any government or organization that does not employ such a system will be at such a disadvantage to the society that does that it will be virtual suicide on a competitive level.
This is assuming there was no intentional tampering with the delivery of the q-vaccines to the US military and what the soldiers, staff, and military professionals are the same products as the civilian population received.
If someone corrupted and covertly occupied a nation, undermining its military and self-defense capabilities through mass pharmaceutical interventions is a perfect asymmetric approach. And if someone then sold that military's bureaucratic know-nothings the technological tools to help "compensate" for those losses of critical staff and practical knowledge as the people become lamed or dead, they have now fully captured the entire oodaloop of that nation, depriving that nation of any means to respond other than guerilla insurrection. And if, in anticipation of that, you enhanced all of the surveillance and anti-social/counterintelligence capabilities of the nation's paramilitary enforcers and the witting and unwitting accomplices among the population (See something, say something types) prior to dawning awareness of the occupation, then there is even less of a chance for any form of national or regional or local self-defense to the occupation.
Military servicepeople sign lots of paperwork to become guinea pigs for national security. 'National security' is a catch-all for what a nation wants to hide, most often out of embarrassment for rampant corruption or insolent incompetency or genuine pathological malice. So, the US military is in a prime position for people to practice hyperwar upon.
I just offered some money. I don't even know how I found your substack page, but it has become central to my reading of the proverbial tea leaves. I really appreciate your intelligence and your humor.
When I first heard about these numbers I hesitated to get emotional about it, waiting for someone I trust to do the deeper dive I am not trained to do. Having you, Mr Kirsch and Dr Malone on it makes me feel like I will get the real numbers and not some weaponized fiction. Thank you
Subscribed, I really appreciate the quality of your work. The Campfire wiki is incredible, and I'm adding it to my children's homeschool curriculum. Thanks Mathew!
Given the importance and implications of this data (the entire multi-billion dollar q-vaccine program, the launch of an entirely new era of mRNA technology), we have to consider that not only the prior data itself could be fabricated, but also any tangential evidence from other sources purporting to support the readjusted numbers. These giant industries most certainly have the technological sophistication to retroactively alter history. We need to somehow verify that the readjusted data from the prior 5 years matches the on the ground reality at that time, and I fear any digital documentation is vulnerable to retroactive tampering.
The info presented here pretty much hits the nail on the head. I concur. Excellent character characterzation, on the others looking into this, in my opinion also. Can't wait for your upcoming analysis. Goody, goody, goody hand rub. God Speed and good luck. Looking forward to seeing you back soon.
thank you so much, Mathew... fyi, this St. Valentine's Day, watch the video and take action at your county courthouse, print off a document and give it to your County Prosecutor and/or mail it to them asap registered mail, this will be happening all across the USA, they have to act or be held accountable for dereliction of their duty, https://go.constitutionallawgroup.us/vday
I've noticed very different statements about WHO is covered by this Database. Given the reported numbers, it would seem to me that it MUST contain Spouses and Dependents, not just current active duty military (I believe from some reading that it includes the same for reservists as well)
That’s a good point and can explain some of it . But we might still expect it overall similar to baseline then . Certainly not any mote then a 5% variance
The number of dependents is generally going to be much larger and have higher levels of poor health than active duty. Reservists as well - there are something like 4.5m reservists but the number I've seen is around 1.5m active duty.
It's going to shift population numbers massively. Jessica Rose tried to argue miscarriage rates as if it were only active duty pregnancies for instance. I don't think she made the argument in bad faith, but if spouses are in the data it is a massive difference in denominator.
Come on folks! A minimum subscription is $5/month. I consider it an incredible bargain for access to someone with the intelligence and access that Mathew has. This and one other site are the premier substacks for me.
Matthew - I appreciate that you are going to dig deeper into the DoD data and I will look forward to your findings. As to taking a break with publishing - I'm good with this because I still have to go back and read many of your previous - very detailed and very intriguing posts! I'll be set for at least a week! :-) Cheers and thank you!
Has anyone looked at data from earlier than 2016- say 2010 thru 2015? If so, was there a sudden drop-off from 2015 to 2016 when Renz’s original data were considered? That might indicate flawed 2016-2020 data. If there was little difference from 2015 to Renz’s 2016 data, then Renz’s data are likely right.
