Virusvaria readers are not notorious X-visitors, is my impression. I see a few reposts every now and then, but in general it seems to be a different audience. Let me therefore briefly take you through my X-adventure this week.
It started with this post from Wilfred, who has a promising bar graph after his name.
Here he denies the recent excess mortality among relatively young people and shows a declining line graph.
But at the bottom right, in recent years, the graph shows a clear jump with the top in 2021 with an increased level thereafter.
April 1, I thought.
Maar de dag daarna post hij hij een screenshot van diezelfde eigen tweet, aangevuld met de tekst "Toch geweldig dit?" en 'bewijs' van Grok, die wat overheidsstatements samenvat:
"Volgens de CBS-data in de grafiek daalt het sterftecijfer onder 0-65- jarigen al decennia en ligt het nu ruim onder het 2015-2019-gemiddelde (rond 155 per 100.000). Geen extra sterfgevallen bij relatief jonge mensen de laatste jaren. Totale oversterfte (2022-2025) zit vooral bij 65+ door corona-nasleep, uitgestelde zorg en vergrijzing. Bron: CBS StatLine en opendata."
And if AI summarizes that, then great!
Grok conveniently overlooks the jump in 2021.
Wat te doen. Toch maar even een screenshot gemaakt van die rechteronderhoek, optisch een hulplijntje getrokken... Toch geweldig dit..?
Daar was de kous wel mee af - dacht ik. Niet dus.
What had he just done? He had extended my helpline. You can't just do that, of course. He also did it wrong because his line descended at a steeper angle than my guide line. (Move over the graph with your mouse)
Even that was wrong. Why such a person puts a bar graph after his name, I have no idea. Something like a cool tattoo on the shoulder of an outcast, but as a virtual marker of intellect for people who want to belong.
Because he previously believed in Grok's assessment, I asked Grok to look at the help line to see if he saw a break in the trend there.
Grok confirmed: "Kortom: ja, er is een duidelijke trendbreuk rond 2020-2022. De blauwe lijn gedraagt zich daarna structureel anders dan de langetermijn dalende lijn."
Then you would expect that someone would be made to think. But no.
En hier wordt het interessant. Terwijl werd betoogd dat er niets aan de hand was, dat er géén oversterfte was in de vorm van meer dan verwachte sterfgevallen, verschuift er iets.
OK - dat was dan stap 1. Er was dus wél een trendbreuk in de sterfte.
In the meantime, a troll militia had already come to his aid. Enjoy for a moment how they accused me of extending the helpline. This is why a lot of you don't have fun with X anymore, I think.
All insignificant texts without a trace of substantive interest. I was surprised to see Maarten Keulemans trolling this, but now that I think about it, this might be a place where he feels right at home.
Je hebt toch zelden zulke zinloze tekstjes bij elkaar gezien. Ik weet dat we in een democratie leven en dat iedereen erbij hoort, maar toch...
Rene Smit (not a troll, he has made many analyses, mainly focused on healthcare factors) also seemed to emphasize that the helpline was wrong. He posted a link to a blog article from 2024 in which he explains that with a quadratic trend line (the yellow curve) you get very different results than with a linear one (the green). This graph (which will come back later):
What do you do then, leave it alone? Write an article about it? So that initially became an X-thread. See below.1By the way: the link to my X-thread
The answer
Corona made its appearance in 2020. In the years that followed, we were protected by vaccinations, the Covid mortality dropped too far in 2022 to continue reporting separately in 2023. But in total, more than 6,500 too many deaths of people under the age of 65 (!), calculated from 2021 to 2025.
@mkeulemans met je 'ontdekking van pandemiejaren' 😂 Misschien dat het voor jou nieuw was; voor mij niet hoor.
