- Created by Amir Shehata, last modified on Jan 05, 2022
You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.
Compare with Current View Page History
« Previous Version 8 Next »
(The Center Square) – The head of Indianapolis-based insurance company OneAmerica said the death rate is up a stunning 40% from pre-pandemic levels among working-age people.
“We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica,” the company’s CEO Scott Davison said during an online news conference this week. “The data is consistent across every player in that business.”
OneAmerica is a $100 billion insurance company that has had its headquarters in Indianapolis since 1877. The company has approximately 2,400 employees and sells life insurance, including group life insurance to employers in the state.
Davison said the increase in deaths represents “huge, huge numbers,” and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica.
“And what we saw just in third quarter, we’re seeing it continue into fourth quarter, is that death rates are up 40% over what they were pre-pandemic,” he said.
“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”
Davison was one of several business leaders who spoke during the virtual news conference on Dec. 30 that was organized by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.
Most of the claims for deaths being filed are not classified as COVID-19 deaths, Davison said.
“What the data is showing to us is that the deaths that are being reported as COVID deaths greatly understate the actual death losses among working-age people from the pandemic. It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers.”
He said at the same time, the company is seeing an “uptick” in disability claims, saying at first it was short-term disability claims, and now the increase is in long-term disability claims.
“For OneAmerica, we expect the costs of this are going to be well over $100 million, and this is our smallest business. So it’s having a huge impact on that,” he said.
He said the costs will be passed on to employers purchasing group life insurance policies, who will have to pay higher premiums.
The CDC weekly death counts, which reflect the information on death certificates and so have a lag of up to eight weeks or longer, show that for the week ending Nov. 6, there were far fewer deaths from COVID-19 in Indiana compared to a year ago – 195 verses 336 – but more deaths from other causes – 1,350 versus 1,319.
These deaths were for people of all ages, however, while the information referenced by Davison was for working-age people who are employees of businesses with group life insurance policies.
At the same news conference where Davison spoke, Brian Tabor, the president of the Indiana Hospital Association, said that hospitals across the state are being flooded with patients “with many different conditions,” saying “unfortunately, the average Hoosiers’ health has declined during the pandemic.”
In a follow-up call, he said he did not have a breakdown showing why so many people in the state are being hospitalized – for what conditions or ailments. But he said the extraordinarily high death rate quoted by Davison matched what hospitals in the state are seeing.
"What it confirmed for me is it bore out what we're seeing on the front end,..." he said.
The number of hospitalizations in the state is now higher than before the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced a year ago, and in fact is higher than it’s been in the past five years, Dr. Lindsay Weaver, Indiana’s chief medical officer, said at a news conference with Gov. Eric Holcomb on Wednesday.
Just 8.9% of ICU beds are available at hospitals in the state, a low for the year, and lower than at any time during the pandemic. But the majority of ICU beds are not taken up by COVID-19 patients – just 37% are, while 54% of the ICU beds are being occupied by people with other illnesses or conditions.
The state's online dashboard shows that the moving average of daily deaths from COVID-19 is less than half of what it was a year ago. At the pandemic's peak a year ago, 125 people died on one day – on Dec. 29, 2020. In the last three months, the highest number of deaths in one day was 58, on Dec. 13.
Error rendering macro 'viewpdf'
com.atlassian.confluence.macro.MacroExecutionException: com.atlassian.confluence.macro.MacroExecutionException: The viewfile macro is unable to locate the attachment "CovidHighlights.pdf" on this page
First, Japan's health ministry acknowledged the growing rate of heart inflammation among the vaccinated population. Then Japan's public and private sectors were alerted to the fact and forbidden to discriminate against those who refuse the COVID vaccine. Furthermore, Japan has made it clear that "informed consent" is required to receive the vaccine. Japan now insists the vaccine labels warn of dangerous potential side effects such as myocarditis.
_____________
NHK-Japan (Japan Broadcasting Corporation) | Japan's health ministry has listed inflammation of the heart muscle and of the outer lining of the heart in younger males as possible serious side effects of the Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines.
It says that as of November 14, out of every one million males who had the Moderna vaccine, such side effects were reported in 81.79 males aged 10 to 19 and 48.76 males in their 20s.
The figures were 15.66 and 13.32 respectively for those who had the Pfizer vaccine.
The ministry held a panel of expert on Saturday [Dec. 4] and proposed warning of the risk by printing "serious side effects" on the documents attached to the vaccines.
It will also require hospitals to report in detail incidents involving people who developed the symptoms within 28 days after being vaccinated, according to the law.
The plan was approved by the panel, and the ministry will notify municipalities.
__________________
RairFoundation.com | Japan announces that public and private sectors can not discriminate against those who refuse the experimental mRNA gene therapy injections.
