Covid in Norway: As Fear-Mongering Ramps Up, 'the Experts™' Are Baaack At Spreading Nonsense

In other news, 'Covid-associated deaths' doubled from last week while legacy media is again spreading fear (and loathing)

Almost predictably, as the sun rises each day in the east, now it is Norwegians’ turn to be exposed yet again to utter nonsense concerning the WHO-declared, so-called ‘Corona Pandemic’.

As recently as a week ago, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (IPH) has come out quite strongly against excessive fear-mongering vs. ‘Covid’:

Covid is 'Like the Flu, the Cold', Norwegian Public Health Officialdom Explains (Again)

This was last week, though, and this week being, well, ‘now’, things are different, it would seem. As I’ve discussed comparable insanities in Austro-Covidistan just yesterday a mere hours before I saw the below piece over at Norwegian state broadcaster NRK (believe it or not…)

The below piece comes in my translation, with emphases added.

---

Researcher: Skipping Covid Testing Can Cost you Dearly

By Sondre Skjelvik and Kai Jæger Kristoffersen, NRK, 28 Nov. 2023 [source]

Authorities say most people don’t need to get tested. According to the head of Norway’s largest corona study, this is very unfortunate.

Cough and cough. Snot and snot. Get tested? Or skip it? The authorities say you don't have to. This makes the leader of the largest Norwegian corona study react:

‘Not getting tested means that we don't detect the coronavirus. Unfortunately, this has a number of negative consequences’, says researcher Arne Søraas.

The Doctor leads the Corona Study [orig. Koronastudien].

He believes there are many important arguments in favour of getting tested and taking the coronavirus more seriously.

This poll is in the piece, asking ‘do you test yourself for Covid?’, with 42% saying no and 58% saying yes (screenshot taken yesterday evening with a bit over 30K votes cast).

Can Cost You Dearly

Earlier in November, NRK reported that dozens of tests are still being sold, and this is despite the authorities' recommendation.

Søraas of the Corona Study believes it is problematic that the authorities so clearly recommend not to get tested:

Corona is still a fairly serious disease. I think it's unfortunate that the official advice is that you shouldn't get tested.

If you get Covid, and subsequently get Long Covid, you would like to have a picture of that test. If not, no one can document that you have had Covid. That puts you in a weak position if you need to claim compensation.

[Basically what he’s saying is that you should get tested for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with Covid-the-illness; it has to do with the fact that under Norwegian health/social insurance law, the employee on sick leave must ‘apply’ to the social security fund for salary compensation. In other words: how convincingly can you tell your GP that ‘Covid’ is the reason he or she should write you a doctor’s note to stay at home…]

The researcher elaborates on what he means by this:

For example, if you are infected at work as a doctor, nurse or teacher, this will entail legal rights if you have long-term problems. It becomes much more difficult if you can't document the illness. [true, but keep in mind that the overall share of MDs and nurses is, well, not that overwhelmingly large relative to the rest of the population]

There's a lot of research on treatment for Long Covid as well, but if you don't even know it was Covid then it's not so easy for the doctor to treat Long Covid afterwards.

[so, if I feel ‘ill’ I should get tested to find out if I’ve got Covid-the-illness just in case I get ‘Long Covid’ (whatever that is), because if I don’t get tested, I may not ‘even know it was Covid’—what kind of ‘logic’ is this?]

Important for Others in Society

The doctor also brings up what he believes is an equally important argument in favour of getting tested: ‘other people’ in society.

The most important reason is to stop the infection. With Covid, you should take completely different precautions compared to other diseases, such as influenza and colds.

[oh, what a good kind of ‘logic’ here—as the jabs don’t stop transmission or infection, testing is somehow going to do that now?]

Søraas emphasises that, based on their own figures and figures from abroad, they can confirm that Covid is still a far more serious disease than other respiratory infections:

As a researcher, my job is to produce knowledge so that people can get good, evidence-based advice. As head of Koronastudien.no, where we are following 150,000 Norwegians through the pandemic, we have both our own figures and international figures that show that COVID-19 has a much more serious aftermath than other respiratory infections.

