24 Comments
Jun 22, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

This is precisely what was done with CDC’s mortality data, as pointed out in the post linked below. To whit, ~2.9M people died in 2020, representing no surge and no excess when compared to previous years. This data was posted weekly through the year. And yet, after the year was complete, approximately 500K deaths were added, initially as part of the final week’s tally, but later distributed throughout the year.

https://www.fittrimimmortal.com/blog/covid-statistical-hijinx

I have not seen or heard this publicized elsewhere.

Expand full comment
author

Has anyone done an analysis of the typical end-of-year revisions? It is pretty common for official data to be revised. So the issue is what the typical yearly revision is.

Crawford did this analysis with the database, showing that these revisions were 135 times the typical revision.

Expand full comment

I was unable to find any reliable reporting on "typical" yearend adjustments, but adding 500K (>17%) strikes me as prima facie evidence of either incompetence or malfeasance. That big of a "mistake" happening "honestly," is significantly risible. If we missed the mark by that much, we should fire everybody involved. Adjustments are made throughout the year, where weekly or daily totals are revised up or down, usually due to information not filed in the proper time frame, but as far as I've been able to see, it never represents any significant amount, and has a near equal chance of being a deduction (something accidentally reported to the prior week) as an addition.

My concern regarding the alterations to the 2020 data is that I see no way that it could be legitimate to suddenly, in early January, revise every single week by nearly the same 17%, in what I see as an obvious attempt to fraudulently hide the revision for reasons stated in the post referenced above, i.e., it looked like we must have cured cancer and heart disease.

Perhaps someone like yourself, or Jessica Rose has access to better sources?

Expand full comment
deletedJun 22, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Did you conclude anything from that about typical revisions?

Expand full comment
deletedJun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Hahaha. Well! Maybe at some point but man I have so many things on my plate.

Expand full comment

Here is an article on this matter written in February.

Counting Covid Deaths:

https://healthfreedomdefense.org/counting-covid-deaths/

From article:

“What exactly counts as a Covid-19 death?”

To fully understand what a Covid death is- and what it isn’t- it is essential to understand the radical, and to this day unexplained, changes made in how deaths would be recorded, starting in the Spring of 2020. For the last two decades, standardized cataloging of mortality statistics has been in place, as outlined in the CDC’s Medical Examiners’ & Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the CDC’s Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death.

The arrival of Covid-19 would usher in a new manner of recording mortality.

On March 24th, 2020, the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), under the direction of the CDC, issued ‘COVID-19 Alert No. 2’ to all physicians, medical examiners, and coroners as a guideline as to ‘how cause of death’ would now be reported on death certificates, exclusively for COVID-19.

The ramifications of this can not be overstated as the NVSS, a division of the CDC sets the rules for how state health departments are obliged to assess mortality data.

This seemingly innocent single-page release became a watershed moment in how the United States would define Covid-19 deaths and began a process by which all manner of deaths would be coded as U07.1 COVID-19.

In practice, this led to a grossly exaggerated number of deaths being mislabelled “Covid-19 deaths.”

For example, as of Feb. 3rd, 2021, a glimpse at Table 3 of the CDC’s “Conditions Contributing to Deaths Involving COVID-19” shows 14,369 deaths listed as injury deaths which were recorded in the Covid-19 death count. While not the largest example of Covid-19 death misattribution, this clearly illustrates the deceit and manipulation which is found throughout the CDC Covid-19 mortality database.

Further examples of questionable accounting found in the CDC’s Provisional Mortality Statistics Covid-19 database can be found here– 1,265 deaths in 2020-2021 occurring from falls from various structures coded as U07.1 (COVID-19); and here– 17 drowning deaths all coded U07.1 (COVID-19); and here– 99 suicides all coded U07.1 (COVID-19).

Such examples are not unique. An exhaustive examination of the CDC’s Provisional Mortality Statistics database reveals that finding a case where an individual died solely from Covid is the exception.

Expand full comment
author

This seems like a different but related topic, how deaths are classified as COVID-caused. I believe the first comment was about adding deaths to the past that didn’t exist.

Expand full comment

More importantly, it's about fraud, deceit and medical malpractice. Per Edmund Burke: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing. The majority of our doctors and politicians did evil things during this pan or plan demic. How many of them recognized the evil in what they were doing, and how many convinced themselves that it was OK, that it was better to play along and avoid the consequences of defying [illegitimate] authority?

Expand full comment

It is undeniable that covid deaths were massively over reported. One would expect that doctors and hospitals would object to this, but since they were awarded considerable reimbursement for a) covid diagnosis, b) covid death classifications, c) intubation and later, d) Remdesivir, it becomes clear that, like Dr. Mengele and his followers, both positive (financial) and negative (disbarment for prescribing HCQ or Ivermectin) reinforcement helped promote this fraud. Add in the effects of social pressure, as demonstrated by the Asch Conformity experiment and the Milgram Shock Experiment, and it all begins to make sense, however twisted, in much the same way as the Nazi genocide made sense. People are sheep.

