When we talk about the corona crisis, we always start in 2020, but why? The problems only started in 2021 and I will show you why.
First, let's go back to 2017, when life was still normal. We look at the mortality rates from 2017 to 2021. Yes, you read that right, see you in 2021! We can make this graph:
Here we see the weekly number of deaths since 2017. The light blue band is the bandwidth within which the number of deaths is expected to be. In winter higher than in summer and around 0.8% more every year due to aging and slow population growth.
A flu wave was observed in both 2017 and 2018, with undermortality in the following months. The blue line is then below the thin baseline. This is always the case after a flu wave: these are the people who died earlier due to the flu and therefore lead to lower mortality rates in the following months. So we don't see this in 2019, because there was no flu then. Almost all weekly figures for 2019 are within this range.
The corona epidemic was no different in this respect. However, the peak of the wave was a lot higher than that of the flu in 2018, but also lasted shorter. Flu 2018 lasted 5 months, corona less than 3 months. The total number of deaths during the first wave was barely higher than the flu of 2018.
After the first wave, we also see very clearly the undermortality, which lasted until August. Almost a copy of the flu of 2018. What was different, of course, was that this wave was given a real name: "SARS-CoV-2" (the red line in the graph) and that we all had to undergo measures in an effort to limit the consequences.
What was certainly different was that corona came back in September. Insufficient immunity had been built up in the spring and corona was not done with us yet. But apart from that, there was not much special going on in terms of numbers.
In 2021, everything changed
In terms of numbers, 2020 was therefore not a special year. Only the media attention and the consequences it had on public life were exceptional. The picture only really changed in 2021 as we can see in this graph:
On the left we see the dying out of the epidemic, as it always does. But what is immediately striking is the lack of undermortality in the spring and summer of 2021. As of March 2021, mortality is no longer below the baseline. In the middle of summer, mortality even exceeds the bandwidth, while Corona itself had virtually disappeared.
The Delta wave appears in November, long before the normal flu season. It has always been suggested that the Delta wave was corona, but this wave only consisted of 25% corona. The rest was "something else", in accordance with the figures from the RIVM.
What was also different was the undulating pattern in mortality since the summer of 2021. Until the end of 2020, mortality always remained within the baseline, apart from the three epidemics themselves. But we are now actually seeing a succession of death waves. It is also noteworthy that there was always a death wave with each round of vaccinations.
If we divide the number of vaccinations per round by the extra number of deaths in that period, we arrive at a mortality rate of about 1:2000 since the first booster. For the basic series this is more difficult to determine, because they are spread over a longer period, but it seems to be around 1:8000 – 1:10000.
What happened to young people in 2021?
We know that young people very rarely die from the corona virus. It is even a unique opportunity for them to build up resistance to the virus at a young age and thus also create a firebreak for the elderly. Nevertheless, young people were also encouraged to get vaccinated with the QR code as a reward. Who doesn't remember "Dancing for Janssen" with a huge corona outbreak as a result.
Young people were therefore vaccinated later in 2021 and this is also reflected in the figures. We have shown this graph before:
From 2018 to 2020, there is nothing to be seen in excess mortality up to the age of 30. In 2020, there was even less mortality than expected, despite corona. But in 2021, everything suddenly changes. Substantial excess mortality among the first vaccinated 20-30-year-olds and in 2022 also among the 10-19-year-olds.
The figures are also in line with what we saw in the entire Dutch population at the beginning of 2021. There are about 3.5 million inhabitants in the Netherlands in the age group. There are no exact figures, but it is estimated that about 30% of them have been vaccinated. So that's a million. If we assume the risk of 1:10,000, that means 100 young people who have died from this vaccination. There were 120 in 2022. But there are still long-term consequences that are unknown, but are likely to claim at least as many victims.
What happened to RIVM in 2021?
The RIVM kept track of the mortality figures until the corona epidemic. In fact, it was no longer the arithmetic average over the previous five years, with some clever corrections to neutralize the effects of a flu wave. During the pandemic, CBS took over this task, basing itself on mortality developments from 2015-2019.
In 2024, RIVM took over this analysis again and applied its own calculation methodology to the figures with retroactive effect to 2021.
The RIVM's forecasts up to and including 2021 are always slightly lower than those of CBS. We understand that, because if you only include the average mortality of the previous five years, you will miss out on the ageing population. We also see the forecast of Statistics Netherlands, which is around 0.8% higher every year. This also corresponds to our own analysis, based on the growth and changing composition of the population. Until 2023, CBS and we will be on the same page.
