Steve Kirsch I’ve sent you a few emails regarding a statement you made before the FDA regarding one out of every 317 boys between the ages of 16 and 17 developing myocarditis from the shot, can you please send me the source and method that arrived you at this conclusion? I am a day late on an article that will be published immediately and this was information I wish to use but cannot without a source, thank you
The numbers for the "annual run rate of non-institutional population over the last 12 months" in that article seem to be bogus. At least I wasn't able to conciliate those numbers with the actual employment situation reports. Would love of someone could double check those numbers.
The scan of the following insurance companies confirms the initial report. For Prudential, they have had a massive 87% increase in death benefits paid comparing the third quarter of 2020 to the third quarter of 2021. Such a detailed breakdown wasnt available for New York Life, but their 2021 year to date (1 Jan to 30 Sept) death benefit payout is up by 27%. Examining Pacific Life documents identifies multiple units. For Pacific Life the year to date claims are up by only 12%. But for a subsidiary, Pacific Life and Annuity, claims are up by over 80%. This is an opportunistic search; more data may be forthcoming. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/01/more_preliminary_evidence_that_the_*******s_have_led_to_a_spike_in_deaths.html
Anyone think about what will happen to these insurance companies when their payouts get accelerated to this extent? They very well might not have the resources to cover all of these payouts happening so quickly. That could lead to a financial crisis as insurers have to pull money out of their investments to make payments. And/or it could require a Fed bailout of those investments to keep them solvent.
This is straight nonsense and legacy media style fear porn.
That won’t happen because that’s not at all how any of this works. None of these insurers are in danger of not making their payouts, and these mortality increases are in the group market, not the individual market.
To be fair, this is bad, but it is also more of a lesson in the adverse risk selection of group plans and not proof—in any way whatsoever—of healthy people dying or of life insurers in financial danger. Check their surplus and reinsurance arrangements.
So are we perhaps seeing the first glimmers of a quasi free market solution beginning to emerge ? So far it has been the pharma cartel using its own 'regulatory capture' to get what it wants. But this free rein has triggered a subsidiary crisis in the insurance industry. Cannot the insurance cartel be expected to mobilize, to marshal its own captured government bureaucracies in defense against the costs it is now being forced to bear as a consequence of the actions of the pharma cartel ? And as more subsidiary crisis are triggered will not other affected industries seek to press their own captured regulatory bureaucracies into their defense ?
I consider insurance to be a parasitic occupation. Now are the parasites going to earn their keep and become heroes by blowing the whistle on this whole thing? Other lines of business might be able to deny reality to this degree and get away with it, but an insurance company can’t. They will go BROKE if they bet on the wrong thing, if they raise premiums on the unvaccinated and not the vaccinated, unless they start denying insurance claims for being vaccinated.
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.
Hi Steve, my husband works in life insurance in Australia. He's been asking whether there have been statistically significant increases in mortality and morbidity experience as a result of the 'pandemic'. On the three occasions he has asked this question within his own organisation, it has been misinterpreted. The actuaries and underwriters seem to think he is asking about experience changes due to the virus itself, i.e. direct Covid deaths or disability claims, rather than from the vaccines.
As to your line of enquiry, he believes it is not the life insurers but rather the re-insurers who would be ultimately affected by a mispricing of the risk. An insurer has a vested interest in maintaining premium rates as low as possible in order to maintain their share of business. Secondly, their pools of business are often too small and the experience too lumpy for anyone to draw statistically significant conclusions from the experience data. An exception to this would be the very large group risk pools like the Indiana Life example quoted in The Centre Square article on Jan 1.
The re-insurers on the other hand, have much larger data sets across many fronting insurers. So he thinks you may be better served by talking to the large re-insurers like RGA, Swiss Re, Munich Re, Hanover Re. It is these organisations that ultimately carry much of the long tail risk who should be monitoring mortality and morbidity experience changes due to the pandemic and its 'cure', the vaccines themselves.
I will get him to join your insurance substack group.
This is a terrific idea Steve. Nothing will tell the story like all cause mortality rates. There's no better source for that info than large life insurance companies.
Steve: Last week I posted this to a comment section as a possible source of data for you but I don't think you saw it. I independently came to this conclusion as a former risk analyst for a different industry.
It would be very helpful if you had a place where people could contact you other than the comments section from one of your posts in order to give you leads or data sources. This is what I wrote:
Steve, a possible source for data: have insurance company actuaries begun underwriting new policies including vax status as a risk factor for life and disability policies? No one has more to lose financially (since Pharmacy has indemnity) than insurance providers. They must have experienced increased claims given the surge in heart attacks, and other adverse events, and it must be ringing alarm bells in a business that is dependent upon accurately assessing risk and evaluating data. Maybe you have contacts in this area?
