Jona Walk, Bram Bakker and Ronald Meester took the initiative to carry out an analysis, together with the Lareb. How that worked out can be read on their brand new Substack Insight Out. Once again, an institute is holding its cards close to its chest, implicitly suggesting that there are things that cannot bear the light of day. I'll just say it like it is, although that sounds very unscientific. Jonah, Ronald and Bram are also amazed.
Remember that the Lareb must be a guard dog. Lareb is the institute that has to collect and address possible side effects of medicines. It is the very last layer of protection of citizens against sellers of unnecessary, unsound or downright harmful medicines, if they have slipped through the inspection process and the media also let them do their thing and even jump into the breach for them.
If institutes like Lareb neglect their task, we will soon be heading towards 70 vaccinations in the children's vaccination program, just like in America. And perhaps also with similar, dramatically poor morbidity and mortality rates. Science is not yet burning its fingers on this. People are anxiously lurking at RFK.
How it started
During a useful introductory meeting, Lareb initially seemed willing to participate in the research idea. After all, previous research pointed to a possible misclassification bias, which could be clarified with data from the Lareb.
Why is this possible bias important?
Many studies showing positive results from the corona vaccinations, and not only in the Netherlands, measure that vaccinated people die much less often than unvaccinated people ā so little, in fact, that the vaccine also protects against other causes of death, including cancer. This is statistically suspicious and indicates possible errors in the underlying data or assumptions. On this site we have also repeatedly paid attention to such studies (RIVM, Level, UMCU but also universities abroad, such as Italy)
The authors propose two explanations:
- Healthy Vaccinee Effect (HVE): People who are seriously ill are vaccinated less often. This makes it seem as if vaccination protects against death, while in fact it is because people are no longer vaccinated when their death is imminent.
- Misclassification: People who die shortly after vaccination may be more likely to be missing from the vaccination registration (CIMS). If they are counted as 'unvaccinated' as a result, the image arises that vaccinated people die less often ā while this is partly an artefact of inadequate registration. WOO requests show that there was also concern at the institutes about missing data.
The result would be that some of the deaths after vaccination are wrongly attributed to "unvaccinated people". This would seriously overestimate the apparent effectiveness of vaccines on mortality ā or even reverse it entirely.
What happened?
The authors had discussions about this with representatives of RIVM, CBS and Lareb in early 2025. They proposed a simple analysis: see if the Ā±683 deaths reported to Lareb after vaccination in a certain period are all in CIMS.
At first, Lareb reacted positively, but after a few weeks the tone changed. Lareb indicated that linking with CIMS did not work well earlier (in 2021/2022) ā in more than the expected 7% of cases. However, they refused to give numbers or share further data.
Not long after, a screenshot appeared on LinkedIn of the e-mail in question from Lareb director Agnes Kant, in which it was claimed that there can be no question of cooperation. The reason, according to Prof. Dr. Agnes Kant, Director, was: 'the way in which they subsequently reported on this on social media'. So the content is OK, but the way in which it is done. Not an impressive super-scientific argument.
Bram, Jona and Ronald had not seen that stab in the flank coming. I also showed the screenshot last week:
When, after several email attempts, they finally asked the concrete question how many of the 683 reports could not be found in CIMS, the answer was: "We kunnen hierover geen betrouwbare data leveren" ā which made further analysis impossible.
And that while other agencies did draw far-reaching conclusions based on recognized flawed data!
So what do we see again:
Lareb is blocking a study that could have provided important insights into a fundamental weakness in current mortality and vaccination research. Withholding collaboration and dismissing uncertainty as a reason not to share data is scientifically irresponsible. It is precisely such uncertainty that needs to be explored, not ignored.
Once again, the need for independent research into the relationship between vaccination and excess mortality in the Netherlands has become apparent. The Lareb's actions raise fundamental questions about the role of health authorities as guardians of transparency and science and guardians of the health of us all.
It is time for politicians to intervene, according to the Substack. However, it seems more like the Lareb is a joke for difficult customers, a call center through which pharmaceutical companies, health institutes, policymakers, vaccine promoters - and perhaps also the politicians themselves - are shielded so that they can continue to do their work undisturbed.
They formulate it all very neatly. I'm afraid that's not going to help them. Formality is an expression of conformism to unspoken rules. But being formal and at the same time prying at unspoken rules is betrayal: you pretend to belong, but in the meantime you undermine things. It makes my blood boil. Robbert Dijkgraaf wants to bring science closer to society, well, they should stay away from this kind of science. They can get a kick in the ass.
