De overheid is zich bewust van het maatschappelijke belang van het onderzoek naar oversterfte. Niet dat ze Virusvaria lezen, maar de Telegraaf lezen ze wel degelijk: "Vrijdag 16 december jl. is er in de Telegraaf opnieuw een artikel verschenen waarin vraagtekens gezet worden..."
Dan zou je als respons toch uitroeptekens verwachten: "Hier heb je je data! Niks aan de hand, kijk zelf maar!"
Maar nee. Men realiseert zich terdege dat het data-onderzoek antwoord moet geven op vragen omtrent "vroegtijdig overlijden in relatie tot vaccinatiegraad, vaccinatiegraad en ziekteverzuim en vaccinatiestatus subpopulaties (zie fase 3 verrichten onderzoek voor de onderzoeksvragen)." Zo staat het althans in de begeleidende brief.
Wat hier vermeden wordt is "vaccinatiestatus op individueel niveau" maar dat hoeft niet dramatisch te zijn want data op subpopulatieniveau kunnen voldoende aangrijpingspunten bieden - mits de subpopulaties zinnig zijn gekozen. Als daar dan iets belangwekkends uitkomt zal het later alsnog op individueel niveau uitgezocht moeten worden, al was het maar op verzoek van nabestaanden.
Let's see what is delivered (Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)), then that is indeed on an individual level because with BSN numbers:
Phase 1: data transfer from RIVM to CBS.
CBS receives the so-called 'CBS vaccination file' from RIVM. This consists of a
number of personal data filtered from the BI-CIMS dataset. These are:
• BSN number;
•Gender;
•Year of birth;
• Vaccine name;
• vaccination date;
• vaccination batch;
• administering authority (GGD/GP/hospital).
Why the letter refers to subpopulations is unclear. The above facts are indeed what was asked. Although the date of death is not listed, CBS has it together with the causes of death, and that can be linked via the BSN. So then all data is available.
Until we then read that the dataset is incomplete and has therefore been made unusable for the previously described purpose:
- Data of asylum seekers are not included. There are quite a few. Is there something in that, a higher sensitivity or an extremely high covid mortality? (not the scope of this research, but conceivable bycatch). Why are they not allowed to participate in the research, are they not part of it?
- Data from unvaccinated people is also not provided. This removes the possibility to compare vax vs non-vax: there is no reference. Of course, there are pre-vax data, but they are not representative of what took place epidemiologically during the corona crisis.
Nowhere is it explained why the file is invalidated in this way. And then comes the icing on the cake:
"Personen die zijn overleden" worden niet meegeleverd.
For data that are supposed to serve as the basis for a study of mortality, this is too crazy to run wild. Then CBS still cannot make a link between vaccination status and mortality because they do not receive vaccination data from the deceased!
CBS has prepared a number of questions that show that they do not want to understand what independent research stands for. The questions mainly illustrate how badly they want to stay away from the vaccines. Below are their main questions about the EXCESS MORTALITY= study (keep that in mind when you read the questions):
- What is the association between a previous COVID-19 infection and causes of death?
- What is the association between a previous hospitalization due to COVID-19 and causes of death?
- Since the start of the COVID-19 epidemic, what has been the influence of the COVID-19 epidemic on (changes in) life expectancy and inequality in longevity?
- What are the causes of death and comorbidities among deceased persons stating COVID-19 on the cause of death form?
- Is vaccination status a mediator in the association between socioeconomic status and premature death?
- What are the determinants of long covid?
- Longitudinal tracking of vaccinated versus unvaccinated people, ideally corrected for immunity as best as possible (i.e. include previously experienced COVID-19 cases confirmed by positive test result)
- Vaccination turnout after COVID-19 admission/COVID-19 death in close family?
- Course of COVID-19 within families (severe vs. non-severe); This includes looking at admission, but also, for example, home ventilation after a visit to the emergency room
- Vaccination coverage based on policy data by sector and plotting time against absenteeism statistics
- Link with the health monitor data to show differences in perceived health by vaccination status
Hoe moeten de geleverde data, uitsluitend van levende personen, antwoord geven op bovenstaande vragen die met overlijden te maken hebben? Dat zijn vragen 1, 2, 3, 4 en 5 - minder dan de helft van de voorgestelde vragen heeft überhaupt met sterfte te maken!
De olifant wordt opnieuw prominent midden in de kamer geplaatst. Het woord "Vaccinatie" zien we tersluiks opduiken bij een vraag als "Is vaccinatiestatus een mediator in de associatie tussen sociaaleconomische status en vroegtijdig overlijden?" Een bijrol, dat staat vast.
Sabotage
This is pure sabotage. This is frustrating democracy. This is yet another signal of the totalitarian technocratic tendency that is taking hold of our country.
These data are meaningless for an (excess) mortality study. I would like to hear the motivation for withholding essential data. The only explanation that remains now is that the realization has sunk in that the government has totally screwed up during the corona crisis. Everything has been done wrong, from face masks to vaccinations and everything in between, from school closures to curfews to dying in loneliness.
