Report 99: How the CDC Hides COVID Vaccine Deaths and Injuries

report-99:-how-the-cdc-hides-covid-vaccine-deaths-and-injuries

Albert Benavides has diligently documented techniques used by public health agencies to hide data in their databases. He has exposed the techniques of throttling, time displacement, and removal of all or parts of reports. Mr. Benavides posts frequently on Substack.

This report will examine two cases drawn from Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), maintained by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), that exemplify two phenomena, possibly intentional tactics, that in effect hide important information from the public.

 

1) Time Displacement:

This query of the VAERS Wonder database and results for COVID19 and COVID19-2 for the United States and Territories for the year 2001 demonstrates time displacement.

 

According to U.S. government data, 93 events were reported for COVID19 vaccine administered in the year 2001. However, a COVID19 vaccine did not exist in 2001.

What types of events were reported for COVID19 vaccines allegedly injected in 2001?

The query criteria included: Year 2001, United States and Territories, Event Category, and Vaccine.

And the result:

 

This query returned 112 adverse events from COVID19 vaccines in 2001 including: one congenital anomaly/birth defect, two deaths, two cases of permanent disability, and three life-threatening events.

What is going on? To find out, let us look at a case selected randomly from the list of VAERS IDs in this collection of events reported after alleged injections of COVID19 vaccines in 2001.

VAERS #1512205 was a 39-year old-male who suffered a cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) following injection with Janssen’s (Johnson and Johnson) COVID19 drug that was reportedly injected 7,405 days before symptoms developed (see screenshots below). Interesting. Did someone take the time to calculate this number of days, or is it done by algorithm? Are any of the reported dates accurate? It is not possible to know based on the data given.

What is cerebral venous thrombosis? According to the American Heart Association in their updated AHD Scientific Statement March 2024:

“Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is the presence of a blood clot in the dural venous sinuses, the cerebral veins, or both. Among those with stroke, CVT represents only 0.5% to 3%.2 Registry-based and cohort studies suggest that CVT affects predominantly individuals <55 years of age, with two-thirds occurring in women.” [Saposnik G, Bushnell C, Coutinho JM, Field TS, Furie KL, Galadanci N, Kam W, Kirkham FC, McNair ND, Singhal AB, Thijs V, Yang VXD; on behalf of the American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; and Council on Hypertension. Diagnosis and management of cerebral venous thrombosis: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. 2024;55:e77–e90. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000456]

 

A blood clot in a major vein in the brain presents with headache in about 90 percent of cases. [[Ferro JM, Canhao P, Stam J, Bousser MG, Barinagarrementeria F; ISCVT Investigators. Prognosis of cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis: results of the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT). Stroke. 2004; 35:664–670. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000117571] Other findings include nausea, vision disturbances, elevation of intracranial pressure, seizure, encephalopathy, and coma. [Saposnik G, Bushnell C, Coutinho JM, Field TS, Furie KL, Galadanci N, Kam W, Kirkham FC, McNair ND, Singhal AB, Thijs V, Yang VXD; on behalf of the American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; and Council on Hypertension. Diagnosis and management of cerebral venous thrombosis: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. 2024;55:e77–e90. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000456]

The 39-year-old male was hospitalized for an unknown period of time with unknown outcome. The only other clinical information is that he had, “Venous sinus thrombosis – with JJ vaccine.”

The dates of onset and reporting for Case #1512205, July 15, 2021, and July 29, 2021, respectively, are close in time to the announcement by the FDA that six cases of cerebral venous thrombosis had been identified in women 18 to 48 years of age six to 13 days after injection with the Janssen/JNJ product, which led to the drug being taken off of the market on April 12, 2021. One might speculate about the possible implications of time displacement in this seventh case of CVT, this one in a male.

 

 

“As of April 12, more than 6.8 million doses of the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) vaccine have been administered in the U.S. CDC and FDA are reviewing data involving six reported U.S. cases of a rare and severe type of blood clot in individuals after receiving the J&J vaccine. In these cases, a type of blood clot called cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) was seen in combination with low levels of blood platelets (thrombocytopenia). All six cases occurred among women between the ages of 18 and 48, and symptoms occurred 6 to 13 days after vaccination.”

 

Question: What is the prognosis of central venous sinus thrombosis?

Answer: Death or dependence in 10-15% of patients according to the American Heart Association in a January 29, 2024, article. [Saposnik G, Bushnell C, Coutinho JM, Field TS, Furie KL, Galadanci N, Kam W, Kirkham FC, McNair ND, Singhal AB, Thijs V, Yang VXD; on behalf of the American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; and Council on Hypertension. Diagnosis and management of cerebral venous thrombosis: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. 2024;55:e77–e90. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000456]

 

 

“Cerebral venous thrombosis accounts for 0.5% to 3% of all strokes. The most vulnerable populations include young individuals, women of reproductive age, and patients with a prothrombotic state. The clinical presentation of cerebral venous thrombosis is diverse (e.g., headaches, seizures), requiring a high level of clinical suspicion. Its diagnosis is based primarily on magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance venography or computed tomography/computed tomographic venography. The clinical course of cerebral venous thrombosis may be difficult to predict. Death or dependence occurs in 10% to 15% of patients despite intensive medical treatment.” [Emphasis added.]

