The sequel to Part 1, van eergisteren. Daarin lag de nadruk op de effecten van de georkestreerde overheidscommunicatie op de bevolking. Dit artikel richt zich op de de effecten op zorgverleners en wat dat voor consequenties heeft gehad op de zorg zelf, denk aan behandelingen en patiëntenzorg. Aan instituten die zich opstellen als hoeder van “Kwaliteit van Zorg” met claims als “Goede verzekerde zorg voor iedereen in Nederland, nu en in de toekomst” wordt geen aandacht besteed omdat die geen enkele rol hebben gespeeld – een ander punt dat nog aandacht moet krijgen.
An extremely worrisome concern...
An acting doctor who has to 'look dead' someone (as I recently learned how an autopsy is called in professional jargon), what should he fill in with the causes of death? "Did your mother cough?" "Yes doctor, she did have an ugly cough at the end". "And exaltation?" "Yes, in the beginning, but we didn't measure that anymore at some point."
What do you fill in as an acting doctor at the time of an epidemic where you have to be extremely alert to an infectious disease? That is a diagnosis that you absolutely should not miss, that would be a blunder that could just lead to more illness and deaths. So what do you do, err on the side of caution with 'Suspicion of Covid' or leave it for what it is? And would your own doctor have done it differently?
This effect is easily underestimated because people do not only die during office hours or when their own doctor makes visits. On an eight-hour working day, the "Closed" sign hangs in front of the door twice as long as the "Open" sign.
Het is zo ook niet ondenkbaar dat we door dit sentiment onder artsen meer hospitalisaties hebben gehad. Meer diagnoses, meer verwijzingen, aangepaste medicatie. Bij behandelingen werd in een soortgelijke radeloosheid afgeweken van protocollen of er kwamen inderhaast nieuwe, net zoals er in de politiek wetten en grondrechten werden gebroken met noodwetten en de WHO het pandemie-handboek aan de kant gooide en van tijd tot tijd de definities van “epidemie” en “immuniteit” actualiseerde zodat het beleid weer paste.
Government communications led to abuses
For example, there is now the Midazolam issue, which (at least in the UK) seems to have hastened many end-of-life periods. "End-of-Life" protocols with high doses of Midazolam were deployed on elderly people with Covid. It feeds genocide plots: "they wanted to get rid of those oldies".
Twitter account @Jikkyleaks reported on it earlier.
Back to the theme of this article: The caregivers really wanted to relieve the pain, it would be hopeless suffering anyway, so they followed the adapted protocols, although there must have been those who frowned. But hey, why stretch life with such a debilitating, unforgiving disease that ends in a horrific asphyxiation death – in solitary isolation, too? And especially with those old people that no one was allowed to visit anyway... Better for everyone, including the patient. (by the way, they didn't get any food/drinks either – but see this Tweet, that's pretty much all there is to it.)
In some places, Covid patients were not given antibiotics because that did not help against Covid.
This can be seen in the registered number of administrations and the purchase of agents. The road to death from bacterial pneumonia was thus open. There are sources that vaccinated people, on the other hand, did receive antibiotics because they were doubted whether it was really Covid. After all, they had been vaccinated. That, aside from the human tragedies, would flatter the survival rate of vaccinated people.
That aside, I'm not going to look for the links now either. Informative is this video by Dr. John Campbell about changed protocols.
Meer hierover in een later artikel.
The question is how much less severe Covid-19 could have been, without doomsday scenarios and other swords of Damocles. And the same goes for LONG-Covid. And vaccine damage, if there had been transparent communication. There is iatrogenic mortality.
Geldt voor diagnose ‘vaccinatieschade’ hetzelfde?
Undoubtedly, there will be patients who have fallen ill after vaccination where the fear of side effects of the vaccines has played a role. The big difference is that the vaccinations have not been portrayed as dangerous by the media, government and authorities for weeks, months, years. On the contrary, they were emphatically completely safe. I can still see the desperation in Karoly Ily because the words failed him to explain how safe it was. (And they didn't know anything then.) Almost everyone considered the negative publicity surrounding vaccinations to be wappie-talk, nonsense. Doctors who dared to claim otherwise ran the risk of losing their BIG registration, well they don't just do that...!
Doctors will also not feel the same urge to label conditions as possibly related to vaccinations, which they themselves have recommended, where they might have a preference to signal a suspicion of Covid.