Fun game: cover the legend and name the colors in chronological order. (Explanation for those who think that 6,500 premature funerals seems like small beer: that is indeed bad. That does not belong in that age group.) 1/6
If we divide those numbers from above by the size of the age group in that same year, we can identify trends, for example a trend derived from 2000-2019 and a trend from 2010-2019. It's a bit crude but good enough for this group (under 65 only) and for this purpose. Both exponential trends by the way, @rcsmit and @WWesterveld1 - voordat je weer lijntjes door gaat trekken. 2/6
Now the population is growing and that can distort things somewhat. It's not too bad because the image remains the same, but people who are strict think about it differently. So we apply the percentages found to a fixed population size, for example that of 2025. Then we get a better feeling for the numbers. We choose the trend that expects the most mortality and therefore produces the least excess mortality. 3/6
2020 zou ten opzichte van die trend niet eens zo schrikbarend hoog zijn - als het een eenmalige uitschieter was. Een gemeen virus en dan ook nog eens geen vaccins in 2020 - wat een rotpandemie. Maar het bleef niet bij een pandemische uitschieter: het ontpopte zich tot een trendbreuk. Met het hoogtepunt in het jaar dat we allemaal zowat tegelijk beschermd werden, 2021.
The level remained elevated afterwards, even when the disease disappeared. Do you understand the difference between a temporary increase and a trend break? @mkeulemans? Ik zie Grok vaak aangehaald dus misschien heb je daar wat aan. Hij is behoorlijk vaxofiel en consensus-biased maar hij haalde wel de cijfers van CBS op, crunchte ze door de Chow-test en... kwam er niet onderuit.
A clear, significant trend break. 4/6
And please don't bring up the post-WW1 Spanish Flu again. After previous periods of high mortality, such as the Spanish flu [...] life expectancy quickly returned to its previous level. Subsequently, the trend before the period with high mortality continued. (source: CBS http://t.ly/U29Gz)
They don't always tell it like it is, but this was not politically charged and could be confirmed everywhere. Except probably for virologists.
By the way, actuaries also agree: "In 2024 was de oversterfte lager (2,4%) dan in 2025 (3,4%). Hierdoor is er in 2025 sprake van een verdere toename van de oversterfte." Not read? (https://virusvaria.nl/actuarissen-over-de-sterfte-in-2025/) 5/6
And @WWesterveld1 You find drawing lines funny, right? Look here, and now you have to resist @rcsmit say that's HIS line 😇
And on the other @droeftoeters die niet verder komen dan gnuiven en gifjes plaatsen: jullie toonden je geïnteresseerd in sterfte onder de 'jongere' groepen. Het gaat echt niet goed met ze, al valt hun aantal sterfgevallen makkelijk weg in de totaalcijfers. En met de vrouwen tussen 30 en 50 jaar al helemaal niet. Lees er eens wat over, met preciezere berekeningen van sommige 10jaars-cohorten en uitgebreide toelichtingen over baselines (die heb ik in een aparte PDF laten zitten, hoef je niet per se te lezen hoor). https://virusvaria.nl/sterfte-per-leeftijd-en-geslacht-2025/
Have fun. 6/6
A four-parter
Met die mythe van de Spaanse Griep waarmee steeds wordt geschermd moet ook maar eens korte metten worden gemaakrt. Dat wordt een apart artikel. "Stay tuned", zou ik bijna zeggen...
Footnotes
- 1By the way: the link to my X-thread
I have ignored this disinformation fountain of annoying arrogant types like Wilfred Westerveld, Frank Stassen (by far the most annoying and dangerous because of his profession and long disinformation tweets), Wesley Chalii and Tampeloer and/or they have blocked me.
Sneuhans Anton Vink posts so little, you don't even have to ignore him. Keulemans...never mind, he really has an agenda with his girlfriend Marion.
You are the troll expert Ward! 🤓
But suppose these people are really paid from our tax money to spread that nonsense. I say nonsense, but actually what they do is very bad. Denying the mortality caused by the government through various measures and vaccinations during and especially after the Covid-19 period. WOB shows this clearly. The Ministry of the Interior has drawn up protocols and wants to have these implemented by external parties so that this cannot be linked to government interventions. Of course they are. It is hard public influence on which a lot of money is spent. This did not only happen in the Netherlands, of course. How can these types of trolls be justified if this can be justified at all? There would be very naive people from a certain political party who would support the ideas of these trolls.
