Thomas Renz, an attorney based in Ohio has started a lawsuit against the federal government for covering up the true number of deaths from the Covid-19 vaccines.
According to Renz, a whistle-blower – referred to as Jane Doe – who is an insider and has seen information on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) allegedly passed on the numbers and relevant information to him. At an event hosted by Awaken America, Renz said: “We have someone that has sworn under penalty of purgery that there have been at least 45,000 deaths.”
Renz stated that whilst he cannot currently prove the information, he said that with America’s Frontline Doctors – a team of medical professionals fighting for medical freedom for Americans – he has been “empowered” to file the lawsuit in Alabama.
Allegedly, the whistleblower stated that there are around 11 VAERS systems reporting adverse reactions and deaths across the US, and one system alone has allegedly has reported the shocking 45,000 deaths from the Covid jabs. However, Renz believes that this number is “immensely higher” and is calling for immediate investigations into the VAERS system.
“How many have really died and why are they covering it up?”, Renz told the Awaken America crowd.
The attorney said that this information and lawsuit will not be reported by the mainstream media and will likely be censored by big tech corporations like YouTube, Facebook, and Google. Renz said that these big tech giants are “complicit in causing death”, and that he cannot wait to sue them “over and over again.”
Through his Ohio-based law firm, Renz Law, Thomas is suing the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to halt the Covid-19 vaccine rollout to children 15-years-old and younger.
Whistleblower Testimony: 45,000 Deaths Caused by the Vaccines
Plaintiffs’ expert Jane Doe45 is a computer programmer with subject matter expertise in
the healthcare data analytics field, and access to Medicare and Medicaid data maintained by the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) (see Declaration of Jane Doe at Exhibit D).
Over the last 20 years, she has developed over 100 distinct healthcare fraud detection algorithms
for use in the public and private sectors. In her expert opinion, VAERS under-reports deaths
caused by the Vaccines by a conservative factor of at least 5. As of July 9, 2021, VAERS
reported 9,048 deaths associated with the Vaccines. Jane Doe queried data from CMS medical
claims, and has determined that the number of deaths occurring with 3 days of injection with the
Vaccines exceeds those reported by VAERS by a factor of at least 5, indicating that the true
number of deaths caused by the Vaccines is at least 45,000. She notes that in the 1976 Swine
Flu vaccine campaign (in which 25% of the U.S. population at that time, 55 million Americans,
were vaccinated), the Swine Flu vaccine was deemed dangerous and unsafe, and removed from
the market, even though the vaccine resulted in only 53 deaths.
The gross and willful under-reporting of Vaccine-caused deaths, which is substantiated
by Jane Doe’s Declaration, and also by other independent data points considered as part of
Plaintiffs’ due diligence, is profoundly important on a number of levels. This evidence increases
the likelihood of Plaintiffs’ success on the merits by: (1) making it impossible (a) that the DHHS
Secretary can reasonably conclude, as required by § 360bbb–3(c)(2)(B), that “the known and
potential benefits of [the Vaccines] outweigh the known and potential risks of [the Vaccines]”,
(b) that the DHHS Secretary has succeeded in creating conditions, as required by § 360bbb–
3(e)(1)(A)(i)(II) and (ii)(II), that ensure that healthcare professionals and Vaccine candidates are
informed of the “significant known and potential [ ] risks” of the Vaccines, and (c) that the
DHHS Secretary has succeeded in creating conditions, as required by § 360bbb–3(e)(1)(A)(iii),
for the monitoring and reporting of adverse events; and (2) sealing Plaintiffs’ argument that the
FDA’s “citizen petition” process (discussed infra in section III(1)) is “inadequate and not
efficacious” and that its pursuit by Plaintiffs would have been a “futile gesture” by showing
Defendants’ bad faith. The evidence makes it irrefutable that Plaintiffs and others in the public
will suffer irreparable injury (discussed infra in section III(2)) if this Motion is denied. Finally,
the evidence tilts the balance of hardships and public interest (discussed infra in Section III(3)
decisively in favor of Plaintiffs.
Please see case filing below