All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 14, 2022 - Epoch Times
23:09
CDC Admits Having No Records of 'Naturally Immune People' Transmitting Virus | Facts Matter
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good evening.
As the debate about natural immunity has been raging across the country for well over a year now, well, there is a new piece to the puzzle.
According to this letter, which came from the CDC and which came as a response to a Freedom of Information request, the CDC admits to having no records, none at all, of anyone in the entire country who got COVID, recovered, got reinfected, and then spread the virus to others.
Meanwhile, over in Pennsylvania, the Department of Health has, over the past year, been refusing to share vital information with the state legislature.
Specifically, they have been refusing to provide complete information about how they count and report COVID-related deaths.
However, regardless of that fact, we have the report right here.
Let's go through it all together.
This is your daily Facts Matter update, and I'm your host, Roman, from the Epoch Times.
And now let's begin today's discussion by talking about natural immunity.
So, if you have been following the story of the vaccine mandates that are being rolled out across the country, you will know that very few places offer accommodation to people who have natural immunity to the virus.
Meaning that people who suffered from COVID and then recovered, they are typically still required to get the vaccine if they, let's say, want to work at a company, or in the cases of cities like New York, If they want to go to a restaurant, a gym, or a movie theater.
In these places, by and large, you do not have the option of showing people proof of natural immunity in lieu of your vaccine card, meaning that no matter whether you've recovered from COVID or not, you need to show proof of vaccination.
And the reason for this largely stems from the opinions of those at the very highest level of the federal government, including officials over at the CDC.
That's because, despite the fact that there have been over 100 studies which support the claim that natural immunity very likely provides either similar or even superior protection compared to the vaccines, including one very large real-world study that came out of Israel, which suggested that natural immunity might be up to 13 times stronger than the vaccine, which suggested that natural immunity might be up to 13 times stronger than the vaccine, well, that has not seemed to change the minds of
Instead, officials over at the CDC, they have been promoting two of their own studies which argue that even those people who have natural immunity, they should still get vaccinated.
Since, according to the CDC's studies, natural immunity is not as durable as vaccination.
Therefore, the CDC has continued to recommend that everyone across the country, across the board, should get the shot.
And so, several months ago, an organization called the Informed Consent Action Network, or ICANN for short, they wanted more clarification on what specific data the CDC was basing their recommendations on.
And just for reference, by the way, ICANN, it's a nonprofit with their mission statement, according to their website, being this.
You are the authority over your health choices and those of your children.
In a medical world manipulated by advertising and financial interests, true information is hard to find and often harder to understand.
Our goal is to put the power of scientifically researched health information in your hands and to be bold and transparent in doing so, thereby enabling your medical decisions to come from tangible understanding, not medical coercion.
And so, in line with that mission statement, a few months ago, ICANN's lawyer, he sent a request for information over to the CDC.
Specifically, in this letter, he was requesting that the CDC send back concrete examples where people with natural immunity spread the virus to others.
Here's specifically what this lawyer wrote to the CDC as a part of his request.
Quote, Please send records reflecting any documented case of an individual who, one, never received a COVID-19 vaccine, two, was infected with COVID-19 once, recovered, and then later became infected again, and three, transmitted SARS-CoV-2 to another person when reinfected.
And so, essentially, this lawyer was requesting that the CDC send him some concrete examples of people who had COVID, recovered, got reinfected, and then spread the virus to others.
And you would imagine, given how much of a push there is towards universal vaccination, with no consideration being given to natural immunity, you would imagine that the CDC would have many examples of exactly this sort of thing.
I mean, it would make sense and justify their push to get these people vaccinated.
However, after several months of waiting, the CDC officially responded to this request with this letter here, and here's specifically what they wrote in their response letter.
A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request.
The CDC Emergency Operations Center conveyed that this information is not collected.
Now let me just reiterate what this letter from the CDC actually says.
