A cheer for the vaccines: they do things we never expected!

Yesterday I was really shocked. And at the same time, it made me a little sad. The world turned dark brown for a moment. I was sitting in an eatery in Amsterdam and a table away a rather obscure group had settled. They weren't ashamed of anything because I could just catch snippets of their shocking conversation. I couldn't understand it very precisely; In any case, they were only talking about corona.

At one point I caught a glitch: CBS would have ignored the Healthy Vaccine Effect and downplayed side effects. Well, I happen to know a little more about that because I'm not only on top of the quality media, but I also follow CBS on Twitter. So I immediately realized that those wappies were once again telling half the story about that Healthy Vaccine Effect. Ruben van Gaalen tweeted no less than last week twice something about the Healthy Vaccinee effect. Is that 'ignoring'!?

The Healthy Vaccinee Effect according to Statistics Netherlands (CBS)

"Very sick, unhealthy people are less likely to be vaccinated."

From a tweet by Ruben van Gaalen December 11, 2023

"People with other conditions [....] are extra motivated to get vaccinated.

From a (re)tweet by Ruben van Gaalen December 12, 2023

And then insist that they wouldn't know what the Healthy Vaccinee Effect is at CBS...! Ruben van Gaalen also sees very clearly that the HVE does not necessarily work in favor of the vaccines, as wappies often think. Of course, it is much more nuanced, but we don't need to explain that here, and certainly not CBS, because we wouldn't understand it anyway.

Important side effects in vaccinated people, according to CBS/RIVM

In addition, CBS and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) are also said to deny the side effects of the corona vaccines. Of course, that is not true either, and you can see how easily tunnel vision arises within such a wappie bubble. The opposite is the case. CBS and RIVM emphasize the abundance of side effects!

Imagine: As a government, you organize vaccination and communication campaigns for a vaccine that is clearly defined, researched "out and about" and that is closely monitored by apartment buildings full of civil servants with the ultimate very specific goal: "Protecting the Other" “Protecting Yourself" "Combating Serious Covid" and nothing else, that was clear from the start. Thanks to its safety and effectiveness, the government was able to go all out on the organ and it is that Hugo de Jonge held back decently because actually the vaccination should have been made mandatory, also to anti-vaxxers. That didn't happen. Because we live in a cool country, there was only a threat that they could lose their jobs, or their social life – or both, or something else. They were completely free to choose to do so!

Two years after the first campaign, you then do research and guess what? Plenty of side effects! These are all unforeseen, unintended and therefore surprising side effects on a variety of conditions. The report shows that the vaccinations have not only prevented corona deaths, but also reduced mortality from other causes of death thanks to these side effects. They could see that by comparing vaccinated people with unvaccinated people. Being vaccinated resulted in completely unpredicted differences in a variety of diseases. If those aren't side effects!

Side effects for unvaccinated people, according to CBS/RIVM

An important side effect of the jab was that those who did not get vaccinated were more likely to die than before. And no: not because of Covid. Anti-vaxxers suddenly started dying more often from anything and everything, from the moment sensible citizens protected themselves and stayed at about the same level. Compare the two green lines. Blue is also allowed, those are the nursing homes.

Since mid-2021, non-covid deaths among people who have not been vaccinated have more or less doubled. You can't see exactly when that was on the horizontal axis, but it must have taken a very long time. So what do we learn from this?

The side effects do not only concern those who have been vaccinated but also indirectly those who have not received a vaccination. Indirectly, the anti-vaxxers benefited, but the side effects were less effective for them because they were not vaccinated. It's your own fault. Vaccinations have influenced the dynamics in society in a way that we don't yet fully understand. It wasn't postponed care, just to name a few. It should have affected the jabbed as well. No: it was definitely the vaccines. The simultaneity is decisive.

The vociferous group agreed that such effects indicate that a study is incorrect. But if you read the report yourself, I would say: CBS/RIVM have researched it precisely to leave nothing to chance and to get ahead of this kind of nonsense. The proof that this is how it really works has now been delivered!