 

To summarize, VAERS case #1512205 was a 39-year-old male who developed cerebral venous thrombosis an unknown period of time after receiving the Janssen/JNJ “vaccine,” which was taken off the market April 12, 2021. The outcome of his CVT is unknown.

How many cases of time displacement are there in VAERS? Here is one attempt to answer that question. There are thousands of them, 1,239 with wrong dates and 73,671 with unknown dates going back to 1900. Was this case hidden deliberately, or was the record keeping simply sloppy? How many other cases of cerebral venous thrombosis are misfiled in VAERS?

 

 

2) Reformatting Obfuscation: VAERS #1277549

A more complex cloaking technique involves scrambling data that to a reasonable degree of probability had been received in an orderly format by VAERS making it unintelligible for many readers. Is this process done by people, or did the algorithm take over?

Doctors and other medical professionals use a systematic and easily followed format to communicate a medical case. Medical students learn this format early in their medical school curriculum. The British Medical Journal (BMJ) summarized the reasoning behind a standardized reporting format. [Lochlainn, Mary Ni, and Ibrahim Balogun. “How to Present Patient Cases.” The BMJ, British Medical Journal Publishing Group, 17 May 2017, www.bmj.com/content/357/sbmj.i4406.]

“Presenting patient cases is a key part of everyday clinical practice. A well delivered presentation has the potential to facilitate patient care and improve efficiency on ward rounds, as well as a means of teaching and assessing clinical competence.”

 

 

What we find in VAERS is quite different. VAERS #1277549 demonstrates how format can hide clarity and important information. This case was part of a separate study of 78 cases of elevated Free Light Chains or tissue deposition of Free Light Chains [Siegel, David, et al. “Serum Free Light Chain Analysis for Diagnosis, Monitoring, and Prognosis of Monoclonal Gammopathies.” OUP Academic, Oxford University Press, 1 June 2009, academic.oup.com/labmed/article/40/6/363/2504842.] identified in biopsy specimens drawn from the VAERS database.

In this case, the query was the VAERS ID. The following was returned:

 

 

From this we learn a 20-year-old man in Texas received a single dose of BNT162b2 from Lot EW0151 in his left arm by intramuscular injection on April 19, 2021. His symptoms began the same day and led to nine days of hospitalization, and the report was received and completed within two weeks. It was concluded that he was permanently disabled. That is odd since the basis for the determination is not provided. Perhaps the details will be found in the adverse event description to follow?

 

He took no medications at the time of vaccination and had no medical history or allergies prior to receiving a single dose of BNT162b2.

Next, VAERS gives a list (below) of “symptoms,” which is a very mixed bag of medical “stuff” both normal and abnormal.

 

This lengthy list presents a catastrophic collection of medical problems in a young man who was healthy prior to receiving a single dose of Pfizer’s novel drug.

Next comes a description of the adverse event in a concatenated text block. In some VAERS reports repeating text is interspersed with misplaced characters of various sorts.

This concatenated text is relatively readable compared with other reports.

 

Lastly, there is a block of text presenting results of various types of medical testing.

 

It is time consuming to formulate a coherent explanation of what happened to this healthy young man based on this presentation format.

Here is the same information, restructured and edited for clarity, but no data has been added. Commentary has been added in italics.

1) Initial Presentation

This 20-year-old male was in his usual state of good health until April 19, 2021, when he received his first dose of Pfizer’s BNT162b2.

  • Two hours after the injection he became nauseous and vomited multiple times.
  • Overnight he experienced diffuse myalgia (muscle soreness/pain) and suprapubic (lower abdominal)
  • He awoke the next day with a pustular rash on his chin, forehead, chest and back.
  • The patient describes similar previous rashes that have resolved spontaneously.

The next day he began to experience gross hematuria (visible blood in his urine) and presented to the emergency room.

 

2) Emergency Department (ED) – April 20, 2021

In the ED, the patient was found to have:

  • Temperature of 98.9 degrees F, Normal
  • Blood pressure of 100/69mmHg, Low Normal
  • Heart rate of 110 bpm, Elevated
  • Respiratory rate of 18 breaths per minute, High Normal
  • O2 saturation of 97% on room air. Normal

Physical examination:

  • He appeared ill with diffuse pustules on his face, chest and back with
    • Periorbital edema (around his eyes)
    • Leukoplakia (white patches) was noted on his tongue and buccal mucosa.
    • His abdomen was tender to palpation in the suprapubic area (lower abdomen) and at both costovertebral angles (kidney).

