Infant mortality after a vaccination campaign is a bright red flag, complete with flashing lights and alarm bells. Because signaled infant mortality hardly receives any attention, here is an addition to the artikel van 16 oktober jl. about Scotland. It turns out to be even more serious than reported there, because of malpractice by the medical staff.
Reader Anja drew my attention to a video of John Campbell, who treated the Scottish neonatal death on 20 October. In that video, he also mentions that registration fraud. He had not delved into the figures so the girl mortality is not discussed in his article.
Heel in ’t kort: In Schotland is de neonatale sterfte al sinds medio 2021 verhoogd. Onder meisjesbaby’s was er over heel 2021 anderhalf zoveel sterfte als normaal, terwijl de eerste helft van het jaar er normaal uitzag. In afgelopen maart: meer dan het dubbele van de gemiddelde neonatale sterfte(!).
Schotland is met 5,5 miljoen inwoners een klein land maar wel een enorme proefpopulatie waarvan de historische gegevens goed te vergelijken zijn, ook omdat er secuur wordt gerapporteerd. Het kan niet als een ’trial’ worden gezien omdat er geen controlegroep is. Je zou wel kunnen vergelijken tussen gevaccineerd en niet-gevaccineerd maar dat gebeurt niet. De officiële reden om dit niet te doen is omdat het de vaccinatiebereidheid zou kunnen schaden.
Neonatal mortality withheld
It has now come out that at least 10% of the (average) neonatal mortality has not even been recorded recently. Exactly what period this is about is not yet clear. Those dead babies appear to have been booked away as stillborn. This puts them outside the jurisdiction of the 'coroner', an official who investigates violent, sudden or suspicious deaths. According to one of the mothers, her baby lived another 5 days. The medical staff was of the opinion that we had to walk through, there was nothing to see here.
In order not to harm the willingness to vaccinate, one goes over corpses.
Create posts about this, share it. It remains far too quiet. Keeping this medical corruption under wraps, together with the excess mortality, is an outright scandal. It is quite conceivable that the situation in the Netherlands is comparable, but here the thorough registration and otherwise at least the transparency is lacking.
It is abundantly clear that vaccination affects pregnancy. In the Herald, the journalist expresses himself in his enthusiasm when he writes that a jab in the last month increases infant mortality by a third.
“In feite illustreert een schat aan surveillancegegevens wereldwijd dat de vaccins een algemeen voordeel opleveren.
According to cumulative data from December 2020 to the end of July 2022 – covering tens of thousands of pregnancies in Scotland – the perinatal death rate (neonatal deaths and stillbirths combined) was 4.5 per 1000 births for babies born to mothers vaccinated at any time in pregnancy, and 6.1 per 1000 when the mothers had been vaccinated in the last 28 days before delivery.“
Dr. Campbell's supplement on the unrecorded mortality begins here, with a telling silence after treating the neonatal death: https://youtu.be/wj4rE0LrpR0?t=446 , including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.
The whole video:
",.... has not even been registered recently. Exactly what period this is about is not yet clear".
But knowing that seems to me to be crucial information! The difference between conscious attempts to obscure something or a completely different cause or policy that only (partly) overlaps the corona period. You can imagine, for example, that due to the pressure on healthcare, an attempt was made to relieve administrative work by not conducting an investigation in all cases. By immediately labeling this as suspicious, the speaker here is potentially smearing a very large group of care workers ... Sometimes it is better to have all the numbers before such a statement is made.
Whether it's chaos, intent or sloppiness: it's still bad. And very disrespectful to the parents!
Please try not to justify this under the guise of something like "administrative pressure". This only shows that the sense of proportion is lost. Typically an excuse that is accepted in healthcare as justification for dysfunction.
Completely off topic.
Anton, I read this comment on the Corona Middle Way and since you are much deeper into the matter, I am curious if this is true.
Thank you in advance for your response.
Virusvaria makes the mistake of comparing only a few weeks with 2020. There was UNDER mortality in those weeks in 2020. That was because there had just been a 1st corona peak in which people have died who would otherwise have died a few weeks later. So they compare normal mortality (summer 2021) with under-mortality (2020) and wrongly call that excess mortality.
If you go back to the source (the CBS figures) you will see that the excess mortality in 2021 took place in the winter and autumn during the corona waves. There was NO excess mortality in the period of mass vaccination (early summer). Many millions of people then got their jabs.
See for yourself... https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/welvaart-in-coronatijd/gezondheid-in-coronatijd
Where do I compare only a few weeks with 2020..? To my knowledge, figures and basic values are always based on rivm, cbs or the average 2015-2019. That's always there.
The excess mortality in 2021 will start (among the elderly) in March/April 2021. I reported on that in August 2021. Autumn had yet to begin. At that time it was already clear that the mortality rates no longer fluctuated around the expectation but rather around the signal limit. These articles have led to action by Baudet and the Omtzigt motion. Anyone who now claims that it only started in autumn and winter has missed a few things. Maybe he/she will rely on the weekly reports of CBS.
See examples in this article
Busy in healthcare?
would rather lose me than rich Could go to a psychologist ;" you have to change "
Colleagues, from the sweethearts; nothing but good
The drivers ; effe puking mi organized
Don't trust any healthcare institution, doctor, etc. anymore.