Wie slim is, laat zich vaccineren. Dat suggereren twee studies op basis van gevonden correlaties tussen IQ en vaccinatiebereidheid. In drie paragrafen schets ik hoe het ook zou kunnen zitten. De rest van het artikel (onder 'Uitwerking') is voor de liefhebber. Er is van alles te zeggen over de methodologie van de studies, de wijze van intelligentie-bepaling en de context van de populaties die zijn bekeken. Gaan we niet doen.
Nevertheless, it has become a long piece so I'll summarize in the three promised paragraphs:
Voor mensen met een hoger IQ zijn media de belangrijkste informatiebron. Zij zoeken er betrouwbare informatie op en kunnen daar erg veel van verwerken. Zij kijken betrouwbare programma's en knopen de statements van de top-experts in hun oren. Als theoretisch opgeleiden kennen zij de waarde van informatie, verwerken die en passen die toe. Hun collega's en superieuren consumeren hetzelfde informatiepakket en vertrouwen op het systeem dat hen heeft gebracht in de bevoorrechte posities waarin ze als hoger opgeleiden verkeren. Zo is deze groep een jaar lang blootgesteld aan informatie die als doel had de vaccinatiebereidheid te bevorderen.
The group with lower IQs missed all this information. They watch VI and Temptation Island and, lower down the social ladder, are less fond of muckety mucks anyway. Promises that seem too good to be true, such as a miracle vaccine that just falls from the sky, they view with obvious suspicion.
Een hoger intelligentieniveau gaat samen met andere mediaselectie en -consumptie. Kijk- en leesgedrag bepaalt de aard van de informatie en aan die zorgvuldig geselecteerde informatie wordt door intellectuelen bovendien groter belang gehecht. Vertrouwen op elkaars autoriteit, zeker buiten het eigen specialisme, is een fundament onder de wetenschap. Autoriteit wordt gerespecteerd. Wie dat niet doet, is dissident en diskwalificeert de eigen autoriteit. Een hogere vaccinatiebereidheid onder mensen met een hoger IQ kan dus wijzen op een hogere gevoeligheid voor manipulatie via de media.
De kleine groep doctoren (PhD's) onder de hoger opgeleiden gedraagt zich soms weer anders: die prikt juist minder. Zie hierover a later article.
Elaboration
The studies
Cognitive skills, health policy and the dynamics of COVID-19 vaccination
(the links below the screenshots lead to the studies)
Interpretations
Het komt in de studies op de volgende conclusies neer: Slimme mensen laten zich meer vaccineren. Minder slimme mensen kunnen het belang van vaccinaties niet goed inschatten. Zie twee citaten uit de onderzoeken:
- "De resultaten suggereren dat de complexiteit van de vaccinatiebeslissing het voor mensen met lagere cognitieve capaciteiten moeilijk kan maken om de voordelen van vaccinatie te begrijpen."
- "Ondanks een breed scala aan vaccinatiestimulansen die tijdens de onderzoeksperiode beschikbaar waren, was een hogere intelligentie de sterkste voorspeller voor vaccinatiebereidheid."
Clear, right? Not vaccinating is stupid.
Confounding
A correlation does not necessarily indicate a direct causal relationship. Two synchronous phenomena can have a common cause. So it is not the case that one phenomenon leads to the other1A classic example is the difference between IQ and shoe size. The cognitive abilities of a child are of course lower than those of an adult and that correlates with the shoe size. However, a larger shoe size does not cause a higher IQ and vice versa. There is a confounder, an underlying cause that on average results in both larger feet and a higher IQ. Finding such connections is sometimes difficult. This is based on suspicions and coming up with alternative possible causes that are not yet in the picture..
Zou er ook sprake zijn van zo'n indirect verband tussen IQ en vaccinatiebereidheid?
We moeten even generaliseren. Intelligent, hoogopgeleid, ontwikkelde cognitieve vermogens, richting de top van de maatschappelijke ladder: we clusteren het in de groep "Hoger IQ". Die groep verschilt natuurlijk niet alleen in intelligentie van de groep "Lager IQ". Ze hebben een andere lifestyle, wonen anders, rijden in andere auto's, kijken andere tv-programma's, hebben meer of minder kinderen, hebben andere vakanties, eten anders etc. etc. Zit in één van die verschillen misschien wél een oorzakelijk verband met vaccinatiebereidheid? Welke omweg moeten we nemen?