Als kippen zonder kop is er achter de farmafia aan gehold, gestimuleerd door enkele strategisch geplaatste lobbyisten. Incompetent en verblind door angst hebben wanhopige politici zich, bij gebrek aan eigen visie, vastgeklampt aan een globalistische half-fascistische samenklontering van machtige industriëlen en politici met standaardkreten als "Build back better", waarbij versterking van de eigen machtspositie natuurlijk een aanlokkelijk vooruitzicht was - vooral voor wie het beste met de wereld voorhad. En wie heeft dat niet.
Naar de bevolking toe is er gelogen, de soevereiniteit van het land is verder verkwanseld - en dat alles met een moreel superioriteitsgevoel dat wandaden rechtvaardigt. Dat het O.M. hier nog niet op is gedoken doet het ergste vermoeden over onze rechtsstaat, zeker nu het onderzoek moedwillig wordt gefrustreerd.
"he who, after a crime has been committed, with the intention of covering it up or preventing or complicating the investigation or prosecution, destroys, displaces, conceals or evades the investigation of judicial or police officials objects on or with which the crime has been committed or other traces of the crime;"
He faces a maximum of six months in prison, which is not too bad for suspects of crimes of this order of magnitude. As long as it is not a terrorist act, because then it will be five years. That also does not seem proportional to tens of thousands of deaths and the other malaise caused.
Buying time, but for what?
Als deze data-levering echt zo doorgaat is het opnieuw een wassen neus. Natuurlijk komt de overheid hier niet mee weg, dat weten ze ook wel. Ze kopen weer wat tijd want het kuisen van de databases loopt waarschijnlijk uit - maar ook daarin zullen ze fouten maken. De paniek moet compleet zijn daar bij VWS/rivm, op een bepaalde manier heb ik nog met ze te doen ook.
"Het is nu eenmaal gebeurd, terugdraaien kan toch niet"
"Het was de enige optie, we hebben naar eer en geweten gehandeld maar dat begrijpen ze misschien niet"
"We kunnen wel aftreden maar dan loopt het land vast"
"Als duidelijk wordt wat we hebben aangericht is de staatsorde in het geding, daar is niemand bij gebaat"
"Too big to fail" - dat geldt niet alleen voor banken.
Ruben van Gaalen denies everything
Ruben van Gaalen denies this on Twitter. Or there are inaccuracies in the documentation.
According to van Gaalen, it would only concern deceased people before the corona crisis, who have been filtered out. However, it does not say that. When he is further confronted about this, it turns out that he is not the one who is in charge of it.
He also assures us that no data will be lost. But that is not the complaint at all. It's about what is delivered.
He indicates that the proposed research questions can indeed be answered with the data. As we have seen from the specifications, that is doubtful and moreover, those questions are far from complete.
See also his response to this LinkedIn post by Ronald Meester. He denies what is written in black and white. If this is not yet another smokescreen, it seems to me that they should correct that document first. It should not be the case that they throw van Gaalen under the bus later in order to fall back on the official documents and create another postponement.
Van Gaalen often gives his own twist to numbers (see The most read post of this blog).
Frustrating thing, Anton. But I think it can no longer be kept under wraps. An investigation will start in Florida anyway, and in England there is a bit more conflict than here. Moreover, you have probably read the report that explains the waning immunity as one takes more shots. The story about specific antibodies (IgG4 story): https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
This is exactly in line with what we have been observing for a long time. Decreased immunity as one receives more mRNA shots. Already established in Sweden last year. Where they now prick much less.
Will certainly not get MSM in the Netherlands. Too confrontational. But the dam is about to burst (as Berenson says). Once 1 sheep (take that literally) has crossed the dam, the rest will follow. Even within politics, someone within the coalition has to admit that the narrative is wavering on all sides. So far, the government parties have kept the ranks closed, but there must be people among them who see it. Meanwhile, the enthusiasm for the shots is very low by the looks of it.
Or not, and it remains rumbling.
More attention and space for people like Van Haga is needed!! He names everything in the room in great detail. the rest is asleep...
All in all, the sabotage by the government can no longer be denied, but what is even more serious is that the threat of total terror from the thoroughly corrupt and pharma-affiliated WHO hangs over us.
There they are committed to obligations for the member countries that can override the laws of those countries in the event that a pandemic danger is detected at the WHO in which that danger will have to be averted by, among other things, the inherently unsafe mRNA "vaccine" technology. A horrifying vision of the future for me, but even more so for the generations after me
Buy time to lift the shit-storm over the elections?
Although, in the current docile media landscape of only 'pillars', power can really afford anything.
maybe I'm not reading correctly, but there are a lot of unvaccinated people who have deregistered from the RIVM. To what extent are these people counted somewhere, or not?
What do you mean by "unvaccinated people deregistered from the RIVM"? There are people who had not given permission to share their (test/vaccination) data, which was about 7%. So there are not that many. It is therefore not clear whether or not they are mainly vaccinated.
IGG4-toename na mRNA injecties >> covid wordt niet herkend, woekert ongezien door >> sterke toename meersterfte als covid rondwaart, zonder dat het als covid zichtbaar is. Lees het bij Rintrah (punt) nl d.d. 24 december trainwreck (sorry geen link, wordt als spam gezien)
What's your opinion, Anton?
Yes, it explains many longer-term effects and the increasing risk of disease with each repeat vaccination. This is the link.