The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently unveiled a new set of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes to monitor Covid-19 vaccine status.
ICD codes are employed extensively in medical records, health insurance data and research to precisely classify any disease states or injuries caused by external elements such as medication, accidents, toxic chemicals and medical device damage. Vaccination status is an entirely separate concept from a medical condition or injury, yet the CDC believes this warrants the introduction of ICD codes for it. The coding system will be put in place on April 1st 2023.
Nine months back, the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) crafted vaccine status ICD codes as described by Dr. Robert Malone: “The ICD classification system is run by the World Health Organization, not the US government.” As of now, CDC has adopted them into its practices.
It is astounding that the Z28.xxx coding system, which records vaccine status and potential explanations for immunization, includes no code to indicate a person as being “fully vaccinated.” What's more astonishing is that it only provides multiple statuses for those who are not completely inoculated.
- According to the coding system, Z28.0 signifies that an immunization was not carried out due to a contraindication while Z28.1 denotes that it wasn't completed because of personal or social convictions held by the patient.
- The designation Z28.2 signals that a patient has declined immunization for an unspecified reason.
- According to the code Z28.2, “immunization not carried out for other reason” (Z28.8) refers solely to reasons that are non-patient related.
- To conclude, Z28.39 encompasses “other under-immunization status” such as “Delinquent immunization status” and “Lapsed immunization schedule status”.
Yet, a possible inconsistency is highlighted because code Z28.310 implies “unvaccinated for COVID-19.”
It's evident that the details of why patients make particular vaccine selections are not currently coded for Covid-19 vaccines, yet fortunately, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have two months to rectify this. Unfortunately there aren't any specific codes available now on “refused to divulge COVID-19 vaccination status” or “unknown COVID-19 vaccination status,” but eventually these will be added.
What is the purpose of collecting this information? Clearly, it serves a public health benefit to enable agencies to monitor population vaccination status. Personal health data is commonly utilized by various parties like public health entities, insurance companies and researchers, though it remains anonymous and organized into groups. Identifiable health information is securely stored in databases, but must adhere to HIPAA and other regulations that control the use of such data for analysis.
In theory, vaccination status could be treated just like other medical records. Your age, gender and race; where you live; obesity levels; diabetes diagnosis; smoking or alcohol usage habits; and HIV status are all factors which can already be tracked in your medical records. This type of information, if released publicly, could potentially be viewed as stigmatizing. However there are no current political or other external influences that would require individuals to make decisions based on the data collected about them.
Just imagine if one morning, government agents were pounding on your front door at the ungodly hour of 6am, informing you that in order to avoid being sent away to a “smoking-cessation hotel,” you would have to take smoking cessation medications. It doesn't sound like much fun – but it could be reality unless we start taking action now!
The medications have been designed with built-in transmitters that activate when exposed to stomach acid, allowing the government to keep track of those who are taking their meds. Unfortunately, 500,000 Americans lose their lives each year due to smoking related diseases – leading to massive end-of-life medical expenses for which the government no longer wishes to pay.
But Covid-19 and its vaccine have a different story. The EUA protocols were used in creating the vaccines and their boosters, but they are still not fully licensed. BLAs such as Comirnaty aren't available to people in America yet. This obvious ploy has caused an uproar among citizens of the United States; many find these vaccinations controversial or unacceptable, which is understandable given the circumstances surrounding them.
Over the past year, we have witnessed our vaccinated family and friends getting Covid multiple times. We've also seen people harmed by vaccines while healthy athletes suddenly pass away with no explanation other than “coincidence.” Despite being promoted as a remedy to this pandemic, the failure of these vaccines to suppress virus transmission across all demographics is undeniable.
For two years straight, people have been consistently barraged with the same messages that vaccines are “safe and effective” and must be taken. People who don't take them are portrayed as irresponsible, selfish individuals who cause damage to society, resulting in them being ostracized.
These days, personal vaccination status is much more stigmatizing than even having AIDS. Consequently, any government compilation of this data must have the highest security possible to protect against hacking and misuse. Additionally, people need to trust that the government will use it solely for its intended purpose as with other medical information they keep on record.
With the extensive manipulation of information by authorities regarding vaccines, their unfavorable effects, Covid and early treatments for it as well as constraints on genuine scientific opinions and data delivered through social networks, there is no valid cause to trust government with such sensitive personal details.
If the government chooses to distribute confidential status information to insurance companies or any other private corporations, there is no way of knowing whether anyone will be able to challenge it. This could have dire consequences for individuals; public travel may become forbidden, bank accounts frozen and purchases restricted on the basis of this stigmatized data. It's important that we do what we can now to stop such a scenario from becoming reality.
Our Declaration of Independence protects our inalienable right to freedom and the pursuit of happiness. The government is not allowed to interfere with common practices that are part of everyday life, yet companies supported by the government, armed with personal information from them could very well do it.
In the wake of FOIA documents, it has been revealed that hundreds of government employees have spent the pandemic years working to undermine Americans' right to free speech by coercing social media companies into censoring their posts.
In addition, there isn't a legitimate rationale for keeping track of vaccination status. If it was believed that vaccinations would help lower Covid-19 transmission rates across the population (which is inaccurate), then maybe compiling such data could have made sense – but not now.
On August 11, 2022, the CDC made a public announcement that Covid-19 vaccinations are not effective in controlling virus transmission. They stated that while one dose of the vaccine may give transient protection against infection and transmission after receipt of the most recent vaccination, it is far from enough to serve as an adequate public health measure due to this minimal protection waning over time without all recommended booster doses being up to date.
The transient nature of this benefit suggests that after a short duration, boosters are no longer successful in decreasing the risk of transmission; thus rendering any vaccine mandates void.
The only motivation the government has for demanding Covid vaccinations and collecting personal information regarding vaccination status is that these vaccines are supposed to reduce transmission. Unfortunately, this isn't the case.
What's more, the CDC’s August 11th regulations don't determine any policy differences between vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals. Therefore, there isn't a need for the government to distinguish people by their vaccination status since it would be similar to collecting personal data on hair color. However, unlike hair color which has no stigma attached to it; vaccine status carries an intense level of discrimination with it.
With the CDC declaring vaccination status not of policy importance, there is no logical reason for the government to continue their unjustified collection of this information against people's will. Particularly after two years of vilifying individuals who make rational and valid choices about their health concerning vaccinations.