Case closed

Both the excess mortality debate and the parliamentary inquiry have thus been rendered superfluous. ZonMW could actually stop the barrage of tangentially related studies. This was it. The Word has been spoken. Laypeople in the House of Representatives and beyond can be complicated with each other about the recent reports, but the research is there anyway, initiated and fully paid(!) by our own government, a government to which a large part of the population sometimes owes up to five or six completely free(!) injections. Homage!

The unexpected vaccine effects, also known as 'side effects', all work out well without exception. I'm sure a professor of probability can calculate how incredibly lucky we were to do that. RIVM/CBS makes it clear to us how we have crawled through the eye of the needle with these positive effects. After all, in the past, there were mainly negative side effects ('adverse events') that made people sick or died. That seems to be over forever thanks to mRNA technology, the latest miracle of modern science with unplanned only positive side effects ('serendipitous events').

Research quality explained

Methodologically and statistically, it's all right. CBS and RIVM are Institutes, aren't they? They don't fall into those kinds of traps. They know very well that statistics are only good if several independent research parties with access to the crucial data go through everything thoroughly and unbiased. This has now been done by having both the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS) look at it: both research institutes operate independently of each other.

So it can't be in the statistics. The only explanation for the spectacular results is in the medical field. The figures are not doubted by the 'mainstream' of doctors and media makers, so it is true, according to the methodology of top journalist Tijs van den Brink, who can fly in Ab Osterhaus just to be sure. The consensus has been reached. No one knows exactly how the vaccine works, but you can see that it works from the correlations. The statistical links are undeniable.

The government investigation shows that a vaccine has been rolled out of which it now appears that people had no idea beforehand of all the good that the vaccine would bring: how it worked, whether it would pass through the body and where, for how long it would have which effects... All surprises: Happy Side Effects!

Research into a relationship between the vaccine on the one hand, with all the confirmed unsuspected happy side effects, and on the other hand, excess mortality has become superfluous because one thing is now certain: "it is certainly not the vaccine", despite all the autopsies and microbiological evidence. It's even in the paper.

Further research is a waste of money that could be better spent on research into viruses that mainly cause neurological damage. According to Ron Fouchier, there is still a whole lot of fallow. I hope he's already secretly working on it!

Bonus: Correcting for HVE and Protection

In a previous article, we compared the vaccination coverage of the population with the vaccination coverage among hospital patients based on data from the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). It was at a similar level. See this chart.

But is the vaccination coverage of the population actually a good reference for the vaccination coverage you can expect in the hospital?

If you take into account the Healthy Vaccinee effect (sick/unhealthy people are vaccinated less), you would expect a lower vaccination rate among patients in the hospital. Then about 5% of each blue bar is immediately removed.

Well, this is also what it's all about coronapatients who have been vaccinated against corona. Then we would expect that the majority of those vaccinated will NOT end up in the hospital thanks to the vaccine protection.

Last year, De Volkskrant claimed "almost three times less chance of hospitalization" among people over 60.

The same newspaper again came up with a spectacular scoop this week: "70% less admission of vaccinated people among the elderly".

Wow. They are on top of the news and keep us well informed with always relevant updates.

This last report again shows that the scientists were surprised by the remarkably good functioning of their experiment. In the trials, the results were apparently a bit disappointing, but in practice...! Wow. The vaccine as a magic ball. You choose a blue one in the store, you suck on it for a while and it's even bluer. Who would have thought.

Let's keep it quiet for a while and once, very conservatively, keep one-third improvement, then the expectation of admissions drops by a third. If we adjust the blue forecast accordingly, the graph becomes as follows:

If we were to look at the headline used by the RIVM itself: "Three-quarters less likely to be admitted to hospital after corona repeat vaccination". Then all the blue rods will be half as long as they already are.

So that would be more likely to warrant a headline if

“Hospital admissions vaccinated 4x higher than expected".

Now, of course, that can't be right. So we just have to wait for the next thorough analysis of the institutes, then it will probably be all right again.

We can enter the new year with confidence!