And a follow up comment I made responding to a fellow subscriber:
This would be an interesting legal fight for this reason: you would have insurance companies, who issue life and disability policies, making a case for causality related to the vaccine while the CDC and the medical community is actively refuting causality. I don’t think insurance companies would have success with causality if the medical provider is stating in their chart the cause is unknown and that it isn’t vaccine related. The only way an insurer might counter that is by requiring an autopsy, and even then causation has been missed by all but top pathologists in Germany. The insurers will be forced to underwrite based upon vaccine status if they want to avoid paying out 20-25% +/- more death and disability benefits (based upon excess deaths). The insurance companies will be forced to enter the fray arguing for vaccine causality.
Agreed, they could still simply jack up everyone's rates when it comes to life insurance. Not sure they will want to get in the weeds of arguing about the cause of death being the so-called vaccine. However, you should be able to get solid data from them regarding overall death statistics. And if they are not in line with previous years we have a problem, especially in that age group. Hard to blame the pandemic for 40% increase in the 18-64 range. And 2022 could make that number look tame depending on what the mid to long term effects are.
I know someone who works in life insurance. I asked him if there was an increase in claims due to mortality in 2021 and he said it's not out yet, but you can look up the quarterly filings (so data through 9/30/21). These filings are all available for free to the public on the SEC's EDGAR filing service. You'll search the companies name and then look for 10-K (annual report, so you can get 2019, 2018, etc data) and then 10-Q for quarterly data (so you can compare the nine months through the end of Sept.) It can be tricky searching for a company because they have trusts, holding companies, etc, so search the name and keep clicking on the different entities until you find 10-Qs and 10-Ks.
2. Click on "10-K and 10-Q" in the Selected Filings section (right side)
3. Click on 10-Q Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] with a filing date of 11/9/21. "November 9, 2021 - 10-Q: Quarterly report for quarter ending September 30, 2021"
4. Click "Menu" upper left, then "Open at html" because their new viewing platform is crap.
5. Once you're in the document, CTR-F "underwriting". This is the sauce. It took me a while to find where they hide it, but it's in the underwriting section (because they're underwriting human beings, not loans, etc like other companies).
On page 112 (US segment for the nine months ending 9/30/21 compared with the nine months ending 9/30/20:
"Underwriting and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable mortality in our Group Benefits business resulted in a decrease in adjusted earnings of $587 million. This was primarily driven by: (i) increases in both incidence and severity in both COVID-19 and core claims across our life businesses; and (ii) unfavorable results in our accidental death & dismemberment business due to lower incidence in the prior period as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Favorable mortality in our RIS business, including the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic, resulted in an increase in adjusted earnings of $73 million, driven by our pension risk transfer, specialized benefit resource and structured settlement businesses, partially offset by unfavorable results in our institutional income annuity business. Unfavorable claims experience, partially offset by the impact of growth in our Group Benefits business, resulted in a $43 million decrease in adjusted earnings, primarily due to: (i) unfavorable claims experience in our group disability business; and (ii) unfavorable dental results, as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic, which limited availability of services and reduced utilization in the prior period, partially offset by: (i) the impact of the acquisition of Versant Health on our vision business; (ii) favorable claims experience in the individual disability business; and (iii) the impact of business growth in our accident & health business. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $4 million increase in adjusted earnings."
They're saying that part of these "unfavorable" results (ie we had to pay out a bunch of money because people either died or became disabled) is because services weren't available in 2020, so people delayed treatment until 2021, and now they're playing catch-up. I'll let you be the judge of whether that's telling the whole story.
However, in the consolidated section (all across the world, page 108) has this:
"Underwriting, Actuarial Assumption Review and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable underwriting resulted in an $850 million decrease in adjusted earnings and reflected impacts from the COVID-19 Pandemic. This was primarily driven by unfavorable mortality in our U.S. and Latin America segments, coupled with unfavorable claims experience in our EMEA and U.S. segments. The favorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net increase of $63 million in adjusted earnings. Changes in operational, biometric and economic assumptions were less unfavorable in the current period when compared to the prior period. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $43 million increase in adjusted earnings. Dividend scale reductions, as well as run-off in MLIC’s closed block, contributed to lower dividend expenses of $82 million and lower associated DAC amortization of $84 million, which increased adjusted earnings."
The key sentences there are: "The favorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net increase of $63 million in adjusted earnings. Changes in operational, biometric and economic assumptions were less unfavorable in the current period when compared to the prior period. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $43 million increase in adjusted earnings."