RIVM's forecast for 2021 is based on the years 2016-2020. For 2020, the first wave is not included in their calculations and also largely the second wave. This is how their procedure works, so the forecast for 2021 is still almost the same as that of CBS. But when the forecast for 2022 is calculated in 2021, things go horribly wrong. The many death waves are no longer recognized by the calculations and now simply count in the forecasts.
Meanwhile, the RIVM forecast has reached the actual number of deaths in 2024. This is not surprising, of course, if the annual mortality has been more than 10,000 higher than expected for 5 years. The RIVM "therefore" no longer sees excess mortality. We assume that CBS, as a collegiate service, has also adjusted its own forecast for 2024, thus laundering excess mortality.
What happened to science in 2021?
Science's mission was to monitor the effect of the vaccines on our health. What we know now is that many far-reaching statements have been made, which are in fact misleading. To top it all off, the publication of the results of a study by Nivel. The study would show that at the time the vaccines were introduced to prevent covid-19 (which had already virtually disappeared), mortality among unvaccinated people was up to ten times higher compared to the vaccinated. A bizarre conclusion that has been debunked several times, but which is still upheld by the media.
It is just a single example from a world in which the career path of scientists prevails over the correctness of their findings. It is therefore not surprising that the trust of the Dutch in government and science is waning.
Conclusions
When talking about excess mortality, that time is always marked as "since corona". Through this analysis, I propose to make it "Since 2021", or if you prefer "Since vaccination". Even the mortality figures in 2020 do not give any reason to assume that they would play a role in the current excess mortality. It was an epidemic like we see regularly, but it was above average if we only look at the mortality rates. However, the difference is made from 2021 onwards, where we suddenly see a different mortality pattern and also suddenly excess mortality among young people under the age of 30.
RIVM has adjusted its expectations retroactively to 2021, so that the excess mortality we are seeing now has become equal to their expectations. Science is still doing its best to make us believe that nothing was wrong.
This article was also published on steig.nl
Largely agree. But 2020 has not really been studied. The number of people who died DUE to Covid-19 is probably a fraction of the total extra deaths in that year.
Remember that the -very short- peak of March/April 2020 only started after the measures were introduced. So after PCR testing started, so all kinds of people who were hardly sick were put away as Covid patients. The number of people who were wrongly subjected to ventilators must have been quite high. Normal treatments were abolished and exchanged for WHO protocols.
Add to that the degrading conditions in the nursing homes where the PCR madness also reigned. And the ban on early treatment with Ivermectin, HCQ, zinc, vitamins, etc. Then I come to the conclusion that a large part of the 'covid deaths' were in fact iatrogenic deaths. See also, for example, Willem Lijfering's story about wrong diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.
It does not detract from the conclusions you draw with regard to excess mortality from 2021 onwards. I just want to say that it was actually much worse. Without that -bizarre- mortality peak in 2020, the population would never have accepted the subsequent -all idiotic- measures. I think the 'second wave' was a PCR test debacle that got out of hand. The more you test, the more you find. The relatively quiet summer of 2020 shows that it was a seasonal virus, just like the flu. After the summer, all kinds of pathogens will be circulating, and if you then start performing large-scale PCR tests, you will create your own second wave.
Don't forget that flu had 'disappeared' at that time. Or not, and any respiratory virus was seen as Covid.
All kinds of 'usual' causes of death showed a decrease in 2020. You can get that from the CBS figures. This is miraculous and can logically only be explained by the fact that a wrong cause of death has been assigned on a large scale. Not to mention the fact that it is often not possible to determine a specific cause of death, especially in the elderly. Covid may be able to give the push.
I think this topic is also relevant. Read the experiences of Susanne Heijmans on the NTG website. The protocols were still in force in 2021. The combination of WHO protocols, followed by 'vaccinations' has caused a lot of misery.
I think it is relevant to the overall overview. Would love to hear comments.
Of course I agree with Cees.
The following equation indicates that 2021 was no different from 2020:
Covid=flu + medical negligence.
In 2020, the negligence was forgetting all the old protocols in which you (e.g.) had to exclude/establish not only viral disease for severe respiratory infection when diagnosed, but also (other) life-threatening diseases such as pulmonary embolism. Instead, the medical world started doing something completely different, namely introducing the (degrading and life-threatening) covid protocol in which everyone with a PCR positive test or clinical diagnosis of Covid was put on a ventilator, given remdesivir, isolated, etc WITHOUT also looking for other diseases with similar symptomatology to covid.
Otherwise, see this eyewitness report in which things are made clear:
https://bvnl.nl/corona/ooggetuigenverslag-van-een-bezorgde-arts-epidemioloog-tijdens-de-eerste-coronagolf/
In 2021, the negligence had forgotten that every effect (of a drug) can also have a side effect. The effect of the 95% effective vaccine was a PR stunt, i.e. was not found in the Pfizer trial itself (a lost to follow-up problem) and the side effects were legion. But this report was left by experts and doctors to report and the rest, as it is called, is history...
