Question to GP Maarten: Can anything be done about the side effects of COVID vaccines?

Maarten Vasbinder lives in Isaan. His profession is general practitioner, a profession that he mainly practiced in Spain. On Thailandblog he answers questions from readers who live in Thailand.

Do you have a question for Maarten and do you live in Thailand? Send this to the editor: www.thailandblog.nl/contact/ It is important that you provide the correct information such as:

• Age
• Complaints)
• History
• Medication use, including supplements, etc.
• Smoking, alcohol
• Overweight
• Any laboratory results and other tests
• Possible blood pressure

Photos and attachments can be sent to [email protected] everything can be done anonymously, your privacy is guaranteed.

Dear Martin,

My question concerns whether there is already some clarity about whether something can be done about the side effects of the COVID vaccines. Not that I will ever suffer from that because thanks to your early warning I didn't get the injection of course. But in my area there are several people who have been vaccinated and fortunately few have been clearly inconvenienced by it.

But unfortunately a healthy 50-year-old woman has died from the direct consequences of the vaccine (for which the Thai government has come over with a sum of money), but any advice from you will of course come too late for her. However, a second cousin of my wife has developed cancer and is being treated in the specialized hospital in Ubon. Despite the treatment, the cancer continues to grow and has even spread. The treating doctor has told him that the failure of the treatment was probably caused by the four vaccines he has already had. That doctor will say that based on his experiences of the past year.

Now it doesn't surprise me because on the internet there are already many doctors who have the same experiences and it was also predicted more than a year ago that it would happen. Any advice will probably come too late for him, too. For whom advice could be useful is my older sister who was always perfectly healthy but is now a bit in the rag basket after 4 vaccines with many coughing showers (no COVID by the way) although it is of course not certain that it is because of the vaccines. I expect that even more people in my area will have problems, so advice would be very much appreciated. Finally, the latest overview on the RIVM site also indicates that 286 more people died in the last week (end of July). than the 2692 deaths expected on the basis of historical mortality figures, which is no less than 11% more. After correction for 28 COVID deaths, there is still a 10% excess mortality that cannot be explained by RIVM. And because there are already more than 22.500 COVID deaths in the Netherlands (13% of the average death in a normal year), you should expect a catch-up effect of about 2022 percent in 3. So actually the (for the RIVM) inexplicable excess mortality is not 10% but 13%, although I will not claim that the full 13% is attributable to the vaccines, but everyone who checks the databases with the reports of millions of side effects (including tens of thousands deaths) of VAERS and of EMA will be of the opinion that a large part of that excess mortality is a direct result of the vaccines. And that excess mortality has been this way for many months and the end is nowhere in sight.

Together with Statistics Netherlands, RIVM has carried out an extensive study of excess mortality, which resulted in a report of 118 pages. However, the word VAERS does not appear anywhere and EMA only once but only for regulatory reference. This clearly shows that they certainly did not want to blame the vaccines and that was of course to be expected after years of saying that those vaccines are safe. Maarten, if I am too strict in my judgment of the RIVM, please correct me.

All this in support of my request: there is a great need for a remedy against those side effects (question: is lung COVID possible lung COVID vaccine? In other words, does it only occur in vaccinated people?).

According to you (and many others), ivermectin can not only prevent COVID but also help with the treatment. Now I recently read on the internet that it would also help fight the side effects of the vaccines. However, I cannot verify the reliability of those messages, so I appeal to you. If ivermectin would indeed help, is the use of ivermectin intended for the treatment of cats and dogs also advisable? Ivermectin is unfortunately not for sale at the pharmacy in Thailand (in my experience) and also not in the Netherlands. But on the internet you can buy ivermectin for dogs and cats very cheaply. I have no problem at all with using those drugs - if necessary - but I have noticed that others have to overcome a lot of resistance. Could you reassure them by, for example, stating that they can be used responsibly, provided of course in the right dosage?

