In Dutch nursing home, two thirds of residents test positive for COVID after vaccination
Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.
February 26, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — On January 30, the 106 residents of the St. Elisabeth nursing home for elderly people in Amersfoort, Netherlands, received the first shot of the COVID-19 experimental vaccine. Within two weeks, and for the first time since the pandemic began last year, the Wuhan virus made its way through the home at high speed. No less than 70 residents tested positive; by Monday, 22 had died. Some of the residents have recovered but others are still sick, meaning that even more deaths may occur during this wave.
St. Elisabeth has registered the highest number of SARS-CoV-2 contaminations in a nursing home in the Netherlands since the beginning of the crisis.
With its vulnerable population of dependent dementia patients, many of them with other health issues, St. Elisabeth is accustomed to seeing people die. Evelien Bongers, speaking on behalf of the board of directors, stated that it could not be “established with certainty in what measure the deaths were a direct consequence of contamination with the coronavirus” because of the victims’ underlying conditions. “These elderly patients died with the coronavirus, but not necessarily because of the coronavirus,” she