The CDC claims that they have no records, none at all, of anyone who has never gotten the vaccine, got COVID, recovered, got reinfected, and then spread the virus to others.
There are no records of this having happened.
Now of course that does not mean that it doesn't happen.
However, it means that the CDC is essentially just assuming that it does.
Now, we here at the Epoch Times, we actually reached out to the CDC for confirmation, and they got back to us confirming that this letter is in fact legitimate, and that indeed, their emergency operations center could not find any such records.
Now, the lawyer who is representing ICANN, who initially made this request, he wrote this as a response to this CDC letter.
You would assume that if the CDC was going to crush the civil and individual rights of those with natural immunity by having them expelled from school, fired from their jobs, separated from the military, and worse, the CDC would have proof of at least one instance of an unvaccinated, naturally immune individual transmitting the COVID-19 virus to another individual.
If you thought this, you would be wrong.
Alright, there was something I failed to mention during this portion of the episode, and that is, if you go a little bit further down in this lawyer's statement, he really calls out the CDC. He basically said that their excuse for why they weren't able to hand over this data, the fact that they don't collect this information, it is extremely flippant given the fact that the CDC is, and this is a quote, actively crushing the rights of millions of naturally immune individuals in this country if they do not choose to get a vaccine under the assumption that they can transmit the virus.
And along that line, there's something else that I wanted to mention, which is that the CDC in and of itself as an entity, they don't actually create that many rules.
What the CDC does is that they issue opinions and guidelines and recommendations, and then the different entities across this country, whether it's the federal government, the different state governments, the The local governments, the municipalities, or the corporations, they actually issued the concrete vaccine mandate.
And so some people might say, well, hey, listen, the CDC isn't the one issuing these mandates.
However, that's true, but it's their recommendations that a lot of these vaccine mandates are based on.
So when they say that natural immunity is not as good as the vaccine and that those who've had COVID should still get a vaccine, it's those recommendations that are getting implemented into these concrete vaccine mandates across the country.
So that is one thing that's worth mentioning.
The second thing is that even if the CDC was collecting this data, it's not 100% the case that they would definitely turn it over due to a Freedom of Information Act request, sort of like what we're seeing play out over in Pennsylvania.
Because in Pennsylvania, the Department of Health there, they do collect certain COVID data, but for the last one year, they have been just refusing to hand it over to a government agency That is trying to do research and trying to figure out what exactly is happening in the state.
The Department of Health has been refusing to hand them this data.
Although we'll talk more about what's happening in Pennsylvania back in the studio.
If you'd like to go through either letter for yourself, either the request letter from the lawyer or the response letter from the CDC, I'll throw the PDF versions of both.
There'll be links in the description box below this video for you to check out.
And all I ask in return is that as you're making your way down there to the description box, you take a short detour to smash, smash, smash that like button.
For the YouTube algorithm.
And now, since we're on the topic of government agencies not handing over data, let's move on over to Pennsylvania, where you can say a similar situation is playing out.
Oh, sorry.
What's this?
Well, that's a great question, Roman.
And it is today's sponsor, which is an awesome messaging and email service provider called Secure.
And it's awesome if you're the type of person that actually cares about their privacy.
Because, I mean, it's no big secret that these big tech companies are mining and remining our data all the time.
In fact, in the year 2020, it was found that over 155 million Americans, likely including you and me, have suffered some form of data breach.
And by the way, that's only what's publicly known.
However, what's happened in the past?
Well, that can stay in the past because with Secure, Your data and your messages can remain private.
And that's because Secure has all of their data centers located over in Switzerland rather than in the U.S. or in China.
And the reason that's so important is that Switzerland has some of the strictest data privacy laws in the entire world, and they are not subject to the Intrusive Cloud Act.
And if you want to know what the Cloud Act is, head on over to secure.com and watch their video on the homepage or on the video tutorials page, which is under their support section.
Now, the thing that I personally love the most about the Secure app Is the privacy aspect of it.
