The provided text expresses strong criticism of certain research and public health messaging related to COVID-19 vaccination, particularly concerning pregnant women. Here’s a breakdown of the main points and arguments:
Core Criticisms:
Flawed Excess Mortality Studies: The author claims that studies on excess mortality, conducted by Nivel and UMC Utrecht, were flawed becuase they didn’t account for the fact that dying individuals were often unvaccinated. This,the author argues,artificially lowered the mortality rate in the vaccinated group and inflated it in the unvaccinated group,leading to conclusions that favored the existing narrative.The author also alleges that these studies were praised and used by RIVM and politicians to claim that excess mortality was not linked to vaccination.
complaints Ignored: The author states they raised these concerns with the relevant authorities (Nivel, UMC Utrecht, sonmw, NWO, RIVM) through complaints, which were allegedly rejected, possibly with amusement.
Israeli Research on Pregnant Women: The author applies a similar critique to research on pregnant women in Israel. They argue that the research failed to consider the health status of pregnant women who chose to be vaccinated versus those who did not. if the vaccinated group had pre-existing health issues, this could explain any observed differences in pregnancy outcomes, rather than the vaccine itself.
Lack of Proper Research: The author believes that while the Israeli data might warrant further investigation into the effects of mRNA vaccines on pregnancy and fetuses, such complete research is unlikely to be conducted. this is because, in the author’s view, research is only supported if it aligns with decisions made during the COVID-19 pandemic, and professors are unwilling to compromise their positions by challenging the established narrative.
NVOG‘s Advice Criticized: The author strongly criticizes the advice given by the NVOG (Dutch Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology) regarding COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant women, deeming it shameful and irresponsible.
Doctors’ Disregard for Advice: The author notes that many doctors privately advised their pregnant patients to wait with vaccination until after birth,and some even advised against vaccinating their own children,fearing professional repercussions if they spoke out publicly.* Herd Behavior in the Medical Community: The author concludes that the medical profession, along with RIVM and OMT experts, exhibited “herd behavior” during the pandemic, adhering to a prescribed narrative even when it lacked a solid basis.
Underlying Concerns:
The central theme is a deep distrust of the official narrative surrounding COVID-19 vaccination and a belief that research and public health advice have been manipulated to support pre-steadfast conclusions, rather than being driven by objective scientific inquiry. The author is particularly concerned about the potential impact of vaccines on pregnant women and fetuses, and the perceived lack of transparency and honesty in addressing these concerns.
Key Phrases and Tone:
The language used is highly critical and accusatory. Phrases like “much more significant in the analysis,” “abused it,” “probably laughing,” “shameful and irresponsible,” and “herd behavior” convey a strong sense of indignation and skepticism. The author positions themselves as an independent voice exposing perceived wrongdoing.
