50 % excess mortality in age group 1-39 in Norway

If covid is the cause, the vaccines were not effective. If the vaccine is the cause, the vaccines were not safe.

Get ready for a critical analysis of other mainstream debate from Norway that is shown to be misleading by Terje Hansen from the Norwegian association Law and Health. And a short analysis and comment by Kjetil Tveit from Norway.

---

The norwegian newspaper NRK has reported a 50 % excess mortality rate in Norway. The NRK is avoiding the elephant in the room by not asking questions about the experimental covid injections. The highest death rates amoung young people in Norway lately are about cancer and cardiovascular events. Cancer and cardiovascular deaths are two of the most common vaccine death rates of the experimental Covid injections. The biggest new death category in Norway is the category "all other diseases". NRK is blaming late Covid 19 events instead of the covid “vaccines”.

Norwegian MSM propaganda: “It must be remembered that all infection prevention measures disappeared at the same time as the vaccine became available, so that far more people were infected. This has nothing to do with the vaccine. Several studies show this, says Klein.”

The experimental covid injections do not prevent transmission or the risk of becoming infected. Many studies have shown that already. It was aslo reported in the worlds first criminal court case against human rights violations of the Covid Vaccine Passport in Finland by Dr. Aseem Malhotra. The more doses that are applied the higher the death rates become. The countries with the highest vaccine uptakes worldwide now have the highest mortality rates. The covid injections are also already proven to have caused higher excess mortality from the injections than Covid-19 has.

In 2021, Portugal had the highest covid vaccination rate in the world.

Now Portugal has the highest number of excess deaths in Europe.

Journalist Peter Sweden on Substack

Kjetil Tveit: There are still internet trolls who deny that we got excess mortality when we rolled out the mRNA "vaccine" 50% excess mortality in 2023, NRK was able to report yesterday, in the group 1 to 39 years, compared to 2010 to 2019. In other words, a formidable health disaster the likes of which we have never seen. What does the state channel NRK do with it? Yes, they choose to play tricks on you by speculating on everything else than the main suspect. Among the side effects are several types of heart diseases, blood clots, autoimmune diseases, and the Norwegian Medicines Agency has admitted that the "vaccine" was contaminated with DNA and SV-40 which can be carcinogenic. Then Kari Mette Singstad, who is a specialist in clinical health data, is right that we can save lives by ceasing to keep critical health data secret. Only by finding the cause of illness and death can we do something about it. At least we can stop vaccinating immediately. NRK chooses to emphasize that it cannot be due to the mRNA "vaccine", WITHOUT asking what everyone is wondering: What do the statistics say about vaccine status among the dead! According to Singstad, this is very easy and requires little resources to get the hang of, but some people DON'T WANT TO KNOW. Those who shrug off 50% more deaths in the group 1 to 39 years after vaccination, and that some DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHY they die, have a serious problem with their moral compass. This also applies to journalists who do not ask this simple question: Why are the numbers kept secret that can give us vital knowledge?

---

Our World in Data - Norway:

---

The norwegian association Foreningen Lov og Helse (Law and Health) reported in June 2024.

• The "experts" are just get wilder and wilder - part 1

In many Norwegians' persistent efforts to cover up the Covid19 vaccine scandal, new heights are assumed as of 2024. A short time ago, we could read the following on Forskning.no : (the title in norwegian below claims the experts are not blaming the experimental covid injections)

First a comment about Forskning.no - many Norwegians think that Forskning.no is involved in research and science. They are not. They retell stories about presumable research. We therefore quickly move into a narrative just like, for example. VG, but more thematically narrowed. That does not mean that there cannot be good and informative articles there, but they do not do anything scientific. And that can be clearly seen by reading the article above.

The article is, on the whole, what I can best characterize as "spin-wild", and possibly a kind of preliminary bottom line in the large cover-up of the vaccine scandal that is taking place. I will address a few things from this article.

Correlation vs. causality

Both vaccine critics and vaccine lovers can miss the distinction between correlation and causality. If for example researchers find that there is enormous temporal correlation between mortality and a medical product, not just in one place, but all over the world, a correlation has been found. You have not automatically found definitive evidence , but there may soon be reason to fear that you have also found the cause !

And it is precisely such a concern that the Dutch researchers express, as Forskning.no itself writes:

"This is unexpected and worrying," the Dutch researchers wrote of their findings.