De Nederlandse burgers die de negatieve publiciteit rond de vaccins -voor zover ze daar al iets van gemerkt hebben- echt serieus hebben genomen, hebben zich niet laten vaccineren. Die ingebeelde vaccinatieschade bestaat dus niet. Dat was dan ook een minderheid, zo borstroffelde het rivm.
De meeste mensen hadden en hebben gewoon geen benul, die hadden juist vertrouwen, getuige de triomfantelijke gezichten op social media na het ontvangen van de prik. Als ze ziek werden, zeiden ze “daar zie je aan dat het werkt”. Dus dat nocebo-effect bij gevaccineerden… ik weet het niet, het moet een stuk minder zijn. In mijn eigen omgeving heb ik ook ernstige gevallen gezien (een hartfalen in de auto en twee onverwachte hersenbloedingen, waarvan een fataal) waarbij geen enkele relatie met de eerdere vaccinaties werd gelegd door de betrokkenen. Daar praat je ook niet over. Misschien was het ook niet zo – we zullen het nooit weten.
Er was helaas ook een groep die niet wilde maar niet anders kon vanwege allerlei omstandigheden. Maar wie zó overtuigd is van de bijwerkingen, die regelt wat. Als een gezin dat op wintersport wil, QR-passen op de zwarte markt kan kopen, en ziekenhuismedewerkers zijn betrapt op het tegen betaling injecteren met zoutoplossing, dan waren er toch wel mogelijkheden voor degenen die echt doodsbang waren voor de prik. Van de geprikten heeft de overgrote meerderheid echter nog steeds niks in de gaten.
As far as mortality is concerned, there are fewer doubts. Necropsies clearly show whether any damage was caused by the vaccine or by Covid, so there is no doubt about that – at least if one were to do necropsies because that is not stimulated. That's curious because it could remove a lot of uncertainty about the lethality of the vaccines.
What will have caused more mortality: Delayed care, the nocebo effect or vaccinations?
Long Covid data from the ONS (UK CBS)
Last year there was a study, still in the heat of battle, in which of all schoolchildren originally reported as Long-Covid, only 2% were found to actually have Long Covid, after the complaints were compared with the complaints of children who had not experienced Covid-19.
A professor indicates that these complaints are apparently common among schoolchildren, regardless of Covid-19 – at least if the tests are to be believed.
I would add, however, that we may have made those other unpricked children just as sick, purely with horror stories.
About that research in schools:
- Read the full Article on Daily Mail
- In maart 2022 gaf Daniël van der Tuin on Twitter a short summary (text below:)
Official data from the UK's Office for National Statistics (ONS) shows that "long covid" is drastically overreported in children. It occurred in 1% of young people under the age of 11. 1/4
The ONS says only one in 100 primary school-age pupils actually has long covid, despite half of parents reporting at least one of the symptoms. 2/4
Since March 2020, 47.5% of children with long-term symptoms have tested positive. However, 46.6% with the same symptoms did not test positive. 3/4
Commenting on the findings, Professor Viner said: "These data highlight how common symptoms such as fatigue or headaches are in children and teenagers, regardless of whether they have covid-19 or not." 4/4
De kracht van de geest.
Very nice to be kept informed of such matters in this way.
Thanks for that Anton
Campbell, too, is a – probably well-meaning – useful idiot, caught in the virus lie. As a result, he doesn't get beyond endless discussion of details that don't matter. After all, viruses do not exist, "infectious disease" is also nonsense. With that, the whole house of cards collapses. But people like him cannot/dare not admit to themselves and the outside world that they have been propagating a lie all their lives. Ego or cognitive dissonance – or both – stand in their way enormously. Critical thinking is impossible for such people, because they always stay well within the paths of government and industry.
Leo, can you post something businesslike, not just psychology of the cold ground? I sincerely hope that you come up with a better model than the one we have to work with now and that offers a reasonable grip on epidemic phenomena. I am asking this question for the third time.
If you're just ranting, I'd kindly ask you to find another outlet for that. It is no longer specifically about a virus – strictly speaking, it has never been about that. It is about the crisis that has been manufactured around it.
Rants... Because I'm preaching something other than usual?
Another model? That's been there for over a hundred and fifty years. Search for "terrain theory" or "terrain model of disease". You'll be surprised.
