BKK director Andreas Schöfbeck was fired after he pointed out that there was too little mention of side effects after the 'corona vaccination'. This is based on the data of about 11 million BKK policyholders. Now another mole is shooting up. The German National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Doctors has presented the figures for 2021 at the request of a member of the Bundestag. It shows that almost 2.5 million people have consulted a doctor after the injection. So Schöfbeck had a point.
Proportionally, that is also an extremely high number. Yet it was no reason for authorities like the Paul Ehrlich Institute, who must have seen those figures grow anyway, to investigate side effects and mortality further. The authorities seem to be downplaying it ("they are not such serious side effects") and the associations of statutory health insurers are acting illegally because of their tampering with figures, as dtata analyst Tom Lausen makes clear. Moreover, it was regulated by law in Germany that strict monitoring and registration had to be carried out.
Data analyst Tom Lausen has been on top of that from the start. In this video, he shares his findings in an interview with Milena Preradovic.
It is in German. Below I have briefly listed the most striking points.
Lausen shows a table in response to a request for information from an MP. They had accidentally taken the number of injections from January 1, 2021 to March 2022 while all other numbers only cover 1 year. That saved 19 million. Mistake. This is the now corrected table:
We waited three months for this request for information, the German equivalent of a "parliamentary question". However, Lausen estimates compiling this table at 10 minutes to a maximum of an hour of work (he has also done this work himself). He also notices that there is no name of a contact person or responsible person under the document.
Below the numbers have been converted into percentages so that the years can be compared better. (0.36% = 360 per 100,000, 1.85% = 1,850 per 100,000)
If we compare the above numbers: In 2019, the number of side effects was 0.28% of the total injections, in 2021 1.85%. More than 6x as much. He then compares these figures with another source (Arzneimittel-Atlas) and it can be seen that the number of vaccinations in previous years was in reality much higher. In 2019: not 24.9 million but 39.7 million. This will further reduce the percentage of side effects in 2019 to 0.18%. This means that the percentage of vaccine side effects in 2021 will not be 6 times as much but NINE TIMES as much as in 2019.
Tom Lausen strongly criticizes KBV (Umbrella organization of the 17 associations of statutory health insurers). If politicians had not specifically asked for these specific dates, the KBV would probably never have published them. This information is still not on their website. The source data is not made public, that only happens with edited and praised reports. This method is also reflected in the CBS/rivm report.
Illegal
Legally, rules have been set up in Germany at an early stage to be able to monitor and monitor vaccinations transparently and tightly, in order to guarantee the quality with German Gründlichkeit. It appears that the various institutes have not complied with these laws. They are not held accountable for this.
It has also not been investigated whether these are minor or serious side effects, even though that is also described in the law. Apparently, one does not need to know it so much anymore.
Lausen complains that the data is fragmented across various institutions that, for all kinds of reasons, do not want to share their data with each other. In Germany, this appears to be a stumbling block. From the Netherlands he could learn that we only have one institute (no 17 "Bundesländer" to start with) and that even then the data are not released.
Deaths
Thousands of reports of deaths have been reported by private individuals, laymen in the medical field. For example, we see a total of 7 deaths of those reports below in the group of 12-17 years (these are only Pfizer and only reports within 6 weeks after vaccination). As Lausen rightly points out, especially in this age group, family members will have had a well-defined reason for making the connection with vaccination. (What about underreporting is not discussed.)
Three deaths of children occurred on the day after vaccination. So: younger than 18 years, pricked and dead within 1 day. In the age group 18-59: 85 deaths reported, by relatives, also died within one day. So those are possible vaccine deaths. Many families will have reported because the vaccinated person before had nothing wrong. Yet no autopsies are still being done. That would be the way to rule out the vaccines as a cause. In short, nothing is being sorted out.
To the question "what do you do with those reports?" followed the answer "We call them after". Further information is missing. Which questions were asked is unknown and what the answers were has not been recorded; there is not even a standard questionnaire known. That sounds like the well-known "We just do whatever, we have to do something".
No openness
This data analyst also complains about the lack of data. As an outsider, you just have to scrape them together. The data itself isn't crystal clear either. For example, he notes that the classification of side effects is not clear. For example, headaches or dizziness are among the minor side effects, which you have to accept. But there are cases of people who still suffer from dizziness months later or who take ibuprofin almost daily months after the injection because of headaches. You shouldn't call that "minor side effects" anymore.
Another example of the problems with the data: the reports state that thrombosis-like disorders do not show a significant increase. However, if Lausen verifies this in, for example, the statistics of hospitals, there is indeed an increase that needs to be investigated.
In conclusion: a lot of incompetence, lack of curiosity and a lot of inability in especially (so it seems again) medical circles and institutes. Data is not in order and they do not want to share what is in order – scientific integrity, and therefore quality, is completely lost. Lausen has no indications of an evil intent.
So we see it all over the world: wherever fools hold sway, the sharks spin yarn. You would almost think that they are playing under a hat. That is not the case because this requires tight control and disciplined working method. And vision.