So they updated their actuarial tables to assume more people are going to die or get injured/disabled, thus allowing them to roll over some of the expected payouts, thus adding money back in to offset the "unfavorable undewriting" (ie people died/got injured). That's my interpretation.
I am assuming that underwriting means the actual process of underwriting a claim/making a risk assumption on the individual buying a claim. So if the underwriting is unfavorable, then that means they made wrong assumptions on when the person was going to die, or how likely they were to die in a given year, or how likely they were to become injured, etc, and thus they had to pay out more. I don't work in this industry, though, so I could be misinterpreting that. But it seems to me that a decrease in adjusted earnings of almost a billion when they still had the fourth quarter to report is significant. Page 5 has their net income through sept as only 5.3 billion. Also, in that table you can see that claims paid out are up roughly 2.5 billion compared to same ninths months of 2020, whereas their premium payments (you paying them every month) are only up a little under 800 million (top line items in expenses and assets categories, right side).
Pg: 114 (Asia section): "Underwriting and Actuarial Assumption Review. Higher claims, primarily in Japan and Korea decreased adjusted earnings by $28 million. The unfavorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net decrease of $51 million in adjusted earnings."
You find this stuff in the "Notes to consolidated financial statements" section. Usually follows right after the financial statements. You can jump to it by clicking the link at the top of the document, or doing CTR+F.
These reports are required by law. They can't hide them. You can look up other companies and I'll bet it's a similar story. They're saying it's because people didn't seek treatment in 2020. I'm sure that's part of it but idk if it's the whole story, like I said. You can discern for yourself.
It's possible hidden somewhere in there it states the increase/decrease in mortality. I just don't have time right now to get into it. If people have time, you should be looking into this. It's in the filings, just in total dollar basis, not increase of people dying.
Would be interesting to know which companies have the most employees covered by COLI aka dead peasant insurance and how much they made from those policies in 2021.
Steve Kirsch I’ve sent you a few emails regarding a statement you made before the FDA regarding one out of every 317 boys between the ages of 16 and 17 developing myocarditis from the shot, can you please send me the source and method that arrived you at this conclusion? I am a day late on an article that will be published immediately and this was information I wish to use but cannot without a source, thank you
Jason@takeactioncanada.ca
Hiring Manager: 'I Can't Find Employees!'* https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=243839
The numbers for the "annual run rate of non-institutional population over the last 12 months" in that article seem to be bogus. At least I wasn't able to conciliate those numbers with the actual employment situation reports. Would love of someone could double check those numbers.
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244688
The scan of the following insurance companies confirms the initial report. For Prudential, they have had a massive 87% increase in death benefits paid comparing the third quarter of 2020 to the third quarter of 2021. Such a detailed breakdown wasnt available for New York Life, but their 2021 year to date (1 Jan to 30 Sept) death benefit payout is up by 27%. Examining Pacific Life documents identifies multiple units. For Pacific Life the year to date claims are up by only 12%. But for a subsidiary, Pacific Life and Annuity, claims are up by over 80%. This is an opportunistic search; more data may be forthcoming. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/01/more_preliminary_evidence_that_the_*******s_have_led_to_a_spike_in_deaths.html
Anyone think about what will happen to these insurance companies when their payouts get accelerated to this extent? They very well might not have the resources to cover all of these payouts happening so quickly. That could lead to a financial crisis as insurers have to pull money out of their investments to make payments. And/or it could require a Fed bailout of those investments to keep them solvent.
This is straight nonsense and legacy media style fear porn.
That won’t happen because that’s not at all how any of this works. None of these insurers are in danger of not making their payouts, and these mortality increases are in the group market, not the individual market.
To be fair, this is bad, but it is also more of a lesson in the adverse risk selection of group plans and not proof—in any way whatsoever—of healthy people dying or of life insurers in financial danger. Check their surplus and reinsurance arrangements.
I suggest you Post this on the Hartford CT Craigslist and Reddit and maybe Springfield Mass too
So are we perhaps seeing the first glimmers of a quasi free market solution beginning to emerge ? So far it has been the pharma cartel using its own 'regulatory capture' to get what it wants. But this free rein has triggered a subsidiary crisis in the insurance industry. Cannot the insurance cartel be expected to mobilize, to marshal its own captured government bureaucracies in defense against the costs it is now being forced to bear as a consequence of the actions of the pharma cartel ? And as more subsidiary crisis are triggered will not other affected industries seek to press their own captured regulatory bureaucracies into their defense ?
Black Rock and Vanguard own everything, including the insurance industry. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Blackrock and Vanguard do not own the life insurance industry. It’s the other way around.