You're still missing the point: everything in this crisis is based on the virus model.
No, because you're constantly on the same drum and labeling dissenters with mental health issues. I will try to find a brief description of the theory you have in your head via Google and maybe continue from there.
I may be missing the point, but I don't think this crisis is based on the virus model at all. If there is a better model for dealing with disease and death, the commerce kongsi will put aside the virus model and start abusing the new to expand their property and power. You don't necessarily need viruses for that. This could also be done, for example, with water, climate, food, nitrogen, terrain, etc. etc.
I now realize that you can already see something similar happening: Fauci now claims that injecting vaccines can't actually work: it has to be sprayed into the air. So the puncture model is just as easily overhauled.
Bit off-topic: The next round of vaccination is about to be rolled out. All over-60s receive a shingles vaccine. An annoying condition, but very rarely life-threatening. Although pharma and in their wake the media, would have us believe otherwise. https://www.trouw.nl/zorg/60-plussers-krijgen-vaccinatie-tegen-gordelroos~ba987d30/
Shingles is also not caused by a virus, because viruses do not exist. Somewhat similar is the story about herpes, a nice video about it can be found on https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/What-We-Weren't-Taught-About-Herpes:3.
It is so sad that all these people are injected with poison for nothing.
@Anton: "labels dissenters with mental health problems" – really? If you do have an example of that, I will offer you my sincere apologies, but I do not believe that I have used the term "mental health problems", or anything to that effect. Or do you mean "cognitive dissonance"? If so, that's not a problem, it's a widely recognized psychological mechanism that affects everyone to varying degrees.
And yes, of course I keep beating the same drum – that's what the mainstream media does. Only with repetition can you try to get people who have been brainwashed all their lives out of that "hypnosis".
I agree that different crises such as war, climate, etc. can be used. However, for the past three years and many times in history, the virus model has been used by governments to seize more power and by eugenics to make people they consider waste sick with vaccines, in order to earn money from these victims.
But, you don't mean that because other crises can be used, we don't have to pay attention to the virus model, do you? Don't you think it's terrible that innocent children are vaccinated against something that doesn't exist, just to make them stupid and sick, so that later when they grow up, governments and business have good and obedient slaves?
About another model: a nice summary of the contagion lie can be found at https://www.transitieweb.nl/achtergrond-longreads/de-besmettingsmythe-een-nederlandstalige-samenvatting-van-the-contagion-myth/.
An into in terrain theory can be found at https://balanced-health.nl/germ-theorie-versus-terrain-theory/.
PS: if I occasionally express myself indiscriminately, it is mainly because I am very, very angry with robbery and (pharmaceutical) industry.
Hi Leo,
I'll follow you. I'm reading virusmania. There is no evidence for the causation: virusA causes disease B. Then we have drug C. That in turn gives side effects and so we have to give drug D etc. American children get 78 cocks against 16 diseases. The question is why? Many diseases have disappeared because the environment - terrain theory - changed (clean drinking water, better nutrition). For example, despite the fact that there is no vaccine, we no longer have plague in Europe. There is no evidence that viruses exist in the sense that they cause disease. All we have is the electron microscope. Sars-voc2 is a computer model of a piece of what we call RNA protein. There's a lot to say and research and write about it. It's just that "one"—the science doesn't need it. Because so much money is earned, we no longer look any further and we are stuck in a kind of middle ages in terms of thinking. We suffer from dogmas. Thanks to this crisis, many more scientists and doctors are aware of this. Hopefully we can get out of the stranglehold of the pharmaceutical industry and learn how to stay healthy again. Not through medication but through nutrition, exercise, love etc. (and yes there are also medicines that are needed and work well. But if people are chronically ill, you can't speak of being cured, but rather of keeping sick).
https://www.de-tijd-van-ons-leven.nl/leve-het-leven
I get Leo too. I do wonder if people who live in nature and eat healthy don't get sick and don't know epidemics, because I understand that (from what I've read about it, I'm not good at that matter). And I find it difficult to prove that infections do not exist, just as that healthy living in a healthy environment would make you immune to infections. I believe that Westerners have spread a lot of nasty diseases among Indians, Eskimos and Amazonians. Anyway, my priorities at the moment are elsewhere, apart from the fact that under a different paradigm there is a new stranglehold in the current systems. The system needs to be transparent and humanized, whether they are abusing a virus or something else.