Een hoger IQ heeft in ieder geval met denken te maken. In het brein wordt anders omgegaan met informatie. Iemand kan meer, complexere en abstractere informatie opnemen, onthouden, verwerken en internaliseren, zodat met die informatie nieuwe toepasbare kennis kan worden opgebouwd.
Hoger (of beter: onpraktisch) opgeleiden hebben geleerd dat ze hun kennis kunnen verzilveren met diploma's en voortgang op de carrièreladder. Dat ze met informatie eigen argumenten verzamelen, is van levensbelang in een kennismaatschappij. Voor hun is kennis echt een ding. Het is essentieel om goed naar deskundigen te luisteren en in de oren te knopen wat zij te zeggen hebben.
Ben je zelf specialist op een bepaald gebied, dan respecteer je de expertise van een specialist op een ander gebied, zoals je ook wil dat jouw 'expert opinion' wordt gewaardeerd. En wil je in een hiërarchie opklimmen, wees dan geen querulant door de kennis van je superieuren te betwijfelen. Een alom gerespecteerd deskundige kun je beter complimenteren dan bij de enkels afzagen. Dat zou carrièretechnische zelfmoord zijn. De meer volgzame types zullen je dan voorbij streven. Aanpassingsvermogen, het meeveren met de omgeving is dus ook een factor.
Media profiles
Ik heb ChatGPT eens gevraagd om voorbeelden van tv-programma's die specifiek bij een van deze twee groepen populair zijn: hoger en lager IQ.
- Op1 - Een talkshow met actueel nieuws, politieke kwesties en maatschappelijke thema's tot cultuur en entertainment.
- Buitenhof - Een wekelijks discussieprogramma over politiek en actualiteit.
- Tegenlicht - Een diepgaand onderzoeksprogramma van de VPRO over actuele thema's.
- GTST (Good Times, Bad Times) - De langstlopende Nederlandse soapserie.
- Temptation Island - een reality-tv-show waarin verschillende koppels naar een tropisch eiland worden gebracht om hun relaties op de proef te stellen.
- I love Holland - Een entertainmentprogramma met spellen en humor rondom Nederlandse cultuur en actualiteit.
Newspapers/magazines: NRC Handelsblad, De Volkskrant, De Groene Amsterdammer and on the other hand De Telegraaf, Privé and Weekend.
Let's try not to fall into value judgments. The distinction between cognitive and social/relational interests is clear.
GTST, Temptation Island en Ik hou van Holland zijn niet de programma's die je gaat kijken om je een mening te vormen over actuele kwesties, zoals (destijds) vaccineren of niet. De lager opgeleide zat zich avond aan avond te amuseren, terwijl de hoogopgeleide de informatie opzoog die hem werd aangereikt in het dagelijkse Op1. Daar zaten immers de experts, zoals Ab Osterhaus en die kapitein van Pfizer. Karoly Illy, Marc Bonten, Marjolein van Egmond, Ab Osterhaus, Marion Koopmans, Roland Pierik - welke vaccinpromotor heeft daar niet gezeten. En dat zijn echt deskundigen, anders worden ze niet uitgenodigd bij Op1, want dat is zeer betrouwbaar en van hoge kwaliteit. Had ik Ab Osterhaus al genoemd? Enfin, die informatievloed 'sets the mind'. Al die geleerden waren het bovendien roerend eens: consensus. Dan is het onbetwistbaar.
Bij kranten is het al net zo. De Volkskrant heeft een dedicated corona-verslaggever, Maarten Keulemans. Een van zijn koppen spreekt al voor zich: "Corona vaccines worked even better than expected". Wat doet dat met de Volkskrant-lezende intelligentsia?
In regards to jabbing and reflection, the Telegraaf has to rely mainly on columnists. Leon de Winter: "Het is lastig om [voor de oversterfte] een andere omstandigheid te vinden dan, ik moet het ronduit zeggen, vaccinatie. Iets anders kan het niet zijn geweest.". That's a whole different sound.