The whistle blowers have data going back to 2006 for at least Acute Myocarditis (one of their bar charts show it from 2006-21). However, that chart showed no sudden increase after 2015. Unfortunately, the DoD's "corrected" data doesn't look impossible (numbers just bumped up a little compared to the other "corrections"). I really hope there's also more data before 2006 for the other diagnoses.
I recently started studying/learning about quasispecies, and yes, I think what he's talking about is very important. I plan on writing about it in the Omicron hypothesis, but have an important mission to focus on for the moment.
I find them both credible, but dont have the scientific expertise to verify or dispute the conclusions. So was wondering if mr. Crawford had a take on it.
Their views on the virus is one of the few ways that i can steelman my governments handling of the virus.
They were told about the leak/dangers in some diluted version and reacted the way they did. But have finally realised that you can't treat a democratic society like a poultry farm.
Many actors where quick to come up with profitable solutions and lobby for them, and the overreacting nature of politicians meant we got lock stock n barrel.
Now we're in the cover your tracks part of it all, so nothing makes sense and everything is diversions by different actors trying to hide different parts of the mess, which makes it all utterly nonsensical.
The few measures that made sense was completely unprofitable - wash your hands, cover face when sneezing/coughing, limit time spent in crowded indoor places.
But the nature of our society is to create profitable "solutions" (which doesn't solve problems but creates needs) which is why we have cars of different shapes and colours.
Furthering agendas is also in the profitable "solutions" category.
I really appreciate that you don’t paywall Mr. Crawford. I’m disabled and can’t afford anything like this anymore. I had already bought your book Why We Drive however, if that counts for anything. Great book. John Waters had talked about it in an interview with Dave Cullen.
That's not my book. It was written by Matthew B. Crawford. I am Mathew B. Crawford. You are not the first to think we're one in the same.
I'm glad you like all our writing. You will be magically gifted a free six months subscription because I do that once in a while.
thank you!! I did especially like your discussion of math whiz kids.
Did you write the piece about the necessity/virtue of working with your hands? John Waters also mentioned “Mathew Crawford” in that context as well. I think the Double T Matthew should change HIS name. Maybe…”Matt Crawdad” and let you dominate the Mathew B. Crawford space for statistical analysis.
Matthew wrote that piece, too.
But there is another universe in which I worked more with my hands, and my wife and I have accumulated some tools over the years that we plan to use a lot when we buy our farm in a few months.
Have you ever met or communicated with Matthew? I was once introduced to a guy with the same name as mine by a mutual friend who liked to instigate weird things. This other David was a VP for an insurance company and I was/am a guitar player. We didn't have much to talk about.
I have not. He seems like a good fellow, so it might be enjoyable, but it's not a priority just now.
This is ridiculous. No one needs two Mat(t)hew B. Crawfords.
We need 100 of them
Whenever I recommend your posts to people, I always say "Mathew with one T Crawford."
Seconded! Being semi-retired and on disability myself I can't but agree with your praise of mr Crawford and his colleagues, and as a teacher I must say I also approve on a professional basis (or should that be bias?) - spreading information and knowlege and letting people think for themselves without coercing them to think "the one true right way" is what my former profession used to be about, indeed should be about.
I agree. I am a teacher too, and it has been disheartening at times to see the level of indoctrination imbedded in the curriculum. I try to avoid doing so with my college group. Having said that, I'm teaching a course that has a large number of expectations related to the Canadian government. I had to qualify at the outset, that I'd be sharing how it is supposed to work, not necessarily how it is currently working (or not)!
I find the very notion offensive, despite that word having been worn out to the point of self-parody, that it even has to be said that one presents the facts as they are known (and when applicable as they are known according to different perspectives - playing Devil's advocate as needed).
I can accept that it may be necessary when addressing a class of pupils or students (indeed, the difficulties with trying to be impartial may even be used as a basis for discussion and debate), but not in internal discourse among the faculty or with other teachers. There impartial, objective and factual representation should be the default position in all subjects.