True. If you compare the CBS figures for 2019 with 2020, it appears that, for example, far fewer people died from lung diseases and dementia, while the number should only increase on average.
So you can assume that the wrong cause of death was given for a few thousand people and whether they would otherwise have died of those other diseases that same year.
The WHO has used corona to take a very strong position of power. Since then, they have been mainly busy to further anchor and expand that power. I'm really holding my breath!
Dear Kees,
Thank you for your response. I don't find that PCR discussion very interesting. There was a significant mortality peak that is characteristic of a single virus that rears its head. Whether that was corona or anoroc, I don't find interesting. The second one was also just there. I don't think it's worth discussing which creature was responsible for that. And certainly, corona has taken over the cause of death from the underlying suffering, but that is an administrative matter. Whether the death is then recorded as corona or the underlying suffering is important, but only for the final statistical processing. I incorporate it into a correction of the baseline (not described in this article). The expected undermortality after excess mortality. After correction, excess mortality after the 1st wave goes back exactly to 0.
It was only bad since 2021, that is also the message of this story.
Dear Herman. I understand the starting points around your piece. Nice that you gather statistical evidence of the vaccination period and afterwards. It is clear that the 'vaccinations' are no good. You find the PCR discussion not very interesting, and you don't find it interesting which 'beast' caused the diseases either. And whether someone dies BECAUSE of Corona or WITH Corona is only statistical processing. So your focus is clearly on the period from after 2020. I think that the previous developments are indeed relevant. Why?
Because a chain of events preceded the vaccination campaign. A propaganda offensive in which the 'vaccines' were presented as the only way out.
I think we agree. I just think that the run-up to 2021, how it came to this, is indeed extremely relevant, because governments and media have played a very bad role in fueling fear. The 'vaccines' are probably the biggest wrong action in the entire chain.
In itself a great discussion I think.
Dear Cees, we agree more than you think. I do indeed look at it as a statistician and as figures that pharmacy uses to convince us of the usefulness of vaccination. From that point of view, 2020 is nothing more than a normal epidemic. What the doctors have concocted with incorrect diagnoses and treatment is then beyond my scope. I just see a completely different pattern with corresponding figures since April 2021.
The PCR figures don't interest me either. They have been abused in the PR surrounding the epidemic. But the test itself seems reliable to me, but the conclusion attached to it is completely wrong. I'm not going to have that discussion anymore.
Indeed; The PCR test was made many times more sensitive in the autumn of 2020 in order to artificially increase the number of infections enormously.
Because the flu did not 'harvest' in 2019, there were probably more people ready to fall over in the next flu season of 2020 that was most likely offered to us by researchers from the Military Industrial Complex via a lab leak.
In addition, I agree with Cees Mul. How many people were killed in 2020 instead of by the flu by controversial protocols such as forced ventilation and Remdesivir or withholding therapies such as Ivermectin and the like?
https://www.infowars.com/posts/more-than-2200-celebrities-officials-and-european-elite-caught-with-fake-vaccination-passports About how the European powerful falsified their own vaccine data because they didn't trust it
What strikes me most is that in the year 2021, when people under 30 could receive a one-off Jansen injection, there was no excess mortality in that group. But in 2022, there was excess mortality in that age group. Does this mean that 'Jansen' sometimes caused serious side effects later or that (partly) the excess mortality in the youth can be explained by more accidents, suicides, etc.?
The 30-year-olds in healthcare, among other things, received shots from all brands and also from January 2020, but they are 30-year-olds, so they were healthier than the elderly and then you only see the misery later. During sports a lot of them fell over, but now you see a lot of illness too. By the way, are there any healthy Dutch celebrities? If I were to work in the media, I would mention those healthy celebrities because that is a lot less work. It is sad and also very bad that one does not or should not speak about the most logical cause. And when it comes up for a moment, people first hold their breath in shock and then it becomes laughable. All this stands in the way of any treatments and stopping the injections with these techniques.
The loudest laughter at the moment is NATO's SG. My disgust for this figure is so great that I cannot express it in words. Would he actually have dropped the cabinet to pursue this ambition? It wouldn't surprise me. We have had that asylum 'crisis' for years and suddenly he makes the case collapse on it. 5 years ago I would have laughed at people who made these kinds of suggestions. Not anymore.
Combining all those shots is indeed bizarre. Meanwhile, we know the more injections, the more the immune system is damaged. What happens to a mix of Jansen and mRNA? No one can say anything meaningful about that. But the Osterhausjes and Koopmansen were not bothered by those kinds of 'details'. And apparently it is also unclear what the combination of a shot and a run-through infection does to you.
