Note on withdrawal: In dit artikel hoopte ik het bizarre oversterftepercentage van 250% bij ongevaccineerden, zoals Nivel dat communiceert, terug te kunnen voeren tot een simpele rekenfout. Helaas, het is geen rekenfout, ik zat zelf verkeerd. Het is puur de dataproblematiek die tot deze onmogelijke uitkomsten leidt. Of dat de zaak er zoveel beter op maakt, valt te betwijfelen. Want bij een sterftepercentage van 25% gaat sinds 2021 elk jaar een kwart van de ongevaccineerde 80 plussers dood. We gaan op die manier richting een vaccinatiegraad van 100%. En van de ongevaccineerde 75-plussers halen er maar weinigen de 85ste verjaardag, dan weten jullie dat vast.
Het artikel met de foute berekeningen staat hieronder.
At a maximum speed of 100km, the hypothesis is that BMW drivers will drive 105. Research then shows that they drive 110. Nivel would then calculate as follows: "we expected 5km, measured was 10km. So that's a 100% speed overrun. In other words: BMW drivers drive twice as fast." Of course, that is not possible.
Another example: if someone claims that they have 2,000 grams of sugar in their coffee, they don't know what they are talking about. He may have made a measurement or calculation error somewhere, but even so: he just doesn't realize what a gram is. If such a person then makes a report on the effect of sugar, it will undoubtedly lead to bizarre results, even if he says 'yes, but I mean something else with a gram'. You can't. Just like the term 'average' or 'decimal', you can't assign any other meaning to 'excess mortality'. Yet that is what the Nivel report does.
So what does it mean?
The term "excess mortality" means: (significantly) more mortality than expected. The exceedance can be expressed in absolute numbers, but because cohorts and populations have different sizes and are growing and shrinking, a relative indication of excess mortality is usually used. This is done as a percentage of the expected mortality, the total expected mortality.
It is therefore not correct to divide an excess mortality percentage (e.g. 5%) on an expected excess mortality percentage (e.g. 2%) and then present the result as 150% excess mortality. The exceedance may be 2.5 times higher, but that does not make the excess mortality 150%. The difference between the expected 105% and 110% is 5% (5 percentage points, to be more precise). If you take the expectation as a reference or baseline, you set it to 100%. Then the observed excess mortality is 4.7% (5/105). Dividing two excess mortality percentages on top of each other is not common and the result should certainly not be presented as "excess mortality".
This is what happens in the Nivel report, see the table above. But also textually, see the screenshot below. And journalists are eagerly adopting it.
An excess mortality of 230-282% over 12 months
It's really there. From the moment others got jabbed, those who didn't get jabbed died 3.5 times as often, for a year. This is stated in the report as an important conclusion, you really can't read over it.
So they agreed, prof. dr. Eelko Hak (University of Groningen), dr. Susan van den Hof (RIVM), Prof. Agnes Kant (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb), Prof. Jean Muris (Maastricht University), Dr. Tim olde Hartman (Radboud UMC), dr. Lilian Peters (University of Groningen/University Medical Center Groningen), prof. dr. Bas van den Putte (University of Amsterdam), prof. dr. Eugène van Puijenbroek (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb), Prof. Theo Vos (University of Washington), Prof. Ir. Liset van Dijk (Nivel), Dr Reed Sorensen (University of Washington) and Dr Claire Aussems (Nivel) contributed to the statistical analyses in this research funded by ZonMw.
And special thanks to former ZonMW director Prof. Dr. Cardula Wagner, who is also chairman of the Board of Directors of Nivel, without whom this research would probably not have been possible.
The bankruptcy of the establishment. I wanted to write 'of science' but this has little to do with that.
This in itself would be a reason for a thorough revision, and not only of the report, by the way. Were it not for the fact that there are more compelling reasons that will necessitate the withdrawal of the report. See also "More Nivel worries and, of course, the articles by Maurice de Hond.
🤣🤣 This is really too sad for words.
Fortunately, there are still critical people
Hegemony, the locked up! Sad...
Anton@ In 2021, approximately 85 percent of Dutch adults and nearly 90 percent of over-60s had been vaccinated. That old group also accounted for nearly 90 percent of coronavirus deaths in 2020.