Is there a possibility it is a plant to give someone their ah ha moment? Feed them false data and make them look stupid?
Or someone fiddling the books to make their point?
If not, the figures are horrendous but I don't see similar levels in the UK data. Not yet anyway.
Anyway, like you say, the data needs to be further analysed until a firm conclusion can be made.
All public health data needs to be open sourced. There is no reason in this day and age not to do so except to jerk the public around.
Exactly, maybe on a blockchain to ensure transparency whilst ensuring anonymity
More likely the data will be stored with a different system than the blockchain, like Interplanetry File System (IPFS), but a cryptocurrency may be involved in the payment for storage, access, and querying of the data. Blockchains do not make good storage systems for large amounts of data. They are "intentionally dumb databases" whose only purpose is to attach maximal security per stored data unit. So, what would be stored on a blockchain would be digital pointers to data locations, or tags associated with the data.
Any government or organization that does not employ such a system will be at such a disadvantage to the society that does that it will be virtual suicide on a competitive level.
This is assuming there was no intentional tampering with the delivery of the q-vaccines to the US military and what the soldiers, staff, and military professionals are the same products as the civilian population received.
If someone corrupted and covertly occupied a nation, undermining its military and self-defense capabilities through mass pharmaceutical interventions is a perfect asymmetric approach. And if someone then sold that military's bureaucratic know-nothings the technological tools to help "compensate" for those losses of critical staff and practical knowledge as the people become lamed or dead, they have now fully captured the entire oodaloop of that nation, depriving that nation of any means to respond other than guerilla insurrection. And if, in anticipation of that, you enhanced all of the surveillance and anti-social/counterintelligence capabilities of the nation's paramilitary enforcers and the witting and unwitting accomplices among the population (See something, say something types) prior to dawning awareness of the occupation, then there is even less of a chance for any form of national or regional or local self-defense to the occupation.
Military servicepeople sign lots of paperwork to become guinea pigs for national security. 'National security' is a catch-all for what a nation wants to hide, most often out of embarrassment for rampant corruption or insolent incompetency or genuine pathological malice. So, the US military is in a prime position for people to practice hyperwar upon.
I just offered some money. I don't even know how I found your substack page, but it has become central to my reading of the proverbial tea leaves. I really appreciate your intelligence and your humor.
When I first heard about these numbers I hesitated to get emotional about it, waiting for someone I trust to do the deeper dive I am not trained to do. Having you, Mr Kirsch and Dr Malone on it makes me feel like I will get the real numbers and not some weaponized fiction. Thank you
Subscribed, I really appreciate the quality of your work. The Campfire wiki is incredible, and I'm adding it to my children's homeschool curriculum. Thanks Mathew!
There isn't all that much there for curriculum, yet, but when it gets going, there may be a lot.
Given the importance and implications of this data (the entire multi-billion dollar q-vaccine program, the launch of an entirely new era of mRNA technology), we have to consider that not only the prior data itself could be fabricated, but also any tangential evidence from other sources purporting to support the readjusted numbers. These giant industries most certainly have the technological sophistication to retroactively alter history. We need to somehow verify that the readjusted data from the prior 5 years matches the on the ground reality at that time, and I fear any digital documentation is vulnerable to retroactive tampering.
The info presented here pretty much hits the nail on the head. I concur. Excellent character characterzation, on the others looking into this, in my opinion also. Can't wait for your upcoming analysis. Goody, goody, goody hand rub. God Speed and good luck. Looking forward to seeing you back soon.
Great article!
thank you so much, Mathew... fyi, this St. Valentine's Day, watch the video and take action at your county courthouse, print off a document and give it to your County Prosecutor and/or mail it to them asap registered mail, this will be happening all across the USA, they have to act or be held accountable for dereliction of their duty, https://go.constitutionallawgroup.us/vday
Mathew , I think you didn’t include the argument that jessica rose made looking at the data . Which is the comparison of the revised DOD years to
Population baselines rates . Asking , if that is the case why are the military more sick then the non military population ?
