by Greg Piper
The CDC’s explanation for leaving certain diagnosis codes off Minnesota death certificates that cite COVID-19 vaccines as a cause of death, allegedly hiding vaccine injuries in federal records, shows “intent to deceive,” according to a person who helped analyze the death certificates for the Brownstone Institute, a think tank that challenges the scientific basis for COVID conventional wisdom and policy.
John Beaudoin Sr., who is suing Massachusetts for submitting “fraudulent” death certificates to the feds falsely labeling COVID as a cause of death, says CDC spokesperson Kristen Nordlund’s comments on the matter to Just the News will be incorporated in an “affidavit to petition for a grand jury investigation of the CDC” in its home of Georgia.
Beaudoin’s law school expelled him for refusing its vaccine mandate, which he says was based on federal COVID guidance devised in part from Massachusetts death certificate data.
The suit includes a 123-page exhibit analyzing death certificates Beaudoin claims either wrongly omit vaccine-induced deaths or falsely attribute them to COVID. And in May he requested a hearing in response to the state’s motion to dismiss his January amended complaint. His website includes legal filings.
The Minnesota analysis is part of three years of questions about the reliability and integrity of federal and state governments’ COVID-related statistics.
The New York Times found up to 90% of COVID-positive tests officially recorded in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada in summer 2020 were based on SARS-CoV-2 viral loads too small to be infectious.
Oregon lawmakers similarly sought a federal grand jury investigation into COVID statistical manipulation nearly two years ago, claiming the Center for Disease Control and Prevention employed a “double-standard exclusively for COVID-19 data collection” that inflated cases and deaths starting early in the pandemic.
One of them told Just the News that Beaudoin is assisting their efforts, which are now pending before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. “I think this type of fraud is extended across all boundaries, all states,” Oregon state GOP Sen. Dennis Linthicum said.
“Vaccination is not a disease or cause of death, so simple mention of the vaccine or vaccination without mention of adverse effects will not get coded” on the death certificates cited in Brownstone’s analysis, Nordlund wrote in an email.
“COVID-19 vaccines are undergoing the most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history,” she said. “To date, CDC has not detected any unusual or unexpected patterns for deaths following immunization that would indicate that COVID vaccines are causing or contributing to deaths, outside of the nine confirmed TTS [thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome] deaths following the Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine.”
Nordlund’s claims “do not comport with truth, which can be shown by the Massachusetts data,” Beaudoin said. “She trapped herself.”
The CDC is “essentially trying to claim that a coroner who writes ‘covid vaccine 8 hours before death'” in the cause field “means to convey that the vaccine had no side effects and *definitely* did not contribute to the death in any way,” Aaron Hertzberg, who collaborated with Beaudoin and wrote the Brownstone analysis, wrote in an email. “The absurdity of such a position is self-evident.”
He published the first of a planned two-part response late Friday incorporating the agency’s known responses to news media, which Hertzberg deemed “logically incoherent” and “inconsistent with the CDC’s own standards” at minimum.
(Just the News received a longer CDC statement than did Minnesota’s AlphaNews, adding the paragraph about the “most intense safety monitoring” in U.S. history and lack of “unusual or unexpected patterns for deaths.”)
Hertzberg and Beaudoin obtained every death certificate in Minnesota going back to 2015, the analysis states. Doctors fill out the text descriptions but the CDC assigns the ICD-10 codes, either via algorithm or manually if the algorithm can’t nail down the code.
The duo found nine that explicitly mention COVID vaccines as a cause, which is “exceedingly rare … because of widespread medical establishment denialism of vaccine adverse side effects,” but seven of them were missing the most applicable codes – “other complications following immunization” and “viral vaccines.”
Of the seven, one had a COVID infection code and noted the person was infected several months earlier but received their second vaccine dose 10 hours before death, illustrating the “naked double standards” in code assignment, the analysis states.
Others mention specifics including date of vaccination, dose, brand and possible side effects including “felt sick,” cardiac arrest and heart attack, the last of which was coded as a gunshot wound despite the notes specifying “COVID booster.”
The two death certificates with a relevant code cited adverse events following COVID vaccination. On one, the code is cited as the “underlying” cause of death, suggesting “the CDC was trapped and could not avoid putting it on without fundamentally rewriting the death certificate,” the analysis says.
Nordlund had a different explanation.
“The examples in the article for which the adverse effects codes are included are those that mention adverse or side effects of the vaccine,” language that’s missing from those without the codes, she said.
The Oregon lawmakers, Linthicum and fellow GOP state Sen. Kim Thatcher, and naturopath Henry Ealy went to court to compel grand-jury impaneling a year ago after striking out with every U.S. attorney and Justice Department, but the suit was dismissed for lack of legal standing last fall.
“Private citizens are not permitted to serve in the role of prosecutors by presenting evidence of alleged crimes to a grand jury,” U.S. District Judge Marco Hernandez wrote. The 9th Circuit accepted their appeal but hasn’t scheduled oral argument yet.
Linthicum said they are finalizing their brief. “Our goal is not to prosecute,” which is the function of the grand jury, “and we have provided amble [sic] documentation regarding agency malfeasance,” he wrote.
DOJ notified the appeals court June 28 of a recent Supreme Court decision that found Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to compel the Department of Homeland Security to arrest “certain non-citizens upon their release from prison … or entry of a final order of removal,” as they argued federal law requires. Its reasoning applies to the grand-jury petition, DOJ said.
– – –
Greg Piper has covered law and policy for nearly two decades, with a focus on tech companies, civil liberties and higher education.