In addition, it is also more dangerous in the acute phase.

This knowledge has meant that many countries are now giving good advice to their populations, and I hope to be able to contribute to Norwegian authorities giving more evidence-based advice than they do today.

He explains that one of the things they see is that large waves of Covid are reflected in excess mortality from cardiovascular disease in the months and years afterwards.

There are many reasons why corona is something completely different from influenza and colds. Treating it in the same way is very unfortunate.

Up to the Individual

Norway’s IPH writes the following about testing:

There is no longer a general recommendation to the population to test for Covid.

‘It is not correct, as Søraas says, that we recommend not testing. It is up to the individual’, writes Are Stuwe Berg of the IPH].

He also points out that the danger of a strong focus on Covid testing may mean that the general advice does not reach a wide enough audience [gee, I wonder why most people don’t or won’t care about getting tested anymore…]:

There is a risk that many people with respiratory symptoms and a feeling of illness will go out and infect others if they test negative. Influenza is also a respiratory disease that makes many people ill, leading to many deaths and hospitalisations.

[but…we don’t have such a wonderful ‘test’ for the flu (must open a start-up on this one)]

In addition, Berg emphasises that the other important advice is that those aged 65 and older, or who belong to a risk group, should get vaccinated:

We have clear advice to get tested for Covid if you are in a risk group for a more serious course. Especially the elderly, as they can reduce the risk of serious illness by seeing a doctor and assessing whether there is reason to start tablet treatment.

---

Intermission

So, now you know—it’s bitch fight time in Norway, with the poor sob Arne Søraas ‘feeling’ hurt that no-one much cares about his wonderful, sooper-dooper Covid Study, or for ‘believing’ that more people should ‘get tested’ to perform ‘infection control’. I have no idea how that should work, one way or another.

Also, keep in mind that Arne Søraas is no stranger to these pages, as I featured him four weeks ago when he made it to NRK as part of a public ‘expert panel’:

Covid in Norway: A Pandemic for All Seasons

Out of his engagement came two notions:

Arne Søraas is a diehard pro-vaxxer:

The vaccine protects against long-covid, but not as much as I personally would have thought/hoped.

At the same time, he also spreads misinformation:

I myself have wondered whether the vaccine (which, after all, contains/stores a protein from the virus itself [false, it contains modRNA that makes human cells manufacture a synthetic version of such a protein, not ‘a protein from the virus itself’]) can cause long-covid. I have looked at this myself in data from the Corona study, but it has not been published. I saw no such effect. So: I didn’t see any ‘long vaccine’ in our data, and that’s good. At the same time, there are other known side effects from the vaccine, of course.

Once he gets this published, though, we may find out if Søraas actually asked about ‘long vaccine’ issues or not (my money is on that he did not).

---

Other ‘Covid News’: Deaths Increase Mysteriously

As per the IPH’s weekly update on ‘respiratory illnesses’ (weeks 45-46) notes that ‘Covid-associated deaths’ doubled from the previous two-week period:

Factually, the situation is quite…interesting and dynamic, I’d say: yes, ‘C-associated deaths’ in week 46 were higher than a year ago, but they were lower in the preceding weeks (relative on a yoy basis).

That said, two things to note:

We’ll soon see if this year’s C-associated deaths in the coming weeks also exceed last year’s (and, if they do, we’ll probably get some very interesting things to hear about as to why that might be).

Before you get ‘excited’ about this one way or another, keep in mind that the category of ‘C-associated deaths’ is…essentially meaningless:

COVID-19-associated deaths are defined as deaths where COVID-19 is indicated as an underlying or contributing cause on the death certificate. Data on deaths are extracted on 22 November 2023 at 07:30. The figures may be adjusted based on subsequent registrations, especially in the last week. While previously only deaths with a positive test were included test in MSIS, deaths without a positive test are now also included in MSIS. The first death was reported on 21 May 2020.

