Covid in Norway: Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire--Misinformation, Courtesy of the IPH
Covid in Norway: Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire--Misinformation, Courtesy of the IPH
Read up on 'current' misinformation handed out by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. And, yes, it's 30 Nov. 2023, in case you're wondering.
I’m feeling inspired today by friend-of-these-pages
with whom I had a deeply disturbing conversation in the comment section below yesterday’s piece:
It all started off with the question whether or not public health officialdom knows about the ‘vaccination status’ of, well, everyone who’s admitted to the hospital or seeks medical help (sic) because of Covid.
To sum up and deepen the debate, I’ve decided to compile a post. Enjoy, if you like.
Public Health Officialdom Knows Everyone’s ‘Vaxx Status’
Over here, in Norway, all vaccinations are recorded automatically and electronically via the National Immunisation Registry (SYSVAK). This is done by using one’s national ID number (orig. fødselsnummer, or D-nummer, with the difference being that the latter is a temporary ID number) for virtually everything residents do that involve personal identification (other than buying alcoholic beverages in state-owned liquor stores, for which a so-called Bankkort suffices—that’s a photo ID printed on the backside of your bank/debit/credit card, issued by the bank you’re a customer of).
These ID numbers are the functional equivalent to US social security numbers, but they are a wee bit more ‘secure’, as the gov’t and authorities cross-reference multiple data points every time you need to identify with that ID number. But I digress.
The bottom line here is that every time you seek medical care for whatever reason, a resident of Norway has to produce his or her national ID number: they know, for a fact, who is ‘vaccinated’ with which product, how many times, and what has happened thereafter.
What About ‘Informed Consent’ Prior to Vaccination?
This is where we get a bit deeper into the weeds. There is no such thing as ‘informed consent’ possible in Norway, if only because neither public health officialdom doesn’t provide much, if any, information nor (presumably, for I’ve not seen a ‘vaccination centre’ from the inside) does medical personnel who provided these ‘services’ offer much, if any, such information.
In the sense of disclosure, my knowledge here stems from anecdotes (sometimes I ask ‘vaccinated individuals’ if they were properly given ‘informed consent’), but more troublingly, here is the IPH’s website offering the so-called ‘self-declaration form’ in many languages, including English.
Now, I’m not a legal professional, but I do think that a ‘self-declaration form’ is something other than ‘informed consent’ with regard to participation in the single largest human experiment in the history of mankind.
If you’d click on this link, it’ll take you directly to the English version, reproduced as screenshot below:
Notice, on the top of the form, that it clearly states ‘national ID number’ and, at the bottom, offers space for date and time, product name, batch/lot number, and the name of the vaccinator.
In the footer, it reads: ‘revised date 8 April’, and note that the year that is missing here is—2022, as is evidenced by the website of the IPH where I obtained said form:
Has‘t the IPH Updated its Information Since?
Yes, in part they did, and the below quotes are from the link in the ‘self-declaration form’, which brings you to this website (updated 18 Sept. 2023; emphases mine):
The purpose of vaccination against COVID-19 is to prevent disease or to give a milder disease course without being exposed to serious side effects. We will inform about the effect and potential side effects so everyone can make an informed choice [note that it’s a ‘choice’ that is ‘informed’, not ‘consent’]…
Why do we vaccinate?
Having undergone an infectious disease will often provide some protection (immunity) against reinfection, but some diseases can cause such a strong inflammatory reaction in the body that, for some people, it can become dangerous. Some people become severely ill and may die, or have serious medical complications. [this flies in the face of everything public health officialdom has said recently, i.e., that for most people, Covid is ‘like the flu’]
A vaccine gives the body something to practise on that resembles the disease virus, but that cannot cause the disease [what’s a known side-effect of these products? Covid, for sure]. The immune system is stimulated so the body can recognise and fight the virus [do I bring up ‘immune escape’ here?]. The vaccine quickly disappears from the body but has taught the body to defend itself if it is later exposed to infection [apart from ‘immune escape’ once more, does ‘the vaccine quickly disappear from the body?]. We can easily and effectively protect ourselves against some of the dangerous infectious diseases, without having to be exposed to the risk of having the disease [this may or may not be true in other cases, but with Covid, well, it simply ain’t true]
In addition, vaccination can help to limit transmission in society.
At this point, I shall merely relate, yet again, what the EMA has divulged recently, as per Emer Cooke, Head of the EMA in a letter dated 18 Oct. 2023:
COVID-19 vaccines have not been authorised for preventing transmission from one person to another. The indications are for protecting the vaccinated individuals only.
The product information for COVID-19 vaccines clearly states that the vaccines are for active immunisation to prevent COVID-19. In addition, EMA’s assessment reports on the authorisation of the vaccines note the lack of data on transmissibility.
Full coverage below:
Bottom Lines
I find it hard to consider the above and not infer either insane levels of ineptitude (idiocracy) or malignancy.
Sure, there’s the ‘intersectional’ angle that even the most moronic public health official might, at some point in the past almost four years, figure out that he or she has done something incredibly stupid/ill-advised, hence I am open to the possibility that these public health officials do the above gaslighting on purpose, if only to cover their own asses.
There is, however, yet another issue to consider, and that has to do with many among ‘the opposition’ or ‘the unvaccinated’ who are getting complacent, for lack of a better term.
Everyone is, of course, free to voice their opinions as they see fit (although some people are surely abusing their privilege of freedom of speech, see above), but if ‘we, the people’ let ‘them’ get away with the above monstrosities, there’s every guarantee that what has happened during the WHO-declared, so-called ‘Pandemic™’ will happen again before too long.
Sure,
, I wonder about the cognitive capabilities of many people around me, too, but what shall I say or do other than return to these issues, revisit what I wrote and thought in the past, and have the outcome inform my course of action.If taking a Covid injection in 2021 seemed ill-advised, doing so in late 2023 is, well, close to the peak of lunacy.
The same holds for ‘trusting the authorities’ who, for sure (my arse) have ‘intended the best for me’.
There is but one lesson here: stay vigilant, be prepared, and be ready to hold on to your convictions, no matter what.
In the case of Australia, it is the same: they know who is vaccinated by electronic ID but refuse to release the vaccine status of who has died (even children) in the past few years. They know, but do not want us to know, and they are still pushing the vaccines.
Someone like Norman Fenton who recently did a presentation on excess deaths in Australia could analyse these data, but again, the government refuses to release it with the explanation being officially "it is too hard, we do not have time."
This is a lie.
You can’t help people who are content to not know or understand. Following orders is lazy but easy, and people want easy.