Marianne Zwagerman, in her mid-2021 column in De Telegraaf: "'Zelfs een journalistiek programma als Nieuwsuur behandelt vaccinatieplicht als een serieus te bespreken thema, waarbij uiteraard vooral de voorstanders zeer uitgebreid het woord krijgen om de overheidslijn te verdedigen. Terwijl juist de Nieuwsuur-redactie als geen ander weet hoe het coronabeleid ons met leugens en geheimen door de strot wordt geduwd. De redactie kreeg van de rechter gelijk dat Hugo de Jonge de stukken over de coronacrisis – die Nieuwsuur heeft ’gewobt’ – vrij moet geven, maar de minister weigert en jaagt het van ons belastinggeld betaalde programma op juridische kosten door in hoger beroep te gaan."
That's a whole different story. Vaccination gets indirectly associated with lies and secrets. In any case, the Telegraaf reader was not lulled to sleep.
Het is geen geheim dat de staatsmedia het kabinetsnarratief enthousiast hebben uitgedragen, met name de 'kwaliteitsmedia' zoals NRC, Volkskrant, Op1.2For that reason I no longer watch TV and I canceled my subscriptions to VK, NRC and AD (yes, all three of them, I was under the delusion that I was informing myself in a versatile way).
Is MSM information really that colored?
Frequent readers of this blog know that a lot of information from the legacy media is indeed incorrect or incomplete, as evidenced by some debunks of MSM articles from AD, NRC, UK and TV clips.
Een uitstekend voorbeeld van de MSM-desinformatie betreft de Pfizer-contracten die de EU heeft afgesloten namens de lidstaten (wisten we daar toen eigenlijk van? Wat stond daarin?). Ik schreef daar eergisteren een artikel over dat inmiddels 14.000 keer is gelezen. Dat is bijzonder veel voor dit blog, zelfs nog meer dan mijn debunk van Ruben van Gaalen, een oudere 'hit'3In the article about the Pfizer contracts, I outline my dismay at the fact that the EU has signed up to inject the entire European population with a drug of which they contractually confirmed that effects and side effects were unknown. No one knew how common and how severe those side effects would be. But no matter how serious, the pharmaceutical companies could not be blamed. No claims, no responsibility, nothing. Now I had heard that the pharmaceutical companies were indemnified against any claim for damages, but you hear so much. However, the fact that this was clearly stated in black and white and that the contract was actually signed by someone on behalf of all the Member States of the EU, that made my shoes fall off..
From the reactions to that article it became clear to me that that contract between Pfizer and the EU has been online since 17 April 2021, on the website of the Italian broadcaster RAI. Publicly available for more than two years! The EU explicitly confirms in that contract that they signed up to a billion-dollar order for injections for which nothing was known about the side effects or long-term effectiveness.
Had we had critical journalism, or an investigative editorial staff, or a high-level science reporter somewhere, all the newspapers would have jumped on top of this. But what, for example, did the quality newspaper par excellence, NRC, report on this contract?
Top-shelf gaslighting
De aandacht wordt afgeleid met een bericht over de prijs, alsof dat het belangrijkste feit was. De link in het artikel verwijst naar La Vanguardia, de Spaanse krant die in het bezit was van een zwartgelakte versie. Vier dagen eerder stond de complete versie echter al bij RAI. Hadden de topjournalisten van deze kwaliteitskrant dat gemist...?
Meanwhile the Volkskrant cheered that the vaccines came earlier than expected:
Dit is exemplarisch voor de informatievoorziening aan de intelligentsia, de krantenlezers die hun context grotendeels uit berichtgeving halen, die vertrouwen hebben in de kwaliteitsmedia. Al hun collega's en superieuren lezen ook de NRC dus zij zijn het met elkaar eens over de kwaliteit.
Low-skilled (better: practically educated) wappies, on the other hand, don't read NRC. They think they probably won't get sick and simply keep their healthy suspicion of a miracle vaccine that suddenly falls from the sky. They are also less aware that other sources such as Twitter, blckbx, Gezond Verstand or De Andere Krant only spread disinformation. You only know that if you consume enough quality media.
It is therefore expected that the group of media consumers with a higher IQ also has a higher willingness to vaccinate than the group that has not been subjected to this incessant, long-term, media-intensive brainwashing. It would be inexplicable if it were the other way around, given the nature of the information and the conviction among the theoretically trained that the veracity of that information need not be questioned.
