Norway: no direct link between vaccination and death of frail elderly people | NOS
Approximately every elderly person who dies within a month of a covid infection dies "of" corona and is registered as a corona death. This will also have to apply to vaccine deaths. And no excuses of "they were actually almost dead" or "very near end of life". This also applies to the vast majority of corona deaths.
It has now been communicated that of the 33 reported "vaccine deaths" it cannot be proven that the vaccination was fatal to them. It is kept open as a possibility, but is not a cause for concern. Because: "Covid-19 is a lot more dangerous than the vaccination," says Steinar Madsen of the Norwegian Medicines Agencyto Bloomberg.
Let's take a look at the Dutch situation. We have 822,088 people over 80, of which 436,056 are under 85 and 386,032 are above 85. I focus on the 80-85 year olds, also because the average life expectancy is in the middle of that range. The 'Young Eighties'. In five years, 41% of that group or 179,855 people die. On average per week (linearly thought), there are 690 deaths of people between the ages of 80 and 85 in the Netherlands. That is 0.16% of the group between 80 and 85 years old, per week.
Of the 30,000 vaccinated Norwegian octogenarians in three weeks of vaccination, about 140 (3 weeks x 0.16% = 0.48%) should have died anyway. Only in 33 people was that death related in one way or another to the vaccination, in the remaining 107 there was apparently no reason to do so, even though they had recently been vaccinated. It is anyone's guess why that is. Let's assume that the doctors on duty really did find that the side effects were too severe for these 33. Then the vaccination among this age group has a mortality rate of 0.11%.
Question 1: Is Norway the only country where the hundreds of deaths per day, after vaccination, have also been thought to be too little resistance to the side effects? That seems a logical thought for frail, vulnerable elderly people.
If 8,000 of 800,000 Dutch people over 80 died of corona in 2020 (estimate), this results in a 1% risk of dying from a corona infection. That's why they are all vaccinated – but so are we.
Because we do not protect the elderly from infection, they run the risk of becoming infected sooner or later. It was estimated that 70% of the population would become infected. At the current rate, that will take many, many years. Given the average life expectancy of 83 years, most octogenarians will not live long enough to become infected.
Suppose now, in response to Norway, that the risk of death with vaccination is 0.11% in those Young Eighties. The disease is then 9 times as deadly as the vaccination. The risk of 1% is reduced to a risk of 0.11%.
Question 2: The new criterion for vaccinations now seems to be that they must be less harmful than the disease they are intended against? How much less then, is a factor of 10 still sufficient, for example? Is there a minimum?
Note: If a factor of 10 doesn't seem sufficient to you, remember that that is also the difference between a mortality of 80% and 8%. Perhaps a threshold for the severity of an illness is also worth reconsidering. The WHO "List A" seems to be subject to too much arbitrariness.
There will be no other option than to protect those oldies with clean breath, so that they are no longer exposed to too large viral doses, and with a lot of Vitamin D that might boost their immune system a little for whatever dominant virus at that time. (And the already available medication takes even longer in the Netherlands than the vaccinations.) Unfortunately, unfortunately, it's terrible. For the vaccine industry, that is.