They don't mine my data.
They don't mine my phone number.
They don't mine the phone numbers or data of my friends and family who I chat with.
But best of all is that if your friends and family don't actually use the secure app themselves, it doesn't matter.
Because the way that it works is that when you use their secure send email technology, all of your emails and your messages route to Switzerland, and then the recipient can reply using their secure reply technology.
And so everything remains private no matter what.
And the same actually goes for their messaging app as well.
And they're always coming up with new features.
In fact, the most recent one they told me about, they sent me an email here, was that they're coming up with a new feature called text to chat by invite.
So they're an innovative company and they really do care about your privacy.
And so what they're doing doesn't work with your existing big tech email account.
So check them out.
You can head on over to secure.com.
I'll throw the link into the description box below.
And when you use promo code Roman, you can get 25% off.
And the rates are not even that expensive to start with, by the way.
It's only $5 for the messenger and $10 for the email and messenger combo.
And they even offer a seven-day free trial.
So head on over to their website.
Again, it'll be linked in the description box below.
Use promo code Roman to save some money.
And now, Roman in the studio, back to you.
And now let's move on over to Pennsylvania, where the Pennsylvania Department of Health has, for the last year, been refusing to share complete information about how they count COVID-19-related deaths for reports that were ordered by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
Let me just repeat that and let's unpack it a bit.
The Pennsylvania Department of Health has been refusing to explain exactly how they calculated their COVID-related death numbers.
Now, to give you a bit of background on what exactly is happening, Back in November of last year, so November of 2020, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, they unanimously approved a new resolution.
It was called House Resolution 1087, and in short, here's what the resolution was about.
And then, within the actual body of this new resolution, it outlines the specifics of what they were to investigate, which includes a number of different things, But then it got to the question of investigating the COVID deaths in Pennsylvania, And here's what the resolution said, quote, The legislative budget and finance committee must review the death certificates of deceased individuals which have been labeled as COVID-19 deaths and analyze the following information.
One, the location of death.
Two, the individual who recorded the death.
Three, the method of recording the chain of events regarding the death.
And four, the location of COVID-19 in the chain of events listed as the cause of death.
Okay, just to summarize for a moment.
This new resolution required the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, which is a bipartisan committee made up of both state senators as well as state representatives.
And this committee was required to review the Pennsylvania Department of Health's reporting on both COVID testing as well as COVID-related deaths.
And so this resolution, it passed exactly one year ago, and so we have been just sitting and waiting for this report for a while now, for exactly one year.
However, after many, many months of delays, just five days ago, this committee released their first report.
In fact, I have it right here.
You can see it up on your screen.
And while there is some valuable data that this report presents in regards to things like COVID testing, there is something else that this report does not present, and that is the COVID death data.
That's because the Pennsylvania Department of Health, they were not willing to hand over the information to the committee, saying essentially that it was confidential.
Here's in fact what this report states on this front.
As guided by H.R. 1087, our intent was to review death certificates and records for individuals who had COVID-19 listed on their death record.
While the information we sought is generally confidential under the state's 1953 vital statistics law, the vital statistics law provides exceptions to that confidentiality.
The vital statistics law allows the Department of Health to share the information with government agencies and permits the use of the information for research.
Now just to pause here for a quick moment.
The law that this committee is referencing here is the 1953 Vital Statistics Law.
And just as you probably guessed, this particular law, it was passed in order to limit what records can be disclosed and to whom they can be disclosed.
However, that particular law, it has two caveats that are relevant to this case.
One is that records can be disclosed for purposes of research, and that secondly, records can be disclosed to government agencies.
Here's specifically what the relevant sections of that 1953 law say.
Section 805 says that the department may permit the use of vital statistics records or parts thereof for research subject to strict supervision by the department to ensure that the use of the records is limited to research purposes.