Another example: acceptance of lableak theory
Experts en dus ook de 'kwaliteitsmedia' houden nog steeds vol dat het virus niet uit het Wuhan-lab afkomstig is. "Hoogst onwaarschijnlijk" is de consensus. Iedereen weet wel beter, ook de auteurs die ons voor het lapje hebben gehouden met het stuk dat als bewijs voor die ontkenning werd gebruikt.
(Maurice made a presentation about. Jan Bonte made mincemeat of the 'consensus' van Maarten Keulemans)
The media paints a parallel reality. This is also reflected in the lableak belief by level of education and that pattern corresponds to media consumption.
(thanks to Maurice de Hond for making the data available, a measurement from 16-6-2023.)
Imaginary research proposal
Unfeasible, I know, but still.
Stel dat je een RCT doet: Je laat de intelligentste helft van je proefpersonen (voornamelijk onpraktisch opgeleid) een jaar lang avond aan avond naar vaccinpropaganda kijken in programma's die zij als betrouwbaar beoordelen. De andere helft mag dat juist niet, die moet verplicht naar leuke onderhoudende niets-aan-de-hand tv kijken. De vaccin-brainwashgroep laaft zich aan de woorden van experts, zo zit hun context immers in elkaar.
Een soortgelijke opzet zou ook met de andere groep kunnen, de praktisch opgeleiden. Maar vinden informatie minder fascinerend. En op het werk is er sowieso weinig respect voor bekakte hotemetoten. Of zij het volhouden om de blabla in de talkshows uit te zitten? Dat wordt ethisch een probleem, mensen in een onderzoek martelen mag officieel niet, dat is in de Neurenberg code afgesproken. Het is immers iets heel anders dan ze tegen hun zin in injecteren.
In which group would the willingness to vaccinate be highest after that year?
Conclusion
It's not a smarter decision to get vaccinated. Rather, the correlation between IQ and vaccine readiness indicates that intellectuals are more susceptible to media manipulation because of:
- vertrouwen in het (kennis)systeem waar ze onderdeel van zijn
- exposure to persistent and intrusive pro-vaccination information
- sensitivity to expert statements
De intelligentsia zijn vakkundiger en vaker gemasseerd dan de groepen die 'moeilijker te bereiken' waren. Ze zouden zich wat bewuster mogen zijn van deze kwetsbaarheid. Dus mocht er reuring komen over het feit dat slimme mensen kiezen voor vaccinatie, dan weet je hoe dat komt, volgens virusvaria dan. Want bewezen is er niets, maar hopelijk wel plausibel gemaakt.
Zie ook het vervolgartkel met wat onderzoeksdata https://virusvaria.nl/hoger-opgeleiden-meer-geprikt-gepromoveerden-juist-minder/
Footnotes
- 1A classic example is the difference between IQ and shoe size. The cognitive abilities of a child are of course lower than those of an adult and that correlates with the shoe size. However, a larger shoe size does not cause a higher IQ and vice versa. There is a confounder, an underlying cause that on average results in both larger feet and a higher IQ. Finding such connections is sometimes difficult. This is based on suspicions and coming up with alternative possible causes that are not yet in the picture.
- 2For that reason I no longer watch TV and I canceled my subscriptions to VK, NRC and AD (yes, all three of them, I was under the delusion that I was informing myself in a versatile way).
- 3In the article about the Pfizer contracts, I outline my dismay at the fact that the EU has signed up to inject the entire European population with a drug of which they contractually confirmed that effects and side effects were unknown. No one knew how common and how severe those side effects would be. But no matter how serious, the pharmaceutical companies could not be blamed. No claims, no responsibility, nothing. Now I had heard that the pharmaceutical companies were indemnified against any claim for damages, but you hear so much. However, the fact that this was clearly stated in black and white and that the contract was actually signed by someone on behalf of all the Member States of the EU, that made my shoes fall off.
Higher educated people are often brainwashed for years by the institutes where they were trained. They often live in a kind of scientific utopia and believe in the goodness of science. Science has become a kind of religion in which being critical is tantamount to blasphemy. However, practice shows that the world is very different. In fact, everything revolves around power, status and money resulting in corruption. The so-called "lower educated" have to fight harder to keep their heads above water and experience the harsh reality on a daily basis. They have simply developed a healthy distrust based on reality and do not allow themselves to be ignored. I think that's the explanation for the fact that lower educated people have been vaccinated less. In my opinion, the latter group is therefore a lot smarter than the science swappies.