Initial Laboratory Data:

  • Metabolic acidosis of pH 7.33 (normal 7.35-7.45), Slightly acidotic
  • Anion gap of 16 (normal 4-12 mmol/L), Metabolic acidosis
  • Elevated lactate of 2.6 (normal 0.5-2.2), Excessive acid
  • Elevated Neutrophilic leukocytosis 22k (normal 5,000-10,000/mm2),
  • Acute renal insufficiency with a BUN of 45 (normal 10-20 mg/dl) and creatinine 3.81 (normal males 0.6-1.2mg/dL) (baseline is 0.76),
  • U/A +RBCs and 5-10 WBCs.

His initial laboratory results were significantly out of order with acid base imbalance, an elevated white count of 22,000 with left shift, and renal failure with blood and white cells in his urine. The neutrophilic leukocytosis indicates significant inflammation as it is 2.3x normal.

A major oversight is absence of the complete blood count and differential which is part of the panel of tests that includes measurement of neutrophils which is presented. This oversight is critical as this patient has signs of significant internal bleeding making disclosure of his hemoglobin and hematocrit mandatory as well as serial measurements essential.

He was admitted to the medicine service for further management.

 

3) Hospital course April 20, 2021, through April 29, 2021

On the medicine floor he was initially found to have:

  • Rhabdomyolysis CK 584 (normal male 55-170 SI units/L), (His body was breaking down skeletal muscle.),
  • Worsening renal failure (Creatinine now 8 from 3.81 mg/dL),
  • Follicular conjunctivitis (typo?— conjunctivitis is an eye condition) by skin biopsy,
  • Low CD3/CD4 count (CD4 91, CD3 47, CD8 258) (immunological disorder),
  • Normal complement,
  • Bilateral tinnitus (ringing in his ears).

 

Imaging Studies:

  • 4/21/21 CT abdomen/pelvis: A/P without contrast showed attenuation of renal pelves and ureters consistent with hemorrhage, but no renal stones or hydronephrosis. The renal pelves and ureters were more attenuated than expected, compatible with blood products/hemorrhage.
  • 4/22/21 Ultrasound pelvis: The bladder is under distended and nearly collapsed with a volume of less than 10 mL. The lumen is partially filled with heterogeneous dependent material, which is mobile when placed in lateral decubitus position. These findings are consistent with heterogeneous blood products. Hemorrhage requires measurement of serial hematocrit and hemoglobin.
  • 4/22/21 EKG: Normal sinus rhythm.
  • 4/23/21 CT head without contrast: No acute intracranial hemorrhage or mass effect.
  • 4/23/21 Ultrasound heart: No pericardial effusion. Possible decreased left ventricle systolic function (53%). (This is presumably the left ventricle ejection fraction. If so, it is low for a 20-year-old healthy male. Myopericarditis is a possibility and should lead to measurement of troponin levels and cMRI with gadolinium).
  • Plethoric IVC (Possible fluid overload)
  • MRI of brain with attention to inner ear canals:
    1. Several punctate acute ischemic foci in multifocal vascular (possible micro thrombosis) territories of the bilateral cerebral hemispheres and left cerebellum. (two widely separated parts of the brain)
    2. Possible aneurysm or small fenestration of the intradural right vertebral artery proximal to the basilar confluence. (Dilatation in one of the four major arteries supplying the brain; location near the brainstem presenting access challenges should operative repair be needed.)
    3. No evidence of labyrinthitis or imaging sequela of prior labyrinthine insult. (workup of deafness)
    4. No FLAIR hyperintense sulci to suggest meningitis, noting this does not exclude the diagnosis.

 

Kidney biopsy (preliminary) (results not available)

  1. The lower pole of the left kidney was localized for biopsy.
  2. A successful renal biopsy was performed by the nephrologist.
  3. A small perirenal hematoma developed after the second pass.

 

4/26/21 X-ray abdomen

  1. Non-obstructive bowel gas pattern.
  2. No radiographic pneumoperitoneum.

 

4/26/21 Ultrasound gallbladder

  1. Unremarkable appearance of the gallbladder without sonographic findings of cholecystitis (gallbladder inflammation).
  2. Heterogeneous appearing right kidney consistent with the patient’s known clinical history of renal disease.
  3. Small right pleural effusion (fluid accumulation in chest cavity; a chest X-ray and possibly a chest CAT scan is indicated to explain fluid in the space between the lungs and chest wall)

 

4/30/21 MRA  head and neck with attention to vessel wall

  1. No new infarcts, nothing acute, no evidence of CNS (central nervous system) vasculitis on imaging, “…wonder if punctate infarcts of acute inflammation/hypercoagulability.”
  2. No evidence of angiitis (vasculitis).
  3. 2mm right vertebral artery aneurysm maybe incidental.
  4. Neck showed in vertebral artery proximal near origin shows narrow tapering of 3cm on left 2cm on right, carotid arteries and mid and distal arteries look normal.
  5. No evidence of vasculitis.