If a correlation becomes large enough, there can often be great reason to believe, or fear, that one also has the cause. Because where there is a cause there will always be correlation, but where there is correlation there need not necessarily be a cause.

But to claim that it is definitive proof is wrong, and some of the so-called vaccine critics have probably done that. This is what BMJ has pointed out, but Forskning.no writes it like this:

The researchers did not investigate the causes of excess mortality, the journal states. 

This is both true and false at the same time, but in any case a meaningless representation. Because again, it may be that the researchers, by finding a large correlation, have also found the cause! There is therefore no reason to twist the narrative to the point that this has nothing to do with the cause, among other things for the simple reason that after all the sun marks there is every reason to believe that they have actually found the cause.

"The fact that so much suggests that the vaccine results in excess mortality cannot be true because there is nothing to suggest that the vaccine leads to excess mortality"

We will now look at the mother of all medical circular arguments. This long headline is basically the main argument of the vaccine campaigners today, and it has actually also become the main argument of the "professionals" or "experts". This way of thinking is also repeated in the article for forskning.no.

So it is first said that the vaccine has few side effects and is "safe and effective"; this has actually been declared from the very beginning, before the vaccine has even been rolled out; because the (criminal) company which, for example, Pfizer, which made the harmful product, says so itself. Then, when people get enormous health problems, ailments, and even start to die in connection with vaccination, they simply say that these cannot be side effects from the vaccine, because it has been said in advance that side effects are rare. Ergo, the side effect figures are extremely much lower than they should be, and since the side effect figures are cheated and covered up, the phenomenon of side effects is thus declared to be rare. This is expert logic.

You can see more about Pfizer's and the vaccine here , here and here , and about dark figures on side effects here .

Here is this logic unfolded in practice at Forskning.no: (the title in norwegian states excess death in Norway augmented in 2022)

From the start in the first year of the vaccine rollout, for example, the numbers were up to 13 times higher than for the swine flu scandal! And yet vaccination continued unabated.

An incredible amount could be said about the quote above from the article to forskning.no, but the circular argumentation is thus obvious. Forskning.no links to one of its own articles in which one of the most violent vaccine damage cover-ups in Norway, Gunnveig Grødeland, is allowed to state that it has been determined that serious side effects are very rare.

There is also another quirk here, Forskning.no and others have long since agreed that "someone died..." from the vaccine. They therefore agree that people have died from the vaccine, but it is inconceivable that the vaccine has anything to do with the matter when very many people begin to die after vaccination, because only very few die from the vaccine!

FHI and Ann Kristin Skrindo Knudsen

Then a so-called professional comes in, Ann Kristin Skrindo Knudsen from FHI, and the whole thing becomes on a level that, in fact, formally speaking, should not be accepted by a representative of a so-called professional body. I will come back to more of what Knudsen achieves in part 2, but will warm up with an extract where Knudsen tells Forskning.no that:

- The study therefore provides no evidence that corona vaccination contributes to excess mortality, as many media reports about the study may indicate, writes Knudsen to forskning.no. (my emphasis)

This is a flat out lie. The study (and many other studies) provides evidence that the vaccine contributes to excess mortality. These are precisely the points it provides; i.e. not unequivocal evidence, but evidence. And the more studies and statistical analyzes that are done that show a huge correlation between vaccine rollout and death, the more evidence there will be. In the end, there are so many supporting points that you can start to draw clearer and clearer conclusions from it.

We got there a long time ago.

" There is no evidence to say that it is dangerous to shoot a person "

Let me conclude by making a hypothetical analogy to show the approach of our so-called professionals and experts. Let's say that you have the figures for shots fired at people. Then you will find a huge correlation between the fact that someone shoots at another person with a firearm, and that damage occurs to this person being shot at. One then has very good reason to claim that the cause of the injury that has occurred to the person being shot at is due to the person being shot at. You then have enormous correlation, and there is very good reason to believe that you have also found the real causal factor, even if, strictly speaking, investigations must also be carried out into the damage, the wound, the bullet that penetrated the person and the reason why that a few times no damage occurs (then you might find out that the bullet actually missed the person in some shooting cases) etc. So a little extra work is needed to finally create the perfect proof, but you already have in the violent correlation in practice identified the cause. And by pure logic, it is actually almost fully established.

But in the above-mentioned hypothetical correlation analysis, on the other hand, Forskning.no, the rest of the media, FHI, Grødeland and other "experts" will say that there is no evidence that shots at a person lead to injury, because they have only looked at the correlation and not the causality !