Thank you for your valuable addition. I think you're absolutely right and I'm glad you're sharing this here. I feel the same way, but my opinion is just an opinion, I don't think that's enough for an article. I'm not even an expert by experience. More of these comments please!
Agreed, but it depends on what kind of science one has studied. And how and whether that science has been internalized.
You are not a doctor, you are first and foremost a human being, a father, a husband etc who also, once, studied medicine. It's a profession. What you should always keep studying for. Exactly that is missing from many doctors.
"And if you want to move up a hierarchy, don't be a querulant by questioning the knowledge of your superiors."
I think this is Cause #1, more than the daily brainwashing sessions by the state media.
Because that's what I looked at (with two academic titles – including one in an exact subject – also 'highly educated') in the beginning. Only I didn't take it for granted, but gradually became more and more annoyed by it, to the point where I am now: I hardly watch regular TV anymore and the almost 30-year subscription to the NRC has been canceled.
So I am clearly such a querulant, that is also evident from the course of my 'career'. 😉
Great, yes, I see it that way too. What I also replied to Lars applies to this. I have also had interactions where I got the lid on my nose, while it was agreed in advance to have an open conversation. But I can't hang an article on that. It was also in a different, commercial hierarchy. The same laws apply there, but yes, that is their own money and has nothing to do with national policy or abuse of power. The customer is always right so I just misjudged that in my inexperience with the higher-ups. I make different demands of people who defend themselves in the interests of the country and of our money. Then I am the customer, only they have forgotten that.
My iq was once tested at 146 (not to brag) and I haven't been vaccinated.
I think that a higher IQ mainly causes you to be higher educated and therefore more likely to have been taught the (blind) science belief.
Without taking into account the reality of bought science, corruption and influencing people.
My academic experience is that you really have to fall in line there because you are worked out differently. Try asking the prof's info, if only for your own understanding. Are there only a few on each course who can have that.
So I agree 100% with the comments of Lars and Eef.
Beautiful. Broad awareness of this vulnerability among the intelligentsia could make a difference. Media are missing out on their crucial role here. See climate, similar processes are at play there.
With such an IQ it will be difficult not to look at society despondent or sympathetic. Strength with that and thanks for your response, if only because of the implicit compliment that smart people also read my blogs. 😜
The authors of the studies look no further than that their noses are long. They focus entirely on the Western world where the smart ones have all been vaccinated. But what about a country like Bulgaria, for example? Only about 30% have had their jabs. Are those Bulgarians all that stupid? No way, I lived there for six years and my wife is Bulgarian and also university educated. My experience is that those Bulgarians are generally pretty smart. However, these people are not easily fooled. Not because they are smart or stupid, but because this people has been bombarded with lies and propaganda for some 70 years. They see much faster than the West that they are constantly being deceived. And what is the consequence? No excess mortality for quite some time. Those slimbos in the West can't say that. But you don't hear them talk about that, of course. That's how smart they are.
Another nice substantiation, provided that data can be found. History as a predictor of intellectual naivety. Are there propagandistic media there, for example? Or does it stop there already? I believe we saw earlier that the judiciary functions more independently. I didn't follow all that very closely.
Obviously, I think that in the "east" people are more aware that they are being deceived by the government time and time again. That's been going on there for years, as you say. As a result, people have long since created a kind of parallel world. The government says A, but we just do B, because that works better for us, the citizens. That awareness is not there at all in the Netherlands. Here it is, the government says A and a group of citizens do/want AA.
Be careful with the so-called 'less educated' people, there are quite a few who, due to circumstances, have not received or completed a pre-university or academic education, for example because they came from a poor background, or problematic family situation, but are very smart!
For example, I know several dropouts with an IQ of 130 or more, being self-taught, and not feeling the need for socially desirable behavior... And especially the less fortunate, and people with a migration background know very well that you have to distrust the government, and especially when you hear the editor-in-chief of a 'quality newspaper' also say that only the 'corona vision of the government' is held because 'otherwise it is too confusing for the people', then you know that it stinks, that something is seriously wrong, (and the trust in those newspapers has been permanently damaged, if not already).