Because you were considered unvaccinated again after six months and the booster people did not count as vaccinated again for six months until January 2022, only slightly less than half of the vaccinated population had actually been vaccinated at any time over the whole of 2021 and registered as such and classified in studies as such. In 2022, that percentage was even lower.
But it's even worse. The vulnerable 60-plus group etc were not formally considered vaccinated until two weeks after their second shot, so usually sometime in April to six months after that in October. Precisely those months when there was little corona.
What conclusions can you draw if you also take these things into account?
No, that's not an issue here, it's really the vaccination date. But there are many other problems with missing registrations that have caused deaths in vaccinated people to be missed. See @SteigstraHerman's recent work on X and on LinkedIn.
Things are going from bad to worse. Just throw it in the trash with this research
the question remains what Nivel means by "vaccinated". If not the moment of the injection is used, but "2 weeks after the second injection" (and before that you are "partially vaccinated" after 1 week), then people can die unvaccinated after the injection. And possibly FROM the vaccination....
No, in this case, that is the vaccination date. But there are many other problems with missing registrations that have caused deaths in vaccinated people to be missed. See @SteigstraHerman's recent work on X and on LinkedIn.
Thanks! That's not so bad...
Surely you are also one of those amateur statisticians that the acclaimed Volkskrant journalist is talking about? 😉
No, I don't exist. I don't think I'm screaming loud enough. 😎
From the report: "... than among unvaccinated/unregistered people..." How can one actually process data of people who are not registered, what data is used and what is the source of that data?
These are people who are known to general practitioners but for whom there is no vaccination status in their systems.
Anton, let's not forget that this is not a purely Dutch phenomenon. Fenton and Neil have found the exact same chaos in the ONS data in GB in 2022. The number of unvaccinated deaths rose dramatically after a round of jabs. See 'Fighting Goliath'. If you want, I can give you the page numbers. Mass vaccinated deaths were also reported as unvaccinated in Sweden. Just like the myth that it was mainly unvaccinated people who were in the ICU. All lies. I don't believe (anymore) that they are mistakes. We have been deliberately deceived, for a long time. See all those WOO requests that show that it has been clear for a long time that the mRNA jabs cause seriously many side effects, including deaths.
But they just keep going. Only in the Netherlands do the mRNA still work as a life-prolonging elixir.
Now all that remains is to find an explanation for the excess mortality. The government trains all investigations. And that's understandable, they would fall through the cracks.
Nog geen update van RIVM op https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland – zeker nog aan ’t plausibiliseren …
Benieuwd of de extra hoge bult die ze dit najaar in de sterfteverwachting ingelast hebben, de najaarsprik-ellende gaat verdoezelen. (Net iemand gesproken die bij elke prik (5 of 6 al?) dagenlang hoge koorts kreeg/krijgt en dagen echt ziek is – maar dat nog nooit in Lareb gemeld heeft).
In Wenen in de gratis stadskrant gister een stukje over de grote aantallen griep- en corona patiënten. Ziekenhuisopnames en zelfs 2 op de ic. “Laat je tegen beiden impfen!” Was al zo rustig in de stad maar wel af en aan ambulances… uit Nederland veel berichten van zieke geprikte kennissen en geprikte vrienden. Ben heel benieuwd naar de aantallen en de cijfers.
Niets aan de hand.
https://www.nivel.nl/nl/zorg-en-ziekte-in-cijfers/actuele-cijfers-ziekten-per-week
Ze vallen er in Nederland gelukkig geen zorgpersoneel mee lastig dus (nog) geen verhoogde cijfers. In Wenen wel, 75000 mensen (geregistreerd) ziek van corona en griep, 66 in ziekenhuis en 2 op de ic in levensgevaar op 1,8 miljoen mensen ongeveer dubbel zoveel inwoners als Amsterdam. Misschien angstiger? Mondkapjes zie je ook meer in Wenen. Of meer mensen met verzwakt immuunsysteem (geprikten?)? Zowel de griepprik als de coronaprik zijn gratis staat er in het krantenbericht van gisteren. Laat het stoppen! Maurice is alweer in de pen geklommen las ik. Dank allen!