Terje Hansen

The "experts" are just get wilder and wilder - part 2

In part 1, I looked at some elements from an article at Forskning.no , an article that categorically rejects that vaccines can have anything to do with excess mortality. A little further down in the article, their "professional" alibi comes in, namely department director at the Institute of Public Health Ann Kristin Skrindo Knudsen.

She delivers a narrative I've hardly seen the likes of, where nothing really works.

A narrative absolutely without head and tail

As I wrote in part 1, Knudsen made the following completely incorrect claim about a study from the Netherlands, a study which shows the strong correlation between vaccination and excess mortality, and which thus actually provides grounds for fearing that the vaccine contributes to excess mortality:

- The study therefore provides no evidence that corona vaccination contributes to excess mortality, as many media reports about the study may indicate, writes Knudsen to forskning.no.

Then comes an astonishingly pointless section, where Knudsen and/or Forskning.no further "argue" by saying that, on the contrary, the Dutch study agrees well with other studies, which show that there was excess mortality in 2020, 2021 and 2022, with the following explanatory wording:

In other words, more people have died than usual.

In that case.

Furthermore, about Norway coming out of it well and without excess mortality in the vaccine-free year 2020, but then:

But then, in the autumn of 2021, something started to happen. The death rate began to rise gradually.

Then the crowning glory comes when Knudsen and Forskning.no together will give us the answer to the riddle of why people began to have weakened health, poor immune systems, strange ailments and indeed also began to die to an increasingly large extent immediately after the vaccine was rolled out in the Norwegian population:

So why did excess mortality increase in Norway after the vaccines came?

Knudsen points to several possible explanations:

• The more infectious delta and omicron variants of the virus arrived in Norway around the same time as the restrictions were eased. 

• A large proportion of the population was infected. Then the disease also affected several vulnerable groups. In fact, the peak for covid-19 deaths in Norway was  in March 2022 .

•  Although the vaccine protected against serious illness and death, the protection was not 100 percent. Elderly people were, despite vaccination, severely affected.

• The strict infection control measures probably extended the lives of some. When society reopened, it may have led to an accumulation of deaths.

The explanatory elements in the four slightly absurd points above are thus Covid-19-related; either the disease Covid-19 itself, the measures against it, or a combination of the two, so why not immediately afterwards come up with the following:

Almost half of the additional deaths at the end of 2021 and in 2022 were actually due to things other than covid-19, shows a study of the Cause of Death Register  carried out by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health .

And:

Cardiovascular diseases were one of the most common causes of excess mortality.

Let me then point out that cardiovascular diseases have long been recognized as a side effect of the vaccines against Covid-19. Let me summarize the "logical" analyzes and the narrative in what follows.

The narrative from Knudsen, FHI and Forskning.no summarized

There is no evidence that the vaccine has anything to do with excess mortality, although a number of studies and other signals find a number of evidence for just that. That excess mortality is strongly correlated with vaccine rollout, not just in a few places but worldwide, is obviously coincidental.

The fact that mortality behaves completely differently in the vaccine-free year 2020, with much less excess mortality and in some places even without excess mortality, is because the measures worked. Even if the same measures stopped working after the vaccine was rolled out in 2021, then, because then the mortality skyrocketed. But then the measures actually worked a bit, because when the measures ceased at the start of 2022, that is the reason for the increased mortality that then came.

The vaccine works against serious illness and death, but the reason why mortality skyrocketed after vaccination is that, after all, it does not work one hundred percent against illness and death. The explanation for the numbers lies only in Covid-19 and measures, although about half of the increased mortality that is perfectly correlated with vaccination is due to causes other than Covid-19 .

(I can mention here that the disease Covid-19 is listed as one of the side effects of the vaccine , without you letting it disturb the "logic" of the "experts").

Well, cardiovascular disease was one of the most common causes of excess mortality, and although it has been documented that one of the incredibly numerous and serious side effects from the vaccine is actually serious heart disease, the vaccine simply cannot have anything to do with it. It has even been documented that the vaccine has led to the side effect of death , but the fact that there is a lot of death after the vaccine was rolled out cannot have anything to do with the vaccine, because it was found out from the first moment (in fact, before it was rolled out) out) that it only leads to a little death .

This should qualify to receive some form of award in the future.

Terje Hansen