Besides, who still reads a petty NL newspaper where all fake info is behind a paywall? Who still watches TV? On the internet, many free researchers, doctors, and journalists can be found who have not allowed themselves to be muzzled, and can freely proclaim their research results and opinions on uncensored platforms such as Bitchute, Rumble and now also on Twitter/X.
Epoch Times has a good health section, very wide, full of formation, and free!!!!
In short, there is quite a group of 'poorly educated' people, the so-called Wappies, who are actually Snappies.
@Pluis, well seen, that is indeed the gist of the article and most of the comments.
It may not be a real RCT, because there may be more differences, but of course there are plenty of highly educated people who only use the TV for movies or a few series and who have not had a newspaper for a long time. My girlfriend and I are one of them. We also know a lot of them. An easy study would be to compare the vaccination rate in that group with the group that does watch TV and has a newspaper subscription.
I think your statement is largely correct. Also in the no-TV group we have acquaintances who have been vaccinated, but the unvaccinated are actually only in that group of people who also do not watch TV and do not have a newspaper subscription.
A reassuring thought is that excess mortality mainly concerns vaccinated people, which means that the media audience for the highly educated is rapidly declining, which also reduces the spread of politically correct mis- and disinformation.
Also a reassuring thought is that many people have put the TV and newspaper outside and prefer to receive information via alternative channels such as BlackBox, Café Weltscherz, De Andere Krant, Opiniez, Voorwaarheid, Ongehoord Nieuws, Indepen, Interessante Tijden, Climategate, De Nieuwe Wereld, De Blauwe Tijger, Wynia's Week, Dwarsnieuws, Maurice de Hond and of course VirusVaria.
But perhaps the best prospect is that the EU will protect citizens from mis- and disinformation with the newly enacted Digital Service Act. I therefore expect a barrage of objections from citizens (there are more of us) against the deluge of mis- and disinformation that comes from our governments, MSM, science, education and health care institutions. But also from international institutions such as the UN, WHO and EU.
It is often that people who do a profession with their hands (and possibly are less educated) think more logically. They stand with hands and feet in reality while higher educated people are more likely to be above it.
Higher educated people also tend to belong to tribes. They then stop thinking and mercilessly follow opinions at work and private life because they will know because they are highly educated.
You often see this phenomenon in doctors who do not actually look at the patient but the symptoms, then the cause is not addressed.
The wappies as they are portrayed nowadays are, in my opinion, people who still think for themselves and despite the fact that they may have lower IQ, they are much smarter and know how to be independent and take their own responsibility.
Also not to forget, the so-called "U" curve that was in the news in 2021:
"The association between hesitancy and education level followed a U-shaped curve".
Those with a PhD were the most hesitant. But the most in line were those with a Master's degree (so not exactly a U curve).
– https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0260731
The image that the "stupid" and the very smartest (but not the intelligent middle class) opposed the propaganda also fits well with my experience.
That's exactly right. For the still generic approach in this article, that doesn't matter. That group is far too small to affect the overall picture.
Is it correct to report that there is a link between IQ and vaccination readiness? Rather, I read a connection between where you stand on the social ladder and vaccination readiness. The more one is lifestyle and career dependent on moving along, the higher the willingness.
I think a higher IQ can allow someone to be critical, to poke through the propaganda. A growing distrust in the government also plays a role in the willingness to get vaccinated, which may play a role more among the practically educated in society.
See also my reply to Bob. That it is possible according to you and what I myself previously thought, does not turn out that way, that is precisely what the article is about.
There is also a contradiction in what you say. The behaviour of the government, with a succession of broken promises, disastrous mistakes, panic interventions, secret agreements, incompetent ministers, disinformation to lies, has aroused distrust among the sensible part of the population.
According to you, that should be the people with a higher IQ, while you actually assume/perceive that distrust ('according to me' – perhaps you could substantiate that a bit better) among the practically educated. That doesn't make sense, unless you think that the government has acted with integrity and exemplary in recent years, putting aside all 'affairs' and curfews.
We disagree on that, that's fine too.
A higher IQ can certainly allow people to be critical and poke through propaganda; That's probably true for many readers and commentators here. And practically educated people need to have more of their intuition, which may help to simply look past nice talk and pay attention to other things.