We can only hope that more and more people will wake up.
The percentage of people under thirty who got another brand and what used to get is small and it would mean that if that share was significant, more fatal damage would be visible in the short term. Late summer 2021, when almost all people under thirty had already been vaccinated, the Janssenshot was only given to people over 44.
But after 2022, healthy people in their thirties have rarely been vaccinated. The only thing I can think of is that Jansen is only a bit more deadly in the longer term or that other causes (largely) explain the increase in 2022.
Bomenenbos@substack.com mixing corona vaccines.... Very worthwhile to read.
Goede uitleg, waar ik uiteraard alleen maar achter kan staan. Op het laatste woordje na. Dat moet niet “was” zijn, maar “is”.
One of the biggest problems is that reports such as those from Nivel and UMCU are based on datasets that are correct in themselves. And that those datasets indicate that the (excess) mortality is indeed mainly in the group of unvaccinated people.
At the same time, it is crystal clear that mortality that occurs shortly after vaccination cannot, of course, occur in unvaccinated people. But it does anyway! And that suggests a biologically impossible causal relationship.
And here you see the effect of the Healthy Vaccinee Effect, in combination with backlogs in CIMS and in some reports the definition of "vaccinated": namely only 2 or 3 weeks after vaccination.
This seems to be an almost impossible problem to solve. As a result, the 2 narratives at odds with each other still continue to exist side by side.
On LinkedIn I tried to solve this in discussion with Anne Laning, using concrete numerical examples; but in vain. See: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:7281826791223095297?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28ugcPost%3A7281826791223095297%2C7282401615205040128%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287282401615205040128%2Curn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A7281826791223095297%29 and https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:7281826791223095297?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28ugcPost%3A7281826791223095297%2C7282003139522621440%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287282003139522621440%2Curn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A7281826791223095297%29 There are still too many logical-sounding reasons to be able to defend reports such as those from Nivel and UMCU.
I fear that the only way to solve this is to make an inventory of the integral course for each individual case on the basis of all micro data (if necessary with a sample from it) and then come to a conclusion, so that the effects of HVE, CIMS delays etc. are completely banished.
I have no idea how else to get rid of this discussion.
In my opinion, this is now the most important challenge for Anton, Herman, Maurice, Ronald and maybe also Eline? And others to solve: how can we really provide convincing evidence that this causal link exists, without there being any excuses or goat paths to the contrary? Shouldn't this company set up a task force to put an end to these 2 contradictory narratives together in a few workshops, perhaps together with intelligent critics such as Laning and Chi Lueng Chiu?
Only then will the policy be adjusted. And accountability can be held and liability invoked.
Dear Jan,
Ronald Meester's group has already looked into the micro-data. The conclusion is clear: the data is heavily polluted by a combination of HVE and overdue administration. The Kaplan-Meier analysis shows bv. dat unvaccinated people on the day they are administratively linked to a vaccinated person, they suddenly die 1200X as often. On the 2nd day 600X etc. That is of course unacceptable. I myself have devoted many an analysis to this. On steig.nl, for example, there is a lot of reading material. For example, search for "Kaplan" or "Nivel"
Sincerely,
Herman Steigstra
Dear Herman,
Of course, I have known this for a long time. But I also understand that there is still no integral file available from CBS + RIVM.
And besides: the discussion must be "cleaned up", otherwise the doubt will linger. The counterarguments are not completely nonsensical, as far as I can tell. Although I suspect that they will not last.
That is why I argue for a joint workshop of calculators who have so far come to different points of view based on the same data with the detailed figures in hand. Looking each other in the eye, with computers, models, databases, to solve the conflict. Step by step.
In my opinion, that should be possible. Preferably also with a few people/statisticians from RIVM and CBS. Not with virologists who don't understand statistics. In total a club of about 10 men/women.
I would like to facilitate that; possibly. as chairman.
And a small report and press conference at the end.
I can't imagine that you can't come to an agreement with mathematicians at the table.
Do you see salvation there? And would you like to participate in it?
Naturally
Herman
I admire and appreciate all your time and knowledge that you put into this.
I do wonder if it wouldn't be better to deal with 1 statement at a time.
You are now trying to tie excess mortality and vaccination together too much in your text, is my idea.
It also invalidates your story.
"Through this analysis, I propose to make it "Since 2021", or if you prefer "Since vaccination".
So I mean that last bit.
Limit yourself to what you can calculate and make people curious about the cause instead of suggesting a cause themselves (even if it stings you in the eye as far as you are concerned)
It also gives critics ammunition to disempower you.
Keep up the good work!