All News

In the Netherlands, too, we are now seeing a sudden return of the flu. This is mainly explained by the ending of the measures. But that cannot be the main reason if you look at the patterns in the rest of the world. However, that wrongheadedness can lead to measures again. History then threatens to repeat itself.

On 26 November, a big experiment took place at Schiphol. Analyzing it properly can teach us a lot about the mistakes that are made in (the interpretation of) PCR tests and also that reinfections with Covid-19 are (strongly?) overestimated.

There are strong indications that a lot went wrong on Friday, including with the execution of the PCR tests by GGD-Kennemerland (the municipal health service). Those 61 positive tests make for an extremely unlikely number. Among others, that Spanish "refugee" tested negative on Monday as well as another passenger.

The fact that within 10 hours of landing, 10% of the passengers on the 2 flights from South Africa tested positive proves the failure of the 3G (and 2G) coronavirus entry pass. After all, the vaccinated were allowed on board without testing.

It was already clear that the amount of virus particles (virions) inhaled, determines whether you are infected or not. In the meantime, it is possible to specify this even more. On the one hand it concerns the number of virions in the air and how long this is inhaled. On the other hand, it concerns parameters such as age, whether or not you have been infected before, if you have been vaccinated and when. This article provides insight into this through numerical examples, which can also explain all kinds of patterns of the spread of Covid-19. Take note: this article is only a hypothesis

An overview of my conclusions with regards to: 1. Infection routes 2. Severity of the disease 3. Measures to prevent infection And my subsequent recommendations.

Aerosol transmission has been gaining traction in communities of science, politics and media all over the world, but the Netherlands is lagging behind. This article provides an overview of these developments and warns about the consequences if the Netherlands fails to get with the program.

A jaw-dropping report by the Dutch CDC provides strong evidence that poorly configured ventilation systems play their part in the massive spread of the virus among those who are present in those rooms (long-term). Clearly, aerosols play their part in the spread of the virus, but the Dutch CDC remains mysteriously sceptical.

The vast majority of Covid-19 infections occurs through inhalation of the virus and not through larger droplets that end up in the nose, mouth or eyes of an uninfected person. This article provides a brief overview of how this conclusion was reached. It's about time that our leaders come to their senses and for the hegemony of WHO/RIVM and OMT to end.

A new category of "deniers" has emerged: aerosol deniers. Scientists who will tell you they are strictly scientific, but act on the basis of power instead. Reluctant to open themselves up to facts, they are responsible for a lot of unnecessary damage. This article shows the bewildering stubbornness of the Dutch CDC in denying the importance of aerosols.

If your tool is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail. This article discusses evidence that weather patterns clearly affect the spread of the virus, and why this cannot be explained by droplet transmission alone. Insisting that upticks in cases are caused by a failure to keep enough distance, the WHO and its experts are doing more harm than good.

This article discusses RIVM's harmful role in the disastrous situation in the healthcare sector, the importance of aerosols and proportional measures, to illustrate that it is time our policymakers and politicians abandon their original point of view and start scrutinising the advice of RIVM and OMT instead of following it almost blindly.

This article seeks to inform you about the risk of being infected with Covid-19 with the aim to able to live as normal a life as possible. Factors discussed are your mortality rate, your risk of getting infected, points of attention per situation such as touching surfaces, indoor versus outdoor, roommates versus visitors, and visiting others.

Based on all the studies I've read, I offer my best guess of the importance of various infection routes and how to minimize their risks. I believe this best guess improves our ability to combat the virus and preserve our society.

Studies show that most infections are spread through aerosols. The crucial concept in aerosol contamination is the “viral dose”; the number of infectious virus particles needed to infect another person. The more particles you inhale, the sicker you get. This article presents a set of guidelines to prevent infection.

Data shows that Covid-19 is following almost the same pattern as the flu waves. On top of that, a breakdown of the IFR of covid-19 per age group compared to influenza shows that they are quite similar. As long as the WHO does not recognize how the spread of COVID-19 really takes place, countries will take the wrong measures.

I began writing about Covid-19 in March, integrating data analysis, the latest international scientific studies and logical reasoning to formulate a series of conclusions about mouth protection in public spaces, ventilation and elevated humidity, outdoor versus indoor infection, surface contamination, the role of superspreading events, aerosols and social distancing.

The virus thrives best in confined spaces without good ventilation, where people are together who normally do not meet (often). Since we only have 4 months till autumn, I submit that the Delta Plan for the HVAC systems should be introduced in the Netherlands immediately.

William Wells provided the basis for the approach to social distancing back in the thirties. He also explains very explicitly that aerosols are a major danger in almost all diseases that have been studied. Yet the WHO, and therefore all CDCs in the world, don’t adhere to what Wells has been experimenting with since 1955.

The gigantic impact of superspread events This is the fantastic database of Koen Swinkels with a lot of SSE’s worldwide.

I get a lot of questions from various countries where outbreaks are difficult to explain. I've talked to infected people in these countries and also looked at the weather developments there. I've spotted an interesting pattern which I will share in this article. These conclusions aren't watertight just yet.

We should limit the time we are exposed to each other instead of the distance we keep from each other. The time allowed spending in for example a restaurant depends on which measurements have been taken to reduce transmission and immission.

A collection of scientific studies, including "just stop the superspreading events" which appeared in The New York Times on 2 June, all demonstrating that the prevention of such events can slow the spread of COVID-19; an approach with much fewer social and economic consequences.

If you don't know why something happens, you can't take the right measures to prevent it. This article shows how slaughterhouses are a perfect storm when it comes to viral transmission through aerosols. Yet, the RIVM keeps ignoring this mechanism in favor of maintaining the 1.5-metre rule, at the peril of huge economic damage and 'inexplicable' outbreaks.

As a result of how things are being reported, among other factors, a large proportion of Dutch citizens hugely overestimates their risk of getting infected. Based on a couple of simple assumptions, we calculate that of the next 8,500 people you will meet, 1 will infect you.

The WHO's website indicates a social distance of 1 metre. But in the Netherlands, we are told to keep 1.5 metres distance. What is the added value of those additional 50 centimetres in terms of public health, what are the economic and social costs, and where did the 1.5 metres come from?

This article discusses the extremely shaky data based on which the governments have acted "evidence-based". Examples discussed include the vague reproduction factor, insufficient specifications in the numbers, the impossibility of "crash the curve" in the Netherlands and the second wave.

As I was listening to the RIVM briefing yesterday, and the subsequent debate in the Second Chamber, I was wondering whether they were even talking about COVID-19. This article provides an overview of what is now known about the virus based on international research, but has not, or barely, reached the Dutch media and politics.

Prof. Streeck's research in the heavily impacted Heinsberg/Gangelt area just across the German border, is the most complete randomized study I've seen so far. Unfortunately, the Netherlands doesn't seem intent on following this example and/or learning from this type of research. That is why I will give you an overview of its main conclusions.

"1,5-metre distance", "wash your hands", "sneeze in your elbow" and "a second wave is on its way". These were the foundations of the WHO's strategy based on which lockdowns were imposed globally. But these mantras are sending us off in the wrong direction while the true danger is not being fully recognized. A deadly mix during this enormous crisis.