 

Laboratory Workup:

  • CSF (cerebrospinal fluid): Opening pressure 7mmHg, few white cells, glucose 85mg/dL
  • Cryptococcal Neg Fungal neg HSV (herpes simplex virus) neg
  • Varicella Zoster neg
  • T pallidum (syphilis) neg
  • Stool: Enteric pathogens neg
  • Cryptosporidium and giardia neg
  • C-diff pending
  • Viruses:
    • HIV neg (important to keep this in mind when looking at the lymphocyte data)
    • HCV (hepatitis C) neg
    • HBV (hepatitis B) immune
    • CMV neg
    • RPR (syphilis) neg
  • ASO (antistreptolysin O) titer within normal limits
  • Bacteria:
    • CSF neg
    • Blood neg (4/24, 4/21)
    • Urine neg
    • Skin:  MRSA (type of staph) positive
    • Staph A: positive
    • Fungus neg

 

Immunologic (Elevated free light chains [FLC], depressed lymphocyte counts in HIV negative patient):

              (Reference: Human Cluster of Differentiation Markers)

 

4) Treatment:

The patient was treated with a pulse dose 500mg IV Methylprednisolone for three days and then transitioned to 60mg Prednisone.

The patient’s pustular rash and oral leukoplakia greatly improved while on pulse dose steroids, but his kidney function continued to decline (creatinine rising from 8 to 11), and the patient’s bilateral tinnitus progressed to bilateral sensorineural deafness over two days.

MRI of the brain identified several punctate infarcts across multiple vascular territories in bilateral cortices and left cerebellum. The patient’s kidney function continued to decline, with progressive hyperkalemia.  (elevated potassium) He was placed on hemodialysis for renal failure.

3) Discussion:

A 20-year-old male was healthy until he received one dose of Pfizer’s experimental gene therapy product, BNT162b2. The day he was injected he experienced onset of multiple organ dysfunction. The following diagnoses were made within a few days of his receiving one dose of BNT162b2.

  1. Acute renal failure requiring dialysis
  2. Bleeding in his urinary tract and abdomen.
  3. Pleural effusion,
  4. Multiple infarcts in his brain in two and possibly three locations (cerebrum, cerebellum, and possibly the brainstem),
  5. Deafness and tinnitus,
  6. Probable decreased left ventricular ejection fraction possibly due to myopericarditis,
  7. Aneurysm in the right vertebral artery near the basilar confluence,
  8. Flare up of a dermatological condition,
  9. Destruction of skeletal muscle,
  10. Elevation of free light chains may indicate a plasmacytoma or multiple myeloma, and
  11. Immunological compromise.

 

Multiple organ system involvement is characteristic of some illnesses that follow administration of the never-before-used experimental gene therapy product, BNT162b2. [https://robertchandler.substack.com/p/autoimmunity-and-covid-19-gene-therapy] In this case, the central nervous system, urinary system, musculoskeletal system, immune system, integumentary system, and possibly the cardiovascular and hematopoietic system were involved, most with significant disease.

The report for VAERS , as submitted by the medical professional, was reasonably thorough and was filed and processed very rapidly but with no final outcome other than what seems very premature, a determination that he was permanently disabled. The nature of his permanent disability is unknown.

How would this complex case be described using the System Organ Classification (SOC) used by Pfizer? Perhaps as “Other”?

 

Perhaps complicated multisystem illness cases, like that of  VAERS #1277549, were siloed in the leading category of “Other”? The 40,000-plus subjects in the above data set on average reported more than three adverse events each so it is possible that some of the 8,152 in the “Other” category included rapid onset multiple organ system disease.

Is the process of reformatting being used to hide catastrophic complications resulting from the new crop of gene therapy products? Whether intentional or not it takes more time than many are willing to invest digging the important information out of the format it is buried in. Aggressive presentation of complex illness like in this case should be sufficient as a red flag on its own.

This is the first in a series of illustrative case reports of what may be recognized someday as unique disease clusters. In other reports, I will explore that possibility while cases like VAERS #1277549 will provisionally be termed “Turbo CoVax Disease: Rapid Onset Multiple Organ System – Adult” type.

Please Support DailyClout!

Pre-Order The Pfizer Papers Book.

Become a DailyClout Member.

The post Report 99: How the CDC Hides COVID Vaccine Deaths and Injuries appeared first on DailyClout.

Share this post
Twitter