CBS and RIVM see negative Vaccine Effectiveness; White House recommends 8-week booster

Next Tuesday (tomorrow) I'm in Unheard News to say something in their news item "Excess mortality". In the preparations, I came across the graph below from the excess mortality report of rivm and CBS. It was also time for a Virusvaria article, with this one.

t.ly/oDW-

'Basisserie Deel' is the first of the two basic. This immediately shows a VE of more than 50%. The second jab (basic series month 1, month 2 etc) boosts that a bit. Please note: that is not against Covid. This is an effectiveness against dying to any cause of death!

This seems like an elixir of life...! Far fewer people will die, people will age, life expectancy will increase because the majority of people are vaccinated. How many houses should we build now?

To our surprise, an injection protects 65% better against cancer, heart attacks, brain hemorrhages, traffic accidents, domestic accidents...? Or against all other infectious diseases? After all, even in the most rabid calculations, Covid-19 does not go beyond 20% of the causes of death, that cannot cause this difference (See causes of death 2020(!) of the central government) because even if under this 20% assumption every corona death is saved, you will not get to 65% effectiveness against total mortality. Have unvaccinated people suddenly died much more from other causes? Very unlikely.

It is certain that the total mortality remains at the same level and more than that, there is excess mortality. That addition to the prevented mortality should then come from the unvaccinated, but in the hospitals and ICUs we see nothing of that: those figures should have doubled approximately. See calculation example below.

'Basic series m1' means the second injection, which after two weeks increases the protection from 50% to 75%. We assume that those two intervening weeks are counted in "Basic series partly", otherwise you would miss deaths and mistakenly register them as 'unvaccinated'. This in turn could lead to a greatly increased VE against all causes of death.

You could check that in the data, but the institutes did not snoop.

Decreasing protection (delusion)

The course of protection over the months is downright worrisome. In the youngest group (12-49 years), the VE drops below zero after only 5 months: more mortality among vaccinated people. Months 11, 12 and beyond are not even shown, although the young people do give an impression of what happens when the protection curve drops. The protection shoots through to very negative, that is, the chance of dying as a double-vaccinated person is greater than if you are not vaccinated. To what extent that picks up 'automatically' is not to be seen. Let's hope that our natural immune system can also come up with a meaningful response to this.

What happens to the double-pricked (20% of the population) we do not know. After 10 months, the blue balls are omitted and only the boosters are shown. They will boost things enormously again, although we will have to wait and see for how long. The first two visible blue spheres already do not seem equally stable everywhere...

The spirits are now being made ripe for pricking every eight weeks...

Graphlighting: how negative?

In the CBS graph above, it is also striking that at 12-49 years three blue dots are next to each other at -25%. You would almost think that all negative values are shown as -25%. In the underlying figures we even see a Negative VE of -93%! Apparently, 8 months after your injection, you were twice as likely to die as usual, at least if you were double vaccinated and between the ages of 12 and 49. A data error? Or something about the wrong registration of the vaccination status? What's going on here?

This is apart from the shameless misrepresentation, not to say disinformation in the graph. See how CBS displays it and what it should have looked like if the actual values had been displayed.

So the graph should have looked like this:

We also encountered a similar phenomenon in the UK data. As soon as the boosters come into view, the basic series is no longer reported. The group of double-vaccinated people may then be considered too small because the majority (about 75%) of the get the booster. This apparently makes the double-pricked less interesting. The UK data that still exists with regard to the double-vaccinated group also show clear signs of negative effectiveness. This is smoothed out by replacing it with the jacking effect of the boosters.

What is also striking in the CBS graphs is that it seems as if the decline occurs much earlier in young people than in the elderly: about three months earlier. You wouldn't expect that with strong immune systems.

Faster disappearing effectiveness has been reported in multiple studies. For example, in an Israeli study we read:

Published work on many vaccines, such as those against measles, mumps and rubella, has shown a small drop of 5 to 10% each year in neutralizing antibody levels. On the BNT162b2 vaccine, we saw a significant and rapid decrease in humoral response within a few months of vaccination.

Israeli study among approximately 4,000 healthcare workers

They're talking about three to five months. So that rivm interval of 10 months seems like a long time.

[edit 18-9-2022:] In de Tweede Kamer-hearing presenteerde Jaap van Dissel een andere grafiek. De laatste vier rode bolletjes bij 12-49 geven ook hoger sterfterisico dan bij niet-gevaccineerden, maar veel minder dan de blauwe hierboven.

In the graph VE against death by Covid-19, the last balls have been omitted. We have to guess whether they turn into negative values: vaccination mortality.

Risk of death after 2nd dose of basic series

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 mortality

A variable interval?

Statisticians are looking further towards that 5-month interval, given the findings in us and UK. In the Netherlands we only saw those 5 months in the young, the elderly received months longer protection – but against what? Against everything? Isn't that very unlikely, is that data correct?

In this graph the oldest and the youngest group: 90+ holds the protection for months longer than the group of 12-49 years.

The over-90s were vaccinated months earlier than the 50-year-olds. The protection of both the elderly and the young began to fall away at about the same time, that was in the last quarter of 2021. On Twitter, Maarten Keulemans notes that we were dealing with Omikron at the time.

So when Omikron came up and the vaccines could start proving their protection, they failed, they even proved counterproductive.

The graph could also be explained differently: excess mortality was already increasing when vaccine protection began to decrease. When the vaccines were completely exhausted (or escaped away), it paved the way for omikron.
However, this explanation is not compatible with the rest of the world. We were later with than other countries and omikron did not care about that at all.

Another hypothesis is that the immune systems are severely disrupted and that virus-rich periods reveal this. If that is indeed the case, we are heading for an exciting autumn.

In conclusion

All in all, more reasons to explicitly mention vaccinations among the possible causes of the excess mortality that has been structurally continuing for almost a year and a half, since May 2021, and flares up in the meantime. In no particular order, I will list the most important starting points for thorough, independent, scientific and therefore critical and public research:

1. Effects of non-medical interventions: policy measures
   • Psychological factors (depression, decrease in zest for life, lack of perspective due to loss of work or lack of meaning, deprivation of liberty, death need, life threat, life threat of loved ones, threat of death by guilt, etc.).
     Note: Diffuse matter and therefore difficult to harden. Just try to quantify.
   • Delayed care (in particular, delayed diagnoses are often mentioned)
     Note: Delayed care will only be able to explain a small part of the excess mortality, which is easy to quantify.
2. Effects of medical interventions: vaccinations, treatment protocols
   Note.: This research is made impossible by the unjustified protection with privacy rules. This is the biggest red flag and will have to be followed with suspicion. There are too many interests involved, for example financially, politically, in terms of reputations and consequences for the general willingness to vaccinate.
3. Aftereffects of Covid-19
   Note: To be considered in relation to other infectious diseases, which will also be a challenge because less is known about them

We will soon take a closer look at the quantitative share of a number of these categories – as far as possible. Because the government insists that the vaccines cannot be an option at all, we often pay a lot of attention to them here with signals that indicate that there are all kinds of ways in which the vaccines can indeed play a role. Will independent research ever resurface or has it been permanently drowned in the turbulent bars of technocratic inclusivity thinking?