Japan is now labeling Covid “vaccines” to warn of dangerous and potentially deadly side effects such as myocarditis. In addition, the country is reaffirming its commitment to adverse event reporting requirements to ensure all possible side effects are documented.
These efforts from Japan’s health authority are in stark contrast to the deceptive measures taken by other countries to coerce citizens into taking the injection, downplaying side effects, and discouraging proper adverse event reporting.
Additionally, Japan is emphasizing informed consent and bodily autonomy. Until the coronavirus pandemic, the concept of “informed consent” was considered sacred to healthcare professionals in the West.
Japan is particularly raising concerns about the risks of myocarditis in young men injected with Pfizer or Moderna’s gene–therapy treatment. The country is enforcing a strict legal reporting requirement of side effects that must take place within 28 days of the injections.
_______________
BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | Japan’s ministry of health is taking a sensible, ethical approach to Covid vaccines. They recently labeled the vaccines with a warning about myocarditis and other risks. They also reaffirmed their commitment to adverse event reporting to document potential side-effects.
Japan’s ministry of health states: “Although we encourage all citizens to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, it is not compulsory or mandatory. Vaccination will be given only with the consent of the person to be vaccinated after the information provided.”
Furthermore, they state: “Please get vaccinated of your own decision, understanding both the effectiveness in preventing infectious diseases and the risk of side effects. No vaccination will be given without consent.”
Finally, they clearly state: “Please do not force anyone in your workplace or those who around you to be vaccinated, and do not discriminate against those who have not been vaccinated.”
They also link to a “Human Rights Advice” page that includes instructions for handling any complaints if individuals face vaccine discrimination at work.
Other nations would do well to follow Japan’s lead with this balanced and ethical approach.
This policy appropriately places the responsibility for this healthcare decision with the individual or family.
We can contrast this with the vaccine mandate approach adopted in many other Western nations. The U.S. provides a case study in the anatomy of medical coercion exercised by a faceless bureaucratic network.
A bureaucracy is an institution that exercises enormous power over you but with no locus of responsibility. This leads to the familiar frustration, often encountered on a small scale at the local DMV, that you can go round in bureaucratic circles trying to troubleshoot problems or rectify unfair practices. No actual person seems to be able to help you get to the bottom of things—even if a well-meaning person sincerely wants to assist you.
Here’s how this dynamic is playing out with coercive vaccine mandates in the U.S. The CDC makes vaccine recommendations. But the ethically crucial distinction between a recommendation and mandate immediately collapses when institutions (e.g., a government agency, a business, employer, university, or school) require you to be vaccinated based on the CDC recommendation.
Try to contest the rationality of these mandates, e.g., in federal court, and the mandating institution just points back to CDC recommendation as the rational basis for the mandate. The court will typically agree, deferring to the CDC’s authority on public health. The school, business, etc., thus disclaims responsibility for the decision to mandate the vaccine: “We’re just following CDC recommendations, after all. What can we do?”
But CDC likewise disclaims responsibility: “We don’t make policy; we just make recommendations, after all.”
Meanwhile, the vaccine manufacturer is immune and indemnified from all liability or harm under federal law. No use going to them if their product—a product that you did not freely decide to take—harms you.
You are now dizzy from going round in circles trying to identify the actual decision-maker: it’s impossible to pinpoint the relevant authority. You know that enormous power is being exercised over your body and your health, but with no locus of responsibility for the decision and no liability for the outcomes.
You are thus left with the consequences of a decision that nobody claims to have made. The only certainty is that you did not make the decision and you were not given the choice.
Japan’s policy avoids most of these problems simply placing responsibility for the decision on the individual receiving the intervention, or the parent in the case of a child who is not old enough to consent.
Incidentally, this focus on choice and freedom was somewhat reflected in Japan’s policies throughout the pandemic, which were less stringent that most countries, including those in the U.S.
Japan’s government, unlike the governments in most countries in the “free” world, refuses to force and intimidate its population to get vaccinated against covid-19.
An official statement on its health ministry website reads as follows:
“Although we encourage all citizens to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, it is not compulsory or mandatory.
Vaccination will be given only with the consent of the person to be vaccinated after the information provided.
Please get vaccinated of your own decision, understanding both the effectiveness in preventing infectious diseases and the risk of side effects.
No vaccination will be given without consent.
Please do not force anyone in your workplace or those who around you to be vaccinated, and do not discriminate against those who have not been vaccinated.”
Japan’s approach to vaccinating its population appears to be in stark contrast to that practiced in the west.
Not only vaccine mandates are now being enforced in Europe and America, governments like that in Germany, by far the most totalitarian when it comes to dealing with Covid, is now openly inciting hatred against people who do not want to get vaccinated, and removes them from society and the public sphere.