And then Section 806, it says that the department may disclose information or data from vital statistics records to federal, state, or municipal agencies of government which request such information or data in the interest of conduct of official duty.
And so naturally, you might think, given the fact that this COVID death research was authorized by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, and then the research itself was being carried out by a team of lawmakers, senators, and house reps, You might think that this caveat applies exactly in this case.
However, the Pennsylvania Department of Health, they seem to disagree.
Here's specifically what this report said happened.
The Department of Health denied our request.
The Department of Health has taken the position that our request fell outside the allowed statutory exceptions because the Department of Health made the legal conclusions that, for one, the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee is not a, quote, agency of government, and that, secondly, our work is not in the interest of conduct of official duty, and then, thirdly, our work our work is not in the interest of conduct of official duty, and then, thirdly, our work in studying and analyzing the reporting of death records Now think about this for a moment.
Essentially, the Department of Health decided not to hand over these records because they made the determination that a bipartisan group of senators and congressmen doing research on COVID deaths in the state after a resolution was unanimously passed for them to do so does not qualify them to get a hold of the documents.
That is kind of amazing if you think about it, although, frankly, I would not recommend that you think about it too much.
Regardless, though, the report goes on to say that this committee did disagree with the Department of Health in their interpretation of the law, but they also outlined what records they were able to acquire and the kind of research they were able to do.
Here's what the report goes on to say, quote, In the interim, we worked with the Department of Health to obtain highly redacted information about COVID-19 deaths.
The Department of Health provided us with a data file containing all deaths for which the agency had assigned an internal classification as either COVID-19, COVID-19 probable, or COVID-19 probable in correct terminology.
A fourth classification called COVID-19 pending test results is also used when the case is believed to be a COVID-19 death, but test results are needed to confirm.
These latter cases indicate the death was attributed to COVID-19.
And so this is where, in my opinion at least, things get a little frustrating.
That's because this report took so long to get to us that the data here is pretty old.
That's because the data that they present in this report, it goes all the way up to December 31st of 2020, meaning essentially that the data in this report is close to a year old, Which just goes to show you how long it actually took them to compile it altogether.
Regardless, let's go through the data anyway.
In total, the Department of Health sent this committee 17,834 records for what they classified as being COVID-19 deaths.
And out of these records, the overwhelming majority, about 98%, were internally classified as COVID-19 deaths.
That was what the Department of Health sent this committee.
However, that does not paint the full picture.
That's because these researchers, they went in and they actually dug deeper into these 17,000 records, and it turns out that it's not exactly clear whether these people died from COVID or they just died with COVID. Here's specifically what the researchers wrote after digging deep into this data.
Quote, This fact does not mean that the deaths were not to be counted as COVID-19 deaths.
Rather, we believe the discrepancy is explained by how deaths are counted.
For disease surveillance purposes and per CDC guidance, the Department of Health counts COVID-19 deaths broadly, i.e., COVID-19 appearing anywhere on Part 1 or Part 2 of the death certificate.
However, the data the Department of Health supplied to us from the CDC is just the underlying cause of death as determined from Part 1 of the death certificate.
This problem is akin to the issue of trying to count deaths dying with COVID-19 and or dying from COVID-19.
Now, if you would like to see what this data actually looks like visually, here's a chart.
When we take a look at the 17,834 deaths that the Pennsylvania Department of Health sent over to the committee, the ones that were marked as COVID deaths, You're then left with 1,660.
That's the number of deaths that the Pennsylvania Department of Health classified as being COVID deaths, but the underlying cause of death was something other than COVID as per the CDC. That number then further breaks down into 1,596 deaths for which we do know the cause, and then another 64 deaths for which we don't have any code associated with it, and therefore the cause is unknown.
And so then, if we look further at the cause of death for those 1,596 people, we'll find that the top causes of death were things like Now, this has a lot of implications.
First of all, it shows that almost 10% of the people that the Pennsylvania Department of Health said died from COVID actually died from something else.