Expand full comment
Jun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

Thanks for sharing this Chris and seeing the truth. I’m a civilian and my husband is active duty at a Tier One command. We were all mandated to get the jab and finally submitted to the J&J injection and did detox protocols. Luckily neither of suffered anything but flu like symptoms but I was/am horrified by the number of serious issues afflicting the guys around me who are literally some of the fittest men on the planet. Having to wear heart monitors, random infections, exasperated TBI symptoms, it’s insane and heartbreaking what our government has done to force experimental medical treatments on our VOLUNTARY military. The only thing worse is them now pushing the poison on babies. Wolinsky is pure evil.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you for your service and thank you for sharing.

Expand full comment
Jun 22, 2022·edited Jun 22, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

I had 'it' by Halloween, 2019, and didn't recover until January 2020. At the time I thought it was like a pnuemonia with a whooping cough similarity, but dryer. I was working for a person who has contact with Chinese nationals, at an Acupuncture College in the Pacific Northwest. They were visibly ill with a respiratory thing but they had a house move-out date so I was obligated to be in close contact to help them move for a week. I was angry at the time, glad later, that I had caught such a rough illness.

bonus healing notes -I was down for a month, drank nothing but Burdock root tea (lucky to have a 2# bag of it), a pint a day, for 40 days. No appetite, lost 10% bodyweight. 2 other humans I was near DID NOT even GET IT. And after all that, I recovered at home fine, and managed to avoid the jabs, but the others I live with did get them, and had reactions. And after that, I have been FINE no illness, gained wt back too. Best

Expand full comment
Jun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

There is a website that tracks the weekly flu case numbers with a US location graphic going back over a decade. The fall of 2019 showed the highest rate since the tracking began. Many were claiming that Covid was already here in the fall of 2019 because many had experienced heavy flu or pneumonia at the time. I’ll have to go back through my records to see if I can find the site.

Expand full comment
Jun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

Scroll down to the bottom till you see the US map. Move the slider to update for each week of that season. 2019-2020 season from December to February is the worst on record. October 2019 looked pretty mild though. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm

Expand full comment
Jun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

thanks it was essentially November, and I am in Portland OR we have a good pop of Chinese folks too

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for sharing!

Expand full comment

At first I have thought, you have revealed to much, but now I see it was actually very good, because it can keep us composed and focused on what really happened instead of deception we were lead to believe.

Expand full comment
Jun 23, 2022·edited Jun 23, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD

Most people cannot imagine the world without the three letter agencies. But You are right, they are obviously obsolete.

Expand full comment

This is amazingly important. I was doubting whether they use artificial intelligence on us or whether artificial intelligence is using them. This clearly shows this is a man made situation, because that’s how people act when caught while committing a crime, artificial intelligence would not do such as stupid mistake.

Expand full comment

The question mark is the most important part of the title of this interview, because way too much qualifying alternative data that conflicts with the general conclusion is presented. He is so incredibly precise that it leaves one wondering if he indeed thinks what he implied as his synopsis initially or not. it is incredibly frustrating to try to translate. i understand wanting to be complete with explaining your findings, but he keeps acknowledging errors in the whistleblower testimony, but then proves that errors were insignificant, or at least could be to the overall case, but then he says also the DoD made errors, and that he DOES believe that it WAS actually a glitch, but to explain, i will get to that later….that kind of thing over and over. I really do appreciate anyone helping to reveal true information during this pandemic, and i think this *data* is revealing, but i think this does not help our efforts at truth coming out, and i do also recognize that he is a researcher and not a writer or a speaker, which is why i would recommend he either ask a writer or a speaker to represent his work, or he consider trimming out some of the qualifying aspects that go against his ultimate synopsis, but also are not truly essential to include. It is about as relatable for me as Aristotle’s Metaphysics, with all its qualifying details. I really mean no offense to Crawford, and i appreciate his work on this data, but this form of interview does not help anyone with anything, thats my two cents.

Expand full comment
author
Jul 10, 2022·edited Jul 10, 2022Author

I understand what you are saying, but this is why I produced my own summary. I think you are getting distracted from some of his details that don’t change the conclusion at all.

Renz’s team is honestly terrible with statistics. They should be ignored.

Whether a glitch happened during a server migration is a curiosity that has no bearing on the point.

The point is that the database has been provably changed to erase the increase and the proof is that the old data is published in magazines and this proves the DOD is lying about the new data being correct and the old data being artificially low due to the glitch.

Expand full comment
deletedJun 22, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

At a minimum this must have been used to asses the effects of the rollout and justify the mandate!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

I see, but the old data is correct. It appears to be changed so as to bury the trend in the new data.

Expand full comment
deletedJun 22, 2022Liked by Chris Masterjohn, PhD
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Yeah, fact-checkers are corporate PR firms stacked advised by intelligence agency hacks.

Expand full comment