Check the life insurers’ surplus and reinsurance arrangements and let me know what you find. I’ll wait.
I consider insurance to be a parasitic occupation. Now are the parasites going to earn their keep and become heroes by blowing the whistle on this whole thing? Other lines of business might be able to deny reality to this degree and get away with it, but an insurance company can’t. They will go BROKE if they bet on the wrong thing, if they raise premiums on the unvaccinated and not the vaccinated, unless they start denying insurance claims for being vaccinated.
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.
https://archive.is/Bk7PI
Hi Steve, my husband works in life insurance in Australia. He's been asking whether there have been statistically significant increases in mortality and morbidity experience as a result of the 'pandemic'. On the three occasions he has asked this question within his own organisation, it has been misinterpreted. The actuaries and underwriters seem to think he is asking about experience changes due to the virus itself, i.e. direct Covid deaths or disability claims, rather than from the vaccines.
As to your line of enquiry, he believes it is not the life insurers but rather the re-insurers who would be ultimately affected by a mispricing of the risk. An insurer has a vested interest in maintaining premium rates as low as possible in order to maintain their share of business. Secondly, their pools of business are often too small and the experience too lumpy for anyone to draw statistically significant conclusions from the experience data. An exception to this would be the very large group risk pools like the Indiana Life example quoted in The Centre Square article on Jan 1.
The re-insurers on the other hand, have much larger data sets across many fronting insurers. So he thinks you may be better served by talking to the large re-insurers like RGA, Swiss Re, Munich Re, Hanover Re. It is these organisations that ultimately carry much of the long tail risk who should be monitoring mortality and morbidity experience changes due to the pandemic and its 'cure', the vaccines themselves.
I will get him to join your insurance substack group.
I am in insurance
How is this not the leading story on every network news program and ever website?
This is a terrific idea Steve. Nothing will tell the story like all cause mortality rates. There's no better source for that info than large life insurance companies.
Steve: Last week I posted this to a comment section as a possible source of data for you but I don't think you saw it. I independently came to this conclusion as a former risk analyst for a different industry.
It would be very helpful if you had a place where people could contact you other than the comments section from one of your posts in order to give you leads or data sources. This is what I wrote:
Steve, a possible source for data: have insurance company actuaries begun underwriting new policies including vax status as a risk factor for life and disability policies? No one has more to lose financially (since Pharmacy has indemnity) than insurance providers. They must have experienced increased claims given the surge in heart attacks, and other adverse events, and it must be ringing alarm bells in a business that is dependent upon accurately assessing risk and evaluating data. Maybe you have contacts in this area?
And a follow up comment I made responding to a fellow subscriber:
This would be an interesting legal fight for this reason: you would have insurance companies, who issue life and disability policies, making a case for causality related to the vaccine while the CDC and the medical community is actively refuting causality. I don’t think insurance companies would have success with causality if the medical provider is stating in their chart the cause is unknown and that it isn’t vaccine related. The only way an insurer might counter that is by requiring an autopsy, and even then causation has been missed by all but top pathologists in Germany. The insurers will be forced to underwrite based upon vaccine status if they want to avoid paying out 20-25% +/- more death and disability benefits (based upon excess deaths). The insurance companies will be forced to enter the fray arguing for vaccine causality.
Agreed, they could still simply jack up everyone's rates when it comes to life insurance. Not sure they will want to get in the weeds of arguing about the cause of death being the so-called vaccine. However, you should be able to get solid data from them regarding overall death statistics. And if they are not in line with previous years we have a problem, especially in that age group. Hard to blame the pandemic for 40% increase in the 18-64 range. And 2022 could make that number look tame depending on what the mid to long term effects are.
IT'S IN THE SEC FILINGS!!
I know someone who works in life insurance. I asked him if there was an increase in claims due to mortality in 2021 and he said it's not out yet, but you can look up the quarterly filings (so data through 9/30/21). These filings are all available for free to the public on the SEC's EDGAR filing service. You'll search the companies name and then look for 10-K (annual report, so you can get 2019, 2018, etc data) and then 10-Q for quarterly data (so you can compare the nine months through the end of Sept.) It can be tricky searching for a company because they have trusts, holding companies, etc, so search the name and keep clicking on the different entities until you find 10-Qs and 10-Ks.
Using Met life as an example:
1. Go here: https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0001099219
2. Click on "10-K and 10-Q" in the Selected Filings section (right side)
3. Click on 10-Q Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] with a filing date of 11/9/21. "November 9, 2021 - 10-Q: Quarterly report for quarter ending September 30, 2021"
4. Click "Menu" upper left, then "Open at html" because their new viewing platform is crap.
5. Once you're in the document, CTR-F "underwriting". This is the sauce. It took me a while to find where they hide it, but it's in the underwriting section (because they're underwriting human beings, not loans, etc like other companies).
