Baudet's parliamentary questions in November had little impact on excess mortality. When Pieter Omtzigt started to get involved, things went very differently. The media first suggested, not really contradicted by mumbling CBS and rivm, that the unexplained excess mortality was due to Covid deaths after all. Of course, I follow that discourse closely and saw the twisting and turning of various parties who do not want to know that there is excess mortality – let alone why that is.
Last week I was still a bit clumsy because the weekly report had been skipped without further explanation, now it seems that the figures were not found plausible enough and needed a little more time for plausibility.
Plausibility is the credibility of the figures, which is done for every report. I learned this from the CBS website where I can no longer find this term among the causes of death (If anyone knows where to find it, please let me know). It matched the text in the screenshot:
"Surplus mortality": unexplained excess mortality
So far I mentioned excess mortality after deducting Covid mortality: "non-Covid mortality", "Summer mortality", "Unexplained excess mortality" or "Excess mortality excl. Covid". For the sake of convenience, I introduce the term "excess mortality". So that's the green part of the bars in the graph below. It is the mortality that remains of the total mortality, after deducting the expected mortality and the Covid mortality. The graph therefore shows the total excess mortality: Covid mortality (from RIVM, orange) plus excess mortality (green).
Excess mortality = Covid mortality + Excess mortality
If we look at this virologically, it is evident that the 'Baudet' measure had less effect on excess mortality than the 'Omtzigt' measure. The messages were similar. Parliament took no action on Baudet's warnings and later adopted Omtzigt's motion unanimously. Both were accused of disinformation by de Jonge. (Disinformation is information that has a purpose other than increasing vaccine readiness.)
It now remains to be seen what else the ministry will do with the Omzigt motion. There are also the still outstanding ignored FOI requests. It turned out that the court has nothing to say about it; The ministry can operate autonomously and, if desired, totalitarian in consultation with related physicians.
Signs of change are far away in the United States, where the FDA was criticized by a federal judge. They had to release the data about the Pfizer trials and had announced that they would need 55 years to do so. Instead of the 500 documents per month they have indicated as a limit, a federal judge has now demanded that they release 55,000 documents per month. For more details, see the Eucalyptic Society.
The decrease in excess mortality continues, as already signaled in the last posts. Assuming that the last two weeks are added as always, the similarity of the two 'humps' becomes even more appealing.
Speculative hypotheses
Why is excess mortality falling? The government refuses to see the data, so again some speculations, in addition to the possibility that there is a causal link with the vaccines:
- The RIVM covid figures are structurally too low, which means that the excess mortality is exaggerated. CBS registers (always a little later) up to 2x as much covid death. This is correct but does not explain the amount, nor the fluctuations. Imaginarily double the orange bars: green will remain a substantial part of the total anyway – until the Omtzigt motion comes into force. The usual green surplus (also pre-vax) has since been phased out in a spectacular way: from 73% to 9% of total mortality. And that in three weeks. It is possible and of course it is not because of the 'Omtzigt measure' – that's a joke. But why? We don't know.
- Perhaps the emergence of Omicron played a role? Then maybe they were Delta deaths after all? This would be in line with the RIVM's correction to the fraudulent figures regarding vaccinated people in hospitals. That turned out to be considerably more than predicted. Part of the green bars can be explained with this and that moves to the orange bars. Then the vaccines have also had less impact on mortality than thought.
- From Immune or blood disease problems caused by the vaccines develop a clinical picture that takes about six months to become serious. Think of the revival of existing morbidities that were kept under control by a balanced immune system, before it was shaken up.
- The expected CBS mortality is now more in line with the observed mortality. As a result, de facto excess mortality decreases and therefore also 'excess mortality'. We just assume that the observed mortality has actually decreased; It is inconceivable that the expected mortality has been increased. That would have the same effect: compensation for excess mortality.
- A reader suggested that the flu shot (October-November) may have interacted with the vaccinations. I consider a major effect of this unlikely because the increase already started before October. The number of flu shots is also relatively not that high. But this could also theoretically be one of the factors.
Once again, the opaque, not to say obscure, working methods of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport and its health services are taking its revenge.
In the meantime, many evaluations have been made in which it is argued that little special has happened on an annual basis in terms of excess mortality. This is understandable because approximately 155,000 people die every year. 5,000 more or less is not significant. 5,000 in a few months is a different story. In any case, the vaccinations have not resulted in a significantly lower mortality.
This does not alter the fact that research into this excess mortality should be taken up with the highest priority.
Suppose a poison disaster happens somewhere in the Netherlands. In the same province, a clearly increased mortality rate was recorded six months later. Would the parties involved also be allowed to keep their data to themselves? Would research also be put on the back burner?
Vertrouwen in overheid en daaraan gekoppelde wetenschap is helaas niet langer vanzelfsprekend. Controle is altijd nodig geweest en zal altijd nodig blijven; een fundamenteel onderdeel van de democratie.