Second of all, like I mentioned earlier, This data only runs until December 1st of 2020, so these numbers are close to a year old.
And then third of all, as we mentioned earlier, this research was based on extremely redacted data.
And so because the Department of Health refused to hand over information to this committee, this can only be considered a partial report.
And then there is another thing, and that is, when we take a look at the demographics of the people who have actually died, we find that nearly 58% of these COVID deaths, they were among people who were over 80 years of age, with the largest frequency of deaths occurring among those who were between 85 and 89 years old.
About 16% of all deaths were in that age category, between 85 to 89.
And so frankly, I don't know about you, but to me, all this data looks extremely important from a policymaking standpoint.
Because if policymakers, as well as the public, if we don't know this information, then frankly, we are literally flying blind.
And policy choices are being made either unanecdotal or incomplete data.
Here's in fact how Katie Klunk, who is the Pennsylvania State Representative who actually sponsored the legislation which formed this committee in the first place, here's how she described the situation.
He and all Pennsylvanians have a right to know that the data driving public health policy and individual health choices is reliable.
If the governor wants a government that works, he and his administration must be willing to not only talk the transparency talk, And so, we will have to see in the future whether this committee releases the full redacted data.
Only time will tell.
Regardless, if you would like to read this full 110-page report for yourself, I would recommend it.
It's actually fairly interesting.
It's well laid out.
I'll throw a link to the PDF version of it into the description box below this video for you to check out.
And all I ask in return is that you take a quick moment, if you haven't already, to smash, smash, smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm.
And now, since you've completed this episode of Facts Matter, I would highly recommend that you go on over to Epic TV and check out an awesome episode of Wide Angle.
It's actually a special episode where Brandon goes in and investigates the true origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Here's a trailer for that episode.
240 million people infected.
Five million reported dead.
The world's resources, its top scientists, have been enlisted in the pursuit of the virus origin.
Did you find anything?
Following the last mission to China, there were more than three dozen recommended studies that needed to be carried out.
After two years, we seem no closer to locking in the origin of the virus.
This is owed in no small part to the hindrance of the Chinese regime.
And he said, rich?
He said, You know, my lab would get into serious trouble if we helped you.
He said China would find out, undoubtedly, and they would label us as enemies of China.
What is it about the virus's origin that is being so intensively concealed?
And what could it tell us about the next grave danger the world faces?
Cut our links with China so they can't spread the disease.
In my reporting, I've kept a close eye on China and its ruling regime to find out who and what was behind the outbreak.
I knew I had to dig beneath the Communist Party-led headlines and political rhetoric.
No one would have imagined the extraordinary pattern of intrigues, cover-ups, and blatant criminal behaviors that has emerged.
What do you say to somebody who says, I don't believe you?
It's unfortunate that we have been targeted as a scapegoat.
700 people died due to the Chinese regime's cover-up of SARS in 2002.
7,000 times that have died from COVID-19.
What would a thousand times that again, the next pandemic, mean for humankind?
Not knowing the virus origin is an existential threat to humanity.
In this special edition of The Wide Angle, join me as I delve into the source of the novel coronavirus.
If you want to check out that full episode, although frankly it's more of a documentary, as well as all the other great content over on Epic TV, I'll throw a link to it.
It'll be right there at the very top of the description box.
I hope you click on it.
I hope you check it out.
I hope you subscribe.
And I hope that you join us on this journey of exploring this beautiful, beautiful world through honors journalism that is based in truth and tradition.
Now lastly, if you haven't already, smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm.
Subscribe to this YouTube channel if you haven't already in order to get this type of honest news content delivered directly into your YouTube feed while YouTube still allows it.
Also, consider hitting that notification bell so you can actually be notified of any new videos as we release them.
And lastly, if you have an Instagram account, consider following me at EpochTimesRoman.
I publish behind the scenes research as well as spicy memes.
And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times.
▲
Export Selection