Hi Marlies (unfortunately I couldn't answer directly so I hope you see this answer), how great that you are reading Virus Mania! But, not only is there no evidence for causation, there is no evidence that viruses exist at all. You say "All we have is the electron microscope". Have you ever looked at what needs to be done with a sample before it can be viewed through an electron microscope? Frostbite, poisoning with heavy metals, etc. Apart from that: you can take a picture of something with such a microscope, but how do you know that you are looking at a virus, if you have never isolated it? 😉
This one is nice about how SARS-CoV-2 and everything related to it only exists in computers: https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/The-Digital-Seduction-of-COVID-19-with-Eric-Coppolino:0
Furthermore, you say "And I find it difficult to prove that infections do not exist". If something can't be proven, why assume it exists? If even in 1919 they failed to make people sick with the according to the story oh so contagious Spanish Flu virus (https://sci-hub.tf/10.1001/jama.1919.02610310005002)... So where do you stay? After that, there were never any experiments in which contamination was demonstrated.
@Anton: "We suffer from dogmas.": that is certainly true! Another interesting dogma is the "central dogma of genetics", which has also never been proven... Of course not, because dogmas are by definition unproven. A nice discussion that makes you think can be found at https://criticalcheck.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/dna-discovery-extraction-and-structure-a-critical-review/.
" I believe that Westerners have spread a lot of nasty diseases among Indians, Eskimos and Amazonians." – No, that is the story we are told to hide the fact that this was just ordinary genocide. The only thing with which the original peoples were "infected" was Western "nutrition" and "medicine", or vaccines. Only then did they get sick, go figure. And... I get that you too only have 24 hours in a day, but on a rainy Sunday morning you would https://odysee.com/DeBetoveringVerbreken:b of 50 pages should be easy to read. Look for evidence of contamination, you'll be surprised.
About the system: as long as we leave the power to make money with a small group of international bankers, nothing will ever fundamentally change. A great book about that is The Web of Debt (https://odysee.com/The-Web-of-Debt(audiobook):1). Or The Creature from Jekyll Island, which is actually even more exciting (https://odysee.com/griffin-creature-jekyll-island-audio:9ad20b3b73b78c5f6ef39c952dea7e26a5b747ef).
PS: Anton, what does that plugin cost to answer normally? If you set up a Monero wallet, I will make the first donation so that you can finance it. 😉
One thing at a time, I would like to say. In other words, it makes no sense to want to undermine the prevailing theory about viruses as long as there is a goal that is closer to the experience, namely the excess mortality due to the (forced) vaccinations and other very harmful restrictive measures that effectively amount to the deprivation of basic rights. Again: not, in the first instance, wanting to be as pure as possible in the doctrine, but working together against coercion.
One does not have to exclude the other. It's such a shame that people like you can't or won't see big pharma effectively become the fourth pillar of the state, alongside the legislative, executive and "judicial" pillars. That is why it is a fundamentally different issue than arguing about mortality rates or measures. These are all details, derived from the underlying virus model. But there is indeed an even more direct threat that many people do not yet see: the cbdc. It strikes me how incredibly stupid and apathetic the Dutch people are: when you bring up CBDC, the suckers say: "crypto is not for me" or "I have nothing to hide anyway". How one day they will wake up in a nightmare. I would almost say: "just fine, when I warned you you wouldn't listen and you declared me crazy".
Hi Leo, thanks for your reply but wouldn't you want to decide for me whether or not I see things. I've been aware of the dangers you point out for years, but it's a matter of strategy. One thing at a time and not having the illusion that the entire 'army' as a whole can be chopped directly into the pan
"I've been aware of the dangers you've been pointing out for years" isn't really apparent from your initial answer, hence my assumption. "One thing at a time" is not possible anyway: to do things at the same time you need at least two. Apart from that, there is a war against the people on many fronts and we will have to fight back on all fronts at once. Starting with the politicians who make the "rules". At least as important is eliminating the (central) bankers who enable the decline to a technocratic system by financing the psychopaths in politics, media and business. Step by step as you suggest, we are lost. In addition, fighting against the "state" makes no sense, because the "state" is an illusion, created by those same bankers. But of course you already knew that.
You can try to demolish the entire wall around a city to be taken in one fell swoop, you can also try to enter by breaking through a weak spot in the wall. But of course you already knew that