The problem is the large intelligent middle group; There are many who use their intelligence to suck up propaganda. Based on my experience with the pandemic, I looked for followers of dangerous cults like Jim Jones to be much more educated; That appears to be the case. And relatively few low-educated people. Following the scientists quoted earlier, we can propose that lower educated people automatically enroll in new sects, in order to offer them the same social opportunities.
Brilliant Harald 😀
I don't think it has much to do with higher IQ. I have a high IQ myself, but I really don't fall for the lies of the media and government.
There's a lot more going on. A high IQ is not synonymous with higher education. Most higher educated people who come from universities have been brainwashed for years. The left hemisphere (ratio) is the only thing that matters in a university. The use of the right hemisphere (creativity, intuition, feeling) is systematically rammed out of it. These people no longer possess anything like common sense.
I don't call that intelligent, but intellectual. For me, intelligent is if you use both hemispheres optimally and don't just rely on the ratio.
I've met a lot of intelligent people in the past year who weren't educated and who I really thought were a lot smarter than all those hotshots with I don't know how many titles before (or behind) their names. At work, unfortunately, I am also among those kinds of figures (ir, ing, mr, dr.) who can no longer think outside the box, but are stuck in their own thinking that they have formed about what is true and what is not. If you come up with counterarguments, they have stepped on their toes, because only they know it.
Fortunately, there are still plenty of highly educated people who really see how things work. Higher IQ, more vaccination readiness, is indeed generalization, as the author of this piece also states.
IQ is a term to which everything is wrongly linked anyway. I know suckers with a huge IQ. But to make it not too complicated, I took IQ instead of "cognitive abilities" or "cognitive profile" or "intellectual" or whatever nuances you could bring.
It is just an umbrella term to distinguish between knowledge workers, people who are or are not used and/or trained to work with information and therefore also have the cognitive capacity to do so to a marketable extent, and the group for whom the acquisition and invention of knowledge is of secondary importance.
Some people have an intuition that leads to better decisions than that of someone with five libraries in their head. "IQ" here is just a categorization to get a mechanism clear, it's not a value judgment. I notice that quite a few people are on the defensive. You don't have to, whether you think you belong to one group or another, even if you have exceptions.
Highly educated people are not sufficiently aware of an Achilles heel: their receptivity to information, especially if it comes from reliable authorities. That is the key message as far as I am concerned.
My grandfather used to say "never trust the Government". On May 9, 1940, it was announced on the radio that everything was under control and that the Netherlands could sleep peacefully. That night, Germany attacked. He drove to the bank the next morning and emptied his safe. At 10 o'clock, the radio announced that the Banks had to close the vaults. On 15 May, the Netherlands surrendered and on 16 May, the Germans emptied the vaults.
On May 13, the Royal family and the Government had already left for England. They should never have come back.
From the beginning, I was skeptical about vaccination. Simply because it normally takes about 10 years for a vaccine to be developed. The covid vaccine was ready in no time. That didn't seem logical to me. Am I that stupid or are the higher educated so smart? Neither appears given the many (deadly) side effects.
Something imposed with such absurdity and aggressiveness, without any empirical evidence, can only contain red flags. And when you investigate, you only see that suspicion more confirmed instead of debunked. I do not know of any incident in history where such psychological warfare has required the public to take a particular medicine, except in times of war. You do not have to know about diseases, medication or medical treatments to understand that there are completely different intentions behind this. In my opinion, this has nothing to do with IQ or intelligence, but purely with healthy suspicion. Doubt everything. Cogito Ergo Sum.
When I look at the Snappies around me, I come to the following conclusion.
She/he:
1. has been a rebel from an early age, did not want to run with the mob, was an exception.
And/or:
2. has a very great sense of justice.
and/or
3. has been tricked at least once by the government/judiciary.
And/or:
4. is able to have a helicopter view of business.
Often at least two of the above apply.
Curious what you think of this!
Nice checklist!
It strikes me in particular that my very highly educated friends and family members have become so frightened by the continuous flow of disinformation and misinformation that they can no longer or do not want to think logically themselves. For a large part of it, even the memory deteriorated visibly after the shots. Most also don't want to face the truth because they want to have a foothold. If you ask: How is it possible that at the end of 2021, when 85 percent of the Dutch adult population was vaccinated, at least sixty percent received omikron in the first six months of 2022? (With a total of 55-60 percent infections over 2020 and 2021, this means four times more infections in the first half of 2022 per month). Yet they usually still think that shots stop many infections and therefore the qrcode was effective.
