From the RIVM pulpit, as always, there is a threat of hell and damnation. It is now week number 25. The middle between the upper and lower limit of the R-value would be above 1 again in last week (week 24). An ominous upward trend that would have started a week earlier (in week 23). (black and grey line). That was the preliminary hearing.
However, the recalcitrant people once again refused to heed the call for submission and self-flagellation. They refuse to enter the limbo of hell: hardly any hospitalizations and deaths. Below the signal value and falling.
On the following Tuesday, the figures were updated again. For the umpteenth time, we are forced to face the facts. The forecasts are adjusted downwards again afterwards. The models will be no good again, they are wrong, time and time again. Models are the algorithmic reflection of knowledge and insight. In recent flu seasons, they are usually wrong. It is time again for a satisfied piece in a parish magazine about prophecies that always come true, so that the believers can say 'you see'.
After that Tuesday I made a short video about it:
The ratio is completely lost. Yet again a list of how the RIVM logic works:
- Contact infections are off the table for the RIVM. From this we understand: contamination does not come from objects.
- Face masks do not work according to the RIVM. Face masks do stop large droplets. Ergo: contamination does not come from large droplets
- Microdroplets (aerosols) hardly play a role in the physics of the RIVM => contamination is not caused by aerosols.
So contamination does not occur via aerosols, nor via droplets and also not via objects. How does RIVM think that people can still infect each other? Well: that always happens when people don't comply with the measures. That's where the diseases ultimately come from: lack of law-abiding submission. I would like to see how you can capture such logic in a model.
Chaotic dates and disaster tidings. The result is the RIVM principles:
- The more often you wash your hands, the better protected you are
- Face masks have a symbolic role, people must see from each other that they feel protected
- One and a half meters distance prevents (group) infections
- ivermectin has not been well researched, does not work and is dangerous. Ditto for HCQ and budesonide.
- Injected protein therapy of six months old has not yet shown any long-term effects and is therefore safe
- In the summer, hospital admissions will rise explosively
- The vaccine provides partial protection against a mutating virus from two years ago and is therefore the only way out
- The measures will not disappear if everyone is injected with the only way out
- Hospital admissions are falling thanks to vaccinations
It is no longer a parallel universe, it is an inverted universe. If you think, you swim against the current. The rest are happy that they at least have a mouth mask and the spike protein in their bodies, which gives some stability in the chaos.
The vaccination effect
Some pictures from a video at blckbx.tv where Flavio Pasquino is in conversation with Ir. F. Lahr. Because I have repeatedly touched on the same questions here and there, here is a list of pictures.
In April 2020, the number of ICU and hospital admissions dropped faster than now. There were no vaccinations at the time. How can it drop more slowly now than it did then, when we were still unvaccinated and without any immunity exposed to the virus? How could that drop "at all" then, if the seasonal effect is only 15%. Where does the other 85% come from? Please explain the flu waves in every winter season, from 2010 to now, for example.
It is not because of the vaccinated groups of the elderly, see below. There, too, the decline is slower than after the first season. Where is the effect of vaccination?
Then it must have been the stricter measures!? Unfortunately, the R was already falling sharply before the measures were introduced.
And then you hear Jaap again without a sensible answer stubbornly persisting in what he thinks. Does that sound logical and well thought-out? Is that scientifically honest?
"If you take the vaccination effects out of the model, you see how effective the vaccines are."
Jaao van Dissel, who indicates how heavily the vaccines are weighted in their model.