For each death in the Cause of Death Registry, one underlying cause of death must be selected. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health follows the rules laid down by the WHO for the selection of this underlying cause of death. In simple terms, the underlying cause of death is considered to be the most important factor leading to death, without it being possible to say anything about how much other causes of death may have contributed to the death. If multiple causes of death are entered on the death certificate, the disease or diseases that are not registered as the underlying cause of death will be registered as a contributing cause of death. Whether COVID-19 becomes the underlying or contributing cause of death depends on where on the death certificate the doctor enters the diagnosis codes. This is up to the individual doctor to assess.

So, basically, you (your corpse, that is) may be considered a ‘C-associated death’ in the absence of ‘even’ a positive test.

Seen in this light, even the BS spouted by Arne Søraas is, essentially, either utterly devoid of any meaning or completely arbitrary to begin with. Either way, I’d argue, these ‘statistics’ are meaningless, and I cannot for the love of God see as to why the IPH still compiles them.

And that is before we’re even noting that the category ‘C-associated deaths’ conflates dying of Covid and dying with Covid.

Get Your Daily Misinformation Here

Irrespective of these facts, here’s how the IPH spins this, courtesy of Bergens Tidende (23 Nov. 2023):

‘The incidence of hospitalisations and deaths is highest among people aged 75 years and older, and higher among people who have not received the coronavirus vaccine this autumn. The figures are expected to be slightly revised upwards in recent weeks’, writes the IPH in its weekly report.

Furthermore, they write that the winter wave of COVID-19 is ongoing, and that there is still an increase in the spread of infection in the population.

‘It is therefore urgent to vaccinate the elderly and people in risk groups’, the IPH writes.

But…the shots—in a population that’s ‘vaccinated’ with at least two shots in excess of 90% among those 18 years and older, by the way—don’t prevent transmission or infection, as the EMA recently divulged. I call: liar, liar, pants on fire.

Here’s what EMA chieftain Emer Cooke wrote on 18 Oct. 2023 (see here for details):

COVID-19 vaccines have not been authorised for preventing transmission from one person to another. The indications are for protecting the vaccinated individuals only…EMA’s assessment reports on the authorisation of the vaccines note the lack of data on transmissibility.

So, testing does not help, and the shots don’t do transmission control either. But the pro-vaxx diehards at the IPH insist on getting jabbed.

---

Back to the above-cited piece in Bergens Tidende, though, for there’s one other issue to consider:

At the same time, IPH emphasises that the influenza epidemic has not yet started, but that the incidence is gradually increasing and that the outbreak may occur before Christmas.

‘Therefore, it is also time for influenza vaccination of the elderly, people in risk groups and employees in the health service’, the IPH writes.

Sure, why not—does the flu shot ‘work’, by the way? I suppose we’ll find out around Christmas, won’t we?

---

Bottom Lines

Apart from the obvious media pressure so deplorably exerted by state broadcaster NRK and The Doctor Arne Søraas, Norwegian ‘public health’ authorities continue to emphasise vaccination for literally every available illness.

From a piece in Bergens Tidende (22 Nov. 2023):

‘Many people are taking the flu vaccine, but not yet the coronavirus vaccine’, [IPH chief epidemiologist Preben] Aavitsland points out, and wonders whether some people are skipping it because they are tired of all the immunisation and don't think they need another dose.

The IPH also points out that getting vaccinated has become more complicated: many municipalities have shorter opening hours and fewer vaccinators, queues can be longer and you have to take the initiative.

So, if jabs aren’t thrown at people at no costs and with every conceivable convenience, it’ll make ‘public health’ officialdom ‘wonder’ about as to why people don’t just get jabs as others down candy or soda.

Is this (still) ‘cognitive dissonance’?

There’s but one other issue to consider: if the above is taken at face-value (which I don’t think it should, by the way), will this make the globalists finally ‘do the math’ on what it may cost them to ‘offer’ jabs without end?

Beware of public health officialdom bearing gifts.

Keep calm, stock up on Vitamins C and D (I’m not an MD, but it won’t hurt if it doesn’t work, right?), and avoid these gifts.

Also, not that ‘Gift’ in German means ‘poison’.