On page 112 (US segment for the nine months ending 9/30/21 compared with the nine months ending 9/30/20:
"Underwriting and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable mortality in our Group Benefits business resulted in a decrease in adjusted earnings of $587 million. This was primarily driven by: (i) increases in both incidence and severity in both COVID-19 and core claims across our life businesses; and (ii) unfavorable results in our accidental death & dismemberment business due to lower incidence in the prior period as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Favorable mortality in our RIS business, including the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic, resulted in an increase in adjusted earnings of $73 million, driven by our pension risk transfer, specialized benefit resource and structured settlement businesses, partially offset by unfavorable results in our institutional income annuity business. Unfavorable claims experience, partially offset by the impact of growth in our Group Benefits business, resulted in a $43 million decrease in adjusted earnings, primarily due to: (i) unfavorable claims experience in our group disability business; and (ii) unfavorable dental results, as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic, which limited availability of services and reduced utilization in the prior period, partially offset by: (i) the impact of the acquisition of Versant Health on our vision business; (ii) favorable claims experience in the individual disability business; and (iii) the impact of business growth in our accident & health business. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $4 million increase in adjusted earnings."
They're saying that part of these "unfavorable" results (ie we had to pay out a bunch of money because people either died or became disabled) is because services weren't available in 2020, so people delayed treatment until 2021, and now they're playing catch-up. I'll let you be the judge of whether that's telling the whole story.
However, in the consolidated section (all across the world, page 108) has this:
"Underwriting, Actuarial Assumption Review and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable underwriting resulted in an $850 million decrease in adjusted earnings and reflected impacts from the COVID-19 Pandemic. This was primarily driven by unfavorable mortality in our U.S. and Latin America segments, coupled with unfavorable claims experience in our EMEA and U.S. segments. The favorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net increase of $63 million in adjusted earnings. Changes in operational, biometric and economic assumptions were less unfavorable in the current period when compared to the prior period. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $43 million increase in adjusted earnings. Dividend scale reductions, as well as run-off in MLIC’s closed block, contributed to lower dividend expenses of $82 million and lower associated DAC amortization of $84 million, which increased adjusted earnings."
The key sentences there are: "The favorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net increase of $63 million in adjusted earnings. Changes in operational, biometric and economic assumptions were less unfavorable in the current period when compared to the prior period. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities in both periods resulted in a $43 million increase in adjusted earnings."
So they updated their actuarial tables to assume more people are going to die or get injured/disabled, thus allowing them to roll over some of the expected payouts, thus adding money back in to offset the "unfavorable undewriting" (ie people died/got injured). That's my interpretation.
I am assuming that underwriting means the actual process of underwriting a claim/making a risk assumption on the individual buying a claim. So if the underwriting is unfavorable, then that means they made wrong assumptions on when the person was going to die, or how likely they were to die in a given year, or how likely they were to become injured, etc, and thus they had to pay out more. I don't work in this industry, though, so I could be misinterpreting that. But it seems to me that a decrease in adjusted earnings of almost a billion when they still had the fourth quarter to report is significant. Page 5 has their net income through sept as only 5.3 billion. Also, in that table you can see that claims paid out are up roughly 2.5 billion compared to same ninths months of 2020, whereas their premium payments (you paying them every month) are only up a little under 800 million (top line items in expenses and assets categories, right side).
Pg: 114 (Asia section): "Underwriting and Actuarial Assumption Review. Higher claims, primarily in Japan and Korea decreased adjusted earnings by $28 million. The unfavorable change from our annual actuarial assumption reviews resulted in a net decrease of $51 million in adjusted earnings."
You find this stuff in the "Notes to consolidated financial statements" section. Usually follows right after the financial statements. You can jump to it by clicking the link at the top of the document, or doing CTR+F.
These reports are required by law. They can't hide them. You can look up other companies and I'll bet it's a similar story. They're saying it's because people didn't seek treatment in 2020. I'm sure that's part of it but idk if it's the whole story, like I said. You can discern for yourself.
It's possible hidden somewhere in there it states the increase/decrease in mortality. I just don't have time right now to get into it. If people have time, you should be looking into this. It's in the filings, just in total dollar basis, not increase of people dying.
That is SO helpful! Thanks!
You're very welcome. If you find anything, please post what you find here as I'd be interested in reading it!
Would be interesting to know which companies have the most employees covered by COLI aka dead peasant insurance and how much they made from those policies in 2021.
https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/life-insurance/dead-peasant/