The Japanese approach seems to be working seeing how almost 80% of its population is now fully vaccinated.
In the past Japan, unlike governments in Europe and America, also refused to impose a national lockdown on its population, resorting only to declaring a state of emegency and imposing only localized lockdowns in specific places and cities.
Japan’s approach to fighting the pandemic seems to have paid of, as it has one of the lowest death tolls from covid in the world per its population.
With the oldest population in the world, and with almost 125 million Japanese, Japan saw only around 18,000 deaths from covid in the last 2 years.
In comparison, France, which has half of the population that of Japan, had over 121,000 deaths from covid, and counting.
However you never see any mention of this on the corporate media, which praises countries like France and Germany and its leaders for the “good job” they did and how “well” they handled the pandemic.
The fact that Japan never had a national lockdown, or that it refuses to force its citizens to get vaccinated or demonise and penalise those who won’t, while doing much better than almost any other major developed country in the world, seems to fly in the face of the narrative that is being promoted and propogated by the corporate media and global institutions.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/pfizer-fined-23-billion-illegal-marketing-off-label/story?id=8477617
— -- In the largest health care fraud settlement in history, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer must pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil allegations that the company illegally promoted uses of four of its drugs, including the painkiller Bextra, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Wednesday.
Besides Bextra, the drugs were Geodon, an antipsychotic; Zyvox, an antibiotic; and Lyrica, an anti-epileptic drug. Once the Food and Drug Administration approves drugs, doctors can prescribe them off-label for any use, but makers can't market them for anything other than approved uses.
Pfizer subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn pleaded guilty to a felony violation for promoting off-label uses of Bextra, such as for pain relief after knee replacement surgery. At the FDA's request, Pfizer pulled Bextra off the market in April 2005 because its risks, including a rare, sometimes fatal, skin reaction, outweighed its benefits. It had been approved only for treating rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and menstrual pain.
As part of the settlement, Pfizer PFE will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the USA for any matter, according to the Justice Department. Pharmacia & Upjohn must pay a $105 million criminal fine.
Pfizer also has agreed to pay $1 billion in civil damages and penalties to compensate federal health-care programs for false claims submitted as a result of its marketing Bextra and the other four drugs for off-label use or at unapproved dosages.
In an interview Wednesday with USA TODAY, former Pfizer sales representative John Kopchinski said he was told to distribute 20-milligram samples to rheumatologists and orthopedists, even though the FDA had approved only 10-milligram doses for arthritis. The 20-milligram doses were approved only for menstrual pain, yet Kopchinski says he never called on gynecologists or other doctors who would treat that complaint.
In 2003, Kopchinski, 45, a West Point graduate, filed the first whistle-blower lawsuit, leading to the Justice Department investigation. Kopchinski says he was inspired by David Franklin, who filed a whistle-blower lawsuit against Pfizer for promoting Neurontin — at the time approved only to control seizures — for unapproved uses such as treating bipolar disorder.
When Kopchinski began questioning Pfizer's marketing of Bextra and sued, Pfizer fired him, a violation of the anti-retaliation provision of the federal False Claims Act, says his attorney, Erika Kelton of the Washington, D.C., firm Phillips & Cohen. At the time, his son was 2 and his wife was pregnant with twins.
Kopchinski, who began working for Pfizer in 1992, says he was the last employee personally hired by former CEO Edward Pratt, with whom he began corresponding while serving in the first Gulf War.
Kopchinski says one night while on guard duty, he saw a photo of Pratt, now deceased, in Reader's Digest and decided to write him to ask if he wanted to "adopt" his platoon. At the time, Kopchinski says, Pfizer owned Coty cosmetics, and Pratt, an assistant secretary of the Army in the Kennedy administration, responded by sending over three cases of cologne.
Although Kopchinski worked three years as a financial adviser after leaving Pfizer, he says, "I pretty much depleted my 401(k)."
Of the $102 million share of the settlement that will be divided among six whistle-blowers, Kopchinski will receive $51.5 million. To celebrate, he and his wife took their three children out of school Wednesday to have a new family portrait taken and to go to Chuck E. Cheese's for pizza. Kopchinski, who now lives in San Antonio, says he and his wife plan to be stay-at-home parents.
Pfizer mentioned the $2.3 billion settlement this past January in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in which it said it was taking a $2.3 billion charge against earnings related to lawsuits, but the lawsuits were sealed and the investigation ongoing at the time, so no details could be released, Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said Wednesday. Shares of Pfizer closed at $16.28, down 10 cents.
In a statement, Pfizer senior vice president and general counsel Amy Schulman said: "We regret certain actions taken in the past, but are proud of the action we've taken to strengthen our internal controls and pioneer new procedures."
- No labels