Unfortunately, not only the safety of those vaccines is substandard, but also the effectiveness is downright depressing. I've done some research and have come to the conclusion that while the vaccine provides the individual with some temporary protection against the negative effects of COVID, it unfortunately leads to more COVID deaths in the community as a whole and therefore ultimately also the vaccinee a greater risk of death from COVID. I would like to hear your comments because after all I am only a layman and laymen all too often overestimate themselves. I will be no exception.

What have I done? I looked at how many COVID deaths per day and per million people there were on average in the first 12 months (starting 1/4/2020) of the pandemic and how many in the second 12-month period and in the months after that goods. Worldwide (without including the unreliable figures from China) there were 1,35, 1,46 and 0,44 respectively. As a second step, I selected all 74 countries that had virtually no COVID deaths in the first year and that have a population of at least 1 million. Then I looked at what happened when the COVID vaccines hit the market. In the countries where virtually no vaccines were used, the number of COVID deaths remained very low, which is not surprising because although the new variants were more contagious, they were also less deadly.

In the countries that did switch to vaccination, the number of COVID deaths often increased spectacularly. Thailand is a “good” example of this: in the first year 0,00 deaths (worldwide 1,35) and in the second year no less than 1,06 deaths (worldwide 1,46) and now still 0,40 on average ( worldwide 0,44). And the death toll started to rise the moment vaccination started. This has also been reported by others for various countries: https://www.firsthandsources.com/resources/COVID%20by%20nation.pdf

It is also striking that the death toll in the provinces only started to rise when they started vaccinating there (Bangkok and the tourist areas led the way in both vaccination and COVID deaths). The fact that the number of deaths in Thailand was so low in the first year was not because the virus arrived so late in Thailand, because it was first detected outside China in January 2020.

I put all the data in a spreadsheet (by requesting everyone) but here are the main findings:
I found 49 countries that all had less than 0,10 COVID deaths per day per million in the first year (1,35 globally). The 14 countries with a vaccination rate below 15% on 1/4/2022 still had very few COVID deaths in the second year: 0,06 (worldwide 1,46). After that, no more COVID deaths at all: 0,00 (worldwide 0,44)
Thirteen countries had vaccination rates between 15% and 50%. In the second year, those countries still had few COVID deaths, but slightly more than in the first group: 0,10. After that, no more COVID deaths at all: 0,00.

Twenty-two countries had a vaccination rate of at least 50% and the death toll there rose sharply, from an average of 0,03 in the first year to 1,24 in the second and 0,53 thereafter. Those figures are probably even somewhat flattering because those countries include Nicaragua with 0,02 deaths in the second year and 0,00 after that. Nicaragua has not used an mRNA vaccine but a Cuban vaccine. Uzbekistan also scores surprisingly well with 0,02 in the second year and 0,00 thereafter, but this may be due to the use of a Chinese and Russian vaccine. For other countries I have not been able to find out which vaccine they used.

I also looked at 15 countries with a somewhat higher death toll in the first year, but still low compared to the world average: death toll between 0,10 and 0,25. And the same trend can also be observed in those countries: the more vaccinated, the more COVID deaths.

Not all countries will have provided reliable figures, but with the 74 countries studied, a very clear trend can be observed: the higher the vaccination coverage, the more COVID deaths.
What explanations have I, as a layman, come up with for this phenomenon?