I've noticed very different statements about WHO is covered by this Database. Given the reported numbers, it would seem to me that it MUST contain Spouses and Dependents, not just current active duty military (I believe from some reading that it includes the same for reservists as well)
That’s a good point and can explain some of it . But we might still expect it overall similar to baseline then . Certainly not any mote then a 5% variance
The number of dependents is generally going to be much larger and have higher levels of poor health than active duty. Reservists as well - there are something like 4.5m reservists but the number I've seen is around 1.5m active duty.
It's going to shift population numbers massively. Jessica Rose tried to argue miscarriage rates as if it were only active duty pregnancies for instance. I don't think she made the argument in bad faith, but if spouses are in the data it is a massive difference in denominator.
Thank you Mathew. As always good sober reading. I’m looking forward to your analysis and will share your account as always.
"Retired marine turned COVID origins researcher Charles Rixey shares some observations about the data."
In his Feb 9th Twitter thread spreadsheet, Rixey mentions he included several "tan-orange" lines from the "Terminal CWO" video. That Jan 27th video is posted here: https://trmlx.com/dod-establishes-pattern-of-consistent-medical-fraud/ The underlying data can be downloaded from the Feb 1st post here: https://trmlx.com/dod-dmed-data-proves-theyve-known-theyre-poisoning-the-military/
Come on folks! A minimum subscription is $5/month. I consider it an incredible bargain for access to someone with the intelligence and access that Mathew has. This and one other site are the premier substacks for me.
Much appreciated!
Matthew - I appreciate that you are going to dig deeper into the DoD data and I will look forward to your findings. As to taking a break with publishing - I'm good with this because I still have to go back and read many of your previous - very detailed and very intriguing posts! I'll be set for at least a week! :-) Cheers and thank you!
Has anyone looked at data from earlier than 2016- say 2010 thru 2015? If so, was there a sudden drop-off from 2015 to 2016 when Renz’s original data were considered? That might indicate flawed 2016-2020 data. If there was little difference from 2015 to Renz’s 2016 data, then Renz’s data are likely right.
Nice work, as always.
The whistle blowers have data going back to 2006 for at least Acute Myocarditis (one of their bar charts show it from 2006-21). However, that chart showed no sudden increase after 2015. Unfortunately, the DoD's "corrected" data doesn't look impossible (numbers just bumped up a little compared to the other "corrections"). I really hope there's also more data before 2006 for the other diagnoses.
You can find that chart in one of the three pdf downloads at Danny's "Terminal CWO" website (along with his 14-minute commentary) at https://trmlx.com/dod-dmed-data-proves-theyve-known-theyre-poisoning-the-military/
Insightful analysis on the subjec/data by Jessica Rose se as well, specifically relating to miscaragies
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/spontaneous-abortion-urf-in-department
Better to cut the token off the link first.
Thank you.
This question isn't exactly related. Have you read harvardtothebighouse's take on the virus?
Thanks for your work.
I recently started studying/learning about quasispecies, and yes, I think what he's talking about is very important. I plan on writing about it in the Omicron hypothesis, but have an important mission to focus on for the moment.
Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to it.
A man on a mission, sounds thrilling, good luck, hope it will be succeed.
igor chudov here on substack has a similarly grim outlook.
Yes I'm aware, but thanks.
I find them both credible, but dont have the scientific expertise to verify or dispute the conclusions. So was wondering if mr. Crawford had a take on it.
Their views on the virus is one of the few ways that i can steelman my governments handling of the virus.
They were told about the leak/dangers in some diluted version and reacted the way they did. But have finally realised that you can't treat a democratic society like a poultry farm.
Many actors where quick to come up with profitable solutions and lobby for them, and the overreacting nature of politicians meant we got lock stock n barrel.
Now we're in the cover your tracks part of it all, so nothing makes sense and everything is diversions by different actors trying to hide different parts of the mess, which makes it all utterly nonsensical.
The conclusion then for us common folks "don't get the sickness, dont get the cure".
The few measures that made sense was completely unprofitable - wash your hands, cover face when sneezing/coughing, limit time spent in crowded indoor places.
But the nature of our society is to create profitable "solutions" (which doesn't solve problems but creates needs) which is why we have cars of different shapes and colours.
Furthering agendas is also in the profitable "solutions" category.