It is becoming increasingly difficult for corona critics to bridge the growing knowledge gap with Op1 viewers and quality newspaper readers. Earlier I wrote about medical professionals I spoke to, up to a medical professor, who turned out to be unaware of the current excess mortality or, if they now face the excess mortality, condone that non-performance with previous ignorance. How do you react? I made an effort that can be of service to others.
Professionals and the unsuspecting
A hospital manager: "In any case, we knew that the care would be overrun. We had to do something."
(Note: Incorrect predictions from Imperial College blew up the panic narrative. Unvalidated models are apparently sufficient reason to cause havoc, even in retrospect.)
An experienced GP objected: "Yes, but there were really bright minds in the OMT. A lot of good has been done." I asked, "Name three things?" After a moment's thought - he knew he shouldn't mention vaccinations - he said: "The advice to wash hands, for example. Hygiene is very important in infectious diseases."
(Note: advice such as 'hand washing' has diverted attention from the dominant spread factor of respiratory diseases such as Covid: contaminated air. It is virtually impossible to transmit such viruses through indirect contact1 Read article: Playing poker with infections, including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.)
A professor (Medical Prof. Dr. at one of our universities) said with a laugh, when I mentioned excess mortality: "Well, that won't be too bad!"
An ex-director of a hospital group: "If there had been excess mortality, we would have known."
Here we are with excess mortality deniers. Or are they just as well suspicious people who rarely, if ever, hear about it in the big talk shows and quality newspapers?
Ik raakte onlangs in gesprek met een mental coach, het ging over over psychobiologie. Zij vroeg hoe ik geïnteresseerd was geraakt in die Mind&Body materie. Ik legde uit dat dat met mijn laatste blog-artikel te maken had. Even later viel het woord “oversterfte”. Ze vroeg: “Ja? Is er echt oversterfte? Maar hoe weet je dat dan?”
She gave me time to explain why I have been reasonably concerned about excess mortality and the corona policy for two years. She understood and reacted in shock. That was the reason for me to write the story: a kind of introduction to the over-mortality problem. If you immediately start five steps further (causes, speculation, corruption), you will soon be a conspiracy theorist.
A URL you can forward
Since virus variety also has an outlet function for me, the site is not so suitable for referring unsuspecting people. That's a Cold Turkey they'll understandably soon flee. People turn away in disbelief or simply point to their foreheads. That's why I put that approach on another site: onverklaardeoversterfte.nl. It was quite a task for me to describe the situation in neutral terms. Hopefully that worked out a bit and is a URL to refer curious blue-pillers to. I hope it can help some of you.
Don't blame people if they are not aware, but offer them dosed information using the teaspoon method. After all, it is perfectly normal that certain information has eluded them. That makes it incomprehensible to them what others are so worried about. So I tried to describe the worrisome situation as factually as possible, as a first introduction to the matter. Unfortunately, this cannot be done entirely without figures.
If there are suggestions to make it more accessible, or if there are inaccuracies in it, I'd love to read them in the comments section below.
Pages will soon be added with information about possible causes of the unexplained excess mortality. The main candidates are delayed care, lung Covid, measures and vaccinations.
We have therefore had the most important excess mortality issues of the moment.
Other excess mortality factors are partly speculative and have already been largely treated for virus varia, such as:
- Declaring all knowledge about the transmission of respiratory diseases useless
- Declaring all knowledge about the treatment of flu useless
- Promoting false protection: washing hands, social distancing and face masks
- Not protecting vulnerable elderly people by ventilation/air cleaning
- Banning promising off-label medication
To learn from this, the bottom stone will have to come up. Where did all those mistakes come from? Does the pharmaceutical/regulator model still work in a small world in which business has been pleasant for decades? What is the function of the media and how did they take up their role? How do politicians determine their uniform strategies?
One would hope that another policy debacle could be prevented if these processes could be exposed. Presumably that will not work, even if guilty parties are found and prosecuted. Then next time all prepared knowledge will simply go overboard as soon as a small group of experts manages to spread fear of death and those in power use it as a means of coercion.
In any case, the answer to the question "Is there excess mortality?" is: yes, there is large excess mortality, which has grown every year since 2020. In the last 3 years, about 35 people a day died more than expected.
Related themes are quickly pushed into the conspiracy corner, so how we can ever convey that I don't know:
- the dysfunction of parliamentary democracy
- The fusion of the trias politica
- the failure to oversee academic integrity among the patting academic elite
- conflict of interest
- network corruption
- the growing influence of globalists and technocrats
- The motives for banning promising (and sometimes proven effective) medication
- The role of the royal family
- Big Tech's guiding disinformation strategy in consultation with governments and other media
- the substandard national decision-making as shown by WOB documents
- the influence of the industry lobby (i.e. Big Pharma) on scientific journals, on medical research, on health policy
and so on. These are all things that we also see in other dossiers, for example in climate policy. These, too, are things that the critics are concerned about. Perhaps they are even more serious because systemic and structural, with the potential to cause even greater disasters.
What it should start with is transparency, to be demanded unconditionally by independent critical media – because that is where the key lies. Media that do not insist on this are neither independent nor critical. Unwelcome science should also be able to find a platform in the media. Then the masses will follow and then politics will have to.
For the time being, that is a step too far. First, let's outline the problem.
See for that https://onverklaardeoversterfte.nl
- 1Read article: Playing poker with infections