Follow the developments yourself via the substack insight out or follow Ronald, Jona, Bram on LinkedIn and above all, share, help spread scientific initiatives and curiosity. The only means we have is to increase the information pressure.
Again, admirable the perseverance of these people. In my view, many more people who died from the jab are missing. They never reached the Lareb. Dear Jona, Ronald and Bram, focus on (new) data from other sources.
The excess mortality may of course also be due to the fact that stubborn people like the readers here have been getting worked up for five years about the idiocy that has been poured over them. Bad for your heart and your immune system.
That also explains that the extra mortality is taking place among the unvaccinated!
Blessed are the simple-minded and the stoics!
Strange indeed that we, the readers here, are so concerned about and for our fellow human beings with puncture damage and deceased loved ones after we have first done everything to warn them. How to respond to friends who cry and tell that they are so afraid that even more loved ones will leave life prematurely or will leave them due to serious illness, also afraid of suddenly having their turn, or that their children will have problems with children and that the children who are born will show many more "rare" disorders? My parent died screaming with anger and powerlessness with the words "She's right that those shots are deadly!" Of course, my parent is not included in the Lareb system in the figures. Fortunately, there are still plenty of topics to distract them with, such as the climate and of course the war. Last week, a friend received a trip from family for her birthday with the words "While it is still possible." The rest of the conversations were about "the approaching war"... And then it was the turn of the hospital stories again. Oh wait, I forget the anger about the solar panels that no longer yield anything. Also so unsociable.
Totally agree.
Totally agree. There are now hundreds of published articles about the harmful effects. If one still doesn't see it now, then have little hope for it. Good luck with the boosters Rob.
I was already afraid that not everyone would recognize the irony in their comments. Take it from me that you have to read the opposite of what it says! š
The last sentence does give it away, right?
Indeed, reading it again helpsš
Thanks Ton,
But I think I'll skip this time. The excess mortality is one thing, but the fact that they find the junk in the smallest vessels of the brain, various organs and tumors does not sit well with me.
To be honest, I expect confirmation that mRNA was not such a great idea from that angle rather than from the excess mortality research.
Sorry to mislead you!
Especially if shedding of infectious cancer cells becomes a reality. š¢
Fortunately, the English CBS did release them at the beginning of the "pandemic". With that data, we can mathematically prove that the unvaccinated deaths were counted incorrectly. Too bad the lareb doesn't release that data, because then it would be a simple trick to show that they are messing things up.
Wouldn't they just be stopped from above? Fleur Agema has admitted that there are international treaty law aspects to this, hasn't she?
Yes, called back, could just be. There is much more to it than protecting an accident from a virologist hobby. But there are people who still reject that idea, Jan Bonte for example, not just any old man.
Isn't the Lareb managed by the Health Council? Behold the higher-hand effect. The GR still categorically refuses to advise to stop jabling.
By the way, it was not the case in advance that people with poor health and the elderly were given priority with the injections. Apparently, those people were largely taken out of the analyses and eventually ended up on the "Unvaccinated" heap. I argue for the HVE effect, although those people are now also increasingly ill. Has anyone ever looked at whether there is a relationship between vaccination and absenteeism?
In my opinion, international treaty law aspects that turn out to be harmful can be passed over quite easily. There must be a will for that.
Treaties are violated on a large scale when it is convenient, but then suddenly those treaties are not so hard at all.
There is seriously a plan behind this and there is no question of unwillingness, here they are committing outright fraud.
I keep saying that the shit stinks so much that people consciously choose Full Retard.
During the rollout of the vaccination campaign, the government, through the Disinformation Control Unit ā presumably with the help of the NCTV ā fanatically hunted down people who posted messages about their side effects on social media. So that those messages could be removed as quickly as possible or could be classified as disinformation.
It happens to be very convenient that the Lareb can already provide a list of names and social security numbers of possible complainants.
The RIVM manual for healthcare professionals describes exactly when they must report an adverse event to the Lareb. This mainly concerns serious cases, such as death and acute hospitalization. But the same list also literally states that healthcare professionals must report if they suspect that someone could spread negative publicity. When I discovered that, I became sick.
I myself became seriously ill from that shot. Fortunately, I have recovered, but I am still furious because of the lack of medical help, the opposition and the denial.
Indeed, they seem to have learned something from the side effect scandal as a result of vaccination against the swine flu. But unfortunately the wrong thing: not how to prevent serious side effects, but how to ensure that the population does not find out. Bah.