The same applies to excess mortality.
Recently there was a study that 'proved' that lockdowns have caused little or no more metastatic cancer in the long term, let alone death. "You see," they say.
They forget that they themselves recently claimed that the excess mortality from 2022 was not (partly) due to the shots, but that delayed care was the main culprit. So they have a 'frozen' iq where only info is processed that fits their one-sided knowledge and thinking to camouflage and whitewash them. They forget the rest. Always doubting, flexible thinking, being unbiased open to other arguments and a good memory are apparently parts of the intelligence that are not or far too little included in the IQ / are valued.
Prior to the pandemic, an unconditional belief in the medical world and its products was widespread in all walks of life. Vaccines also had an untouchable status. That is why I think it was the drastic measures that aroused suspicion, especially among practically trained people. Because they restricted them the most in the exercise of their profession (their livelihood). Now more receptive to criticism, they turned to alternative news sources. Where they came into contact with information about all the social engineering techniques and the risks of the vaccines that were coming. It made a difference that they were not hindered by a limiting frame of mind that you usually have left over from a theoretical (academic) education.
Theoretically educated people did not so quickly experience a need to look for critical voices. Because for them, the measures had much less financial impact. Moreover, they are highly dependent on the system for their status and income. Not attractive. The equalization of institutions such as government, journalism and science under the influence of industry has been the big pitfall for them, it seems to me.
People who are not mentally and emotionally dependent on the system and rely primarily on themselves are best immune to guiding signals from the institutions. In any case, they do not blindly follow the group or an authority outside them. This is fairly independent of the level of education.
I can't take this kind of research seriously, it also exudes quite a bit of dedain.
The majority of higher educated people have not followed a science study (only 1 in 5), of which only a very small proportion really have a relevant background, have studied the subject matter and experience or knowledge of how the pharmaceutical industry operates. So in the end, only a very limited number of people among these higher educated people are capable of making the right assessment. In addition, people working in healthcare, government and large companies had to deal with enormous peer pressure.
So let's not pretend that IQ has anything to do with vaccination readiness, especially the higher educated should have known better and being informed by the TV and newspaper does not seem very intelligent. In my opinion, what this research mainly shows is that the higher educated are not intelligent enough to continue to think autonomously when things get exciting.
Dear virusvaria.nl,
What an interesting article! It is fascinating to see that there are studies that show a link between IQ and vaccination readiness. It is important to read and consider these types of studies, as it can help to better understand the various factors that may influence a person's attitude towards vaccination.
I appreciate you taking the time to share this information. As a visitor to your website, I really enjoyed reading this and increasing my knowledge. If you have more interesting articles or studies, I look forward to reading those as well.
If you are interested in learning more about topics like these, I would like to invite you to visit my website, link removed, to visit. There you will find a wealth of information on various topics.
Thank you and keep up the good work sharing engaging content!
Sincerely,
Alan Waker
Dear Wanker,
I propose that we criminalise the use of AI as a spam machine. What do you think about that?
I am 71 years old and have a bachelor's degree as an analytical, chemical and biochemical analyst. When I look at the following 2 lines, from the article, I have to conclude that I don't belong in either of these 2 groups:
1. For people with a higher IQ, the media serves as a source of information.
2. The group with a lower IQ missed out on all this information. They watch VI and Temptation Island
I never watched the programs of group 2 and already at the start of the corona plandemic I very quickly started to doubt and search the internet for other messages. Especially from America came messages that seemed more logical to me. With the help of these messages and by thinking logically and cleverly, you could very quickly draw the conclusion that everything was different from what we were told by the media and the government. That we were lied to by Rutte and de Jonge.
At the time, I had to convince my husband (Englishman) with many articles and videos from real scientists. He was also worried that he would not be able to go back to England if he did not take a "vaccine". Fortunately, he quickly figured it out and is just as fanatical as I am.
Goed gedaan!
Despite the fact that I am quite highly educated (largely on the 6th floor of the LTS and that is quite high) I did not get vaccinated. It also took me 10 years, so I was also highly educated for a very long time. So that article is not entirely correct.