1. People who already had the virus at the time of vaccination will not have had a reduced, but rather a greater chance of serious illness.
2. The vaccination was a massive event where people had to wait their turn and wait again after the vaccination to be able to treat any negative effects immediately. Now face masks were undoubtedly used and the one and a half meter rule was of course also observed, but those measures are very ineffective, so it seems likely that many people became infected during the vaccination. And then at exactly the wrong time.
3. The protective effect of the vaccines disappears after six months and after that the chance of hospitalization with COVID increases dramatically. Deeply hidden on the RIVM site it is stated that for the age group 50-70 years the increase in the risk of hospitalization is no less than 68% and for other age groups it is not much better. And to be clear: as a vaccinated person you run a 68% higher risk of hospitalization than an unvaccinated person according to the RIVM! A booster can temporarily offer some protection, but eventually the problems will only get worse. Did the media in the Netherlands report this? I am afraid not.
4. It was clear from the start that the vaccines do not have a sterilizing effect, which means, among other things, that you should vaccinate as few people as possible and only vaccinate when the virus is not prevalent. But the experts at RIVM apparently turned their common sense to zero during the crisis and even flouted all basic vaccination rules. Indirectly, the English health service has also shown that the vaccines do not have a sterilizing effect, because they found that six months after the last vaccination, the risk of infection was double that of an unvaccinated person. I myself think that it is slightly different and that it takes 2 * as long for the virus to disappear from your body. That means that you can also infect other people for 2* as long or probably (but that's a personal estimate) longer than that factor of two yourself, and to make matters worse, they will come among people more often because their symptoms are not too bad. And the more (and the longer) people are infected, the more viruses there are floating around in the air of buildings. This not only has consequences for the number of new infections, but also for the seriousness of the infection: hospitalization and death.

Conclusion: it seems that pharmaceutical companies have millions of COVID deaths on their conscience (and possibly millions of deaths from the side effects of the vaccines) but that they have made hundreds of billions from it. From our tax money. But if the authorities had limited themselves to vaccinating 5-10% of the population (the high-risk cases), the net result would probably have been positive. The authorities worldwide have acted incredibly stupidly and that is not hindsight, no that was foreseeable, only the result of the policy is even more disastrous than it appeared a year and a half ago. But maybe “stupid” isn't the right word in this context because normal people can't be that stupid, can they?

Best regards,

H.

******

Dear h,

As you know, you are raising a very delicate subject here. Unfortunately, because all the facts show that you are largely right.

There are now also more articles in reputable magazines, which unfortunately are often quickly removed again due to the financial pressure exerted by those who are recovering from Covid.

Your question concerns the treatment of side effects. Unfortunately, little research is being done into this, because it is more or less (still) prohibited. Ivermectin has produced some sporadic positive data in people given it a short time after vaccination. It could also do something in the longer term, because we now also know that the injected mRNA remains stable for much longer (up to six months) than natural mRNA (up to 20 seconds). As a result, the body continues to produce the toxic spike protein for a long time, which is more toxic than the spike protein of the virus SARs-Cov-19. This is because the injected mRNA contains an unnatural sequence that has a letter that does not normally occur in nature. If you would like to know more about this, you can consult Prof. P Capel and Prof. dr. Theo Schetters.

Incidentally, Ivermectin was developed for humans and is also used in animals. That has been reversed by the COVID believers, to put a drug that has received a Nobel Prize in a bad light. One of the effects of Ivermectin is that it is a protease inhibitor, a property that Paxlovid developed by Pfizer also has. Where Ivermectin has few side effects, Paxlovid, which has hardly been tested, is very harmful, especially in combination with Remdesivir.

The best treatments for the side effects are next to perhaps Ivermectin, Aspirin to prevent thrombosis, vit D3, Quercetin, Vit C and most importantly: “refusing boosters”. It is also important to have a clotting test done one week after vaccination, including D-Dimer and fibrinogen.
Fortunately, more and more researchers are focusing on the side effects. Too bad that has to be, because this "vaccine" should of course never have been allowed, because it was not sufficiently researched, which is shown by the Pfizer papers, does not work, does not produce sterility (vaccinated are just as or more contagious than non-vaccinated) and because you should never vaccinate in the middle of a “pandemic”, something that has been known for over a century.

It is almost hilarious that the most fanatical vaccine promoters, who have not hesitated to call people who had doubts about anything and everything, now need the help of those same doubters to deal with the side effects. Something these doubters do without any rancor.

H. thanks for your extensive analysis. That would have taken a lot of time.

Yours faithfully,

Martin Vasbinder

Do you have a question for Maarten and do you live in Thailand? Send this to the editor: www.thailandblog.nl/contact/ It is important that you provide the correct information (see list at the top of the page).