Yes, yuck. You take the words out of my mouth.
Bram Bakker was of the opinion that unvaccinated people should not receive hospital treatment. For whatever disease cause. Not such a nice figure as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe you're confused with that other Bram Bakker, the well-known psychiatrist? He also went along with the narrative but did ask questions about freedom of choice, so somewhat nuanced. I can't find a statement like the one you call it.
In any case, I can assure you 100% that this Bram Bakker, the statistician, never claimed that in his life.
I did indeed mean the well-known psychiatrist. What I reported about this is correct.
A link would help, I really can't find it.
And all the media are silent; in deep silence.
Where are the oh-so-critical journalists when you really need them?
Whining about a ribbon, whining about CO2, whining about Wilders & Vd Plas, whining about plaster, whining about childcare benefits affair, whining about earthquakes in Groningen, etc. etc.
But silent about massive excess mortality, about fraud in the recovery of the allowances and the fraud in the earthquakes, about climate nonsense, about 75% of the surface of Natura 2000 that is just in order, etc. etc.
'Prof dr Agnes Kant, director.'
It rarely happens to me that I see so clearly how the naked emperor tries to hide his (in this case his=her) nakedness under a mountain of roaring titles. I think that's all fine. It does not help, it only describes even more clearly the emperor's inability to hide his nakedness.
In that case, the royal family does much better. How many titles does the king have? Which is solved in official documents such as (I paraphrase): King Willem-Alexander, Prince of Orange-Nassau, etc, etc, etc. I think the etc is the most beautiful title.
Anyway, why this is on topic is because such a LAREB is an organization of people who are not unwilling. They do want to do science. But when push comes to shove (that is: by doing science, the magic trick on which 'science' is built, that is 'scientific') something is discovered that should not be shared with the outside world. People of LAREB are not unwilling but totally powerless to admit that everything they have achieved in their lives has and has had nothing to do with guarding health.
Meester et al again put their finger on the painful spot. That is good. What does bother me is that they are so surprised every time how organizations like LAREB, CBS, the academy, react when they put their finger on the sore spot.
That's Elementary, Watson, or as Conan-Doyle spoke through Sherlock Holmes' character:
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
It takes more than a team (of doctors and scientists) who dare to put their finger on the same place. What is needed is that that sore spot is treated, healed, which I don't see happening so quickly from the medical world itself.
Self-cleaning ability, we may conclude after 5 years, does not have the medical arsenal. It will have to come from the outside. Who or what will do that is a bit of a question...
Tip: The MEB was given supervision of Lareb in 2006. Ridiculous, of course, because CBG is again largely subsidized by the pharmaceutical industry. In Medisch Contact from 2006 there is a critical article about this decision.
The annual reports of the MEB and Lareb 2021 show that Lareb is subsidised by the government and by the MEB. A salient detail: the amount that the MEB gives to Lareb corresponds exactly to the amount that the MEB receives from the government. Aka; The Ministry of Health fully subsidises Lareb, but ensures that the MEB can exert influence on Lareb via the MEB detour. Can it get any more absurd?
Well, it's a bit more nuanced. Companies simply have to pay the cost price for an application and maintaining a registration. So there is no direct incentive from that so that they are influenced. It would be better if the MEB were paid by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport and companies had to pay the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport directly for their registration. But that is also cumbersome. In itself, it is fine that registration and detention have to be paid. This is called the profit principle.
==============
Funding
In the Netherlands, costs are charged to the applicant for granting government permits that are independent of the outcome. This also applies to the application and registration of medicines. The pharmaceutical companies pay a flat rate for new applications for the assessment of a medicine. In addition, they pay a fixed annual fee for each drug that is registered. These are the basic income of the MEB.
=========
It is strange that Lareb is financed through the MEB and can therefore be monitored by the MEB. The inspector therefore checks the party that co-supervises the inspections. That is incorrect segregation of duties.
What is also strange is that the Supervisory Board does not include a 50% patient association or the like, but only doctors. That's a bit "We from WC Duck"....
Finally: no matter how you organize and structure it, if the people who carry it out are no good, you will still get misery. AND also the other way around. If you organize it stupidly, but there are good people, then it can go well, but then you ask more of the integrity of the people.
Agnes did have time for an article in the Trouw about the dangers of supplements. Because they are not necessary at all.
If you participate in that, I think you are working for Big Pharma!