Well, 0-65 seemed to return to the pre-corona baseline. The question then is, is 2025 an outlier? Or are these structurally higher mortality rates the new norm.
I lean towards the latter.
In addition, I am of the opinion that the group 0-65 makes a much stronger 'case' than 80+ or the total population, and then start calling out absolute numbers, and then attaching a number of injection mortality to that. Those conclusions depend entirely on your baseline assumption. And they are quite fluid, to say the least.
But in this zone I agree with you Anton. Not as spectacular as '10 Boeings per year'. However, the baseline is a lot easier to determine. And the numbers mentioned are a lot harder.
Maybe look into the causes of death?
I'm a bit tired of (over)mortality myself. Every now and then I see some interesting data. But I don't really spend any time on it anymore.
The truth will naturally come to light. This was also the case with smoking and asbestos. It just takes decades.
VAT. My excess mortality dashboard shows the same trend break in Sweden, Belgium and Denmark. The exception is Portugal. But it was already a lot higher in terms of mortality than the other countries.
I only have these 5 countries in my monitor.
I understand Bonne, but nothing happens 'by itself'...
Idk, 0-65 (or 0-75, 80) works better and harder.
In any case, omitting 80+ is also better than ASMR. From there you can look further at 65-80 andol 80+.
Can I also see your excess mortality dashboard?
Structural is also temporary in this context, but much longer lasting than the roughly 5 years that occurs during (alone) a pandemic.
I think we should assume decades because permanent damage to health will only disappear with the extinction of this generation.
But didn't Portugal have the highest vaccination rate in Europe?
With what kind of batches?
It is actually incomprehensible how some people continue to rationalize away reality...
NOS reported yesterday: intensive exercise over the age of 35 is life-threatening for the cardiovascular system, according to a NEW international study in which our own Radboud University Medical Center participated. Anton, we do not need to prove anything further because, together with heat stress, excess mortality has been explained from the age of 35. All agencies that messed around with graphs and numbers no longer have to do that. Oh wait, it does say that you have to keep exercising... If you read something like that and take it seriously, you are lost anyway...
Anton
Wouldn't it be better to compare the figures from 2014-2019 with 2020-2025? Then you also find out what the number of (suicides) murders was, the number of fatal (traffic) accidents and the number of euthanasia cases.
I don't know it by heart, but I know that there has been a significant increase in all categories after 2019. If you subtract that extra increase, you have a better idea of the other excess mortality. For example, due to vaccines, diseases detected too late due to less care, checks, etc. or due to Covid/flu itself. To get an even clearer picture for which the flu or Covid cannot be blamed, it is better to use 'under 50 or 45 years of age', because the number of deaths from Covid/flu alone is minimal among 'young people'
See this article from 2023. This year's cause of death figures are not yet available. Hopefully Hans will delve into it again. But 'subtracting the excess mortality': that encounters the same problems when determining a baseline. There are also matters such as re-classification (causes are categorized differently, ICD-10 codes are adjusted, etc.)
Moreover, yesterday at the event De Silte Schreeuwt it was once again emphasized that all kinds of "other" causes of death could also be related to vaccine excess mortality, but which you would not initially think of. Some examples: suicide and euthanasia due to severe side effects. Car accidents (read, last year sky high) due to sudden death or sudden “disappearance”, the many acute cancers, etc. etc.
Sounds a bit ego-trippy. But you can filter out those kinds of effects by simply looking at mortality/100,000/age years. If those figures are still higher than in 2018/2019, then something is wrong! Unfortunately, with a correction for the “unhealthy volume” of 1944/1945. It shifts backwards with age. And maybe there is something to correct?? But those are real exceptions.
We will have to wait and see the causes of death again. We also did such an analysis in 2023. The next question is to what extent suicide, euthanasia and car accidents can be proven as side effects of the vaccine. Accidental fall was also such a special one, two years ago (Theo Schetters also mentioned it).
We do not think your baseline of 2018 and/or 2019 is suitable, but you can read it very easily from the graphs: simply draw an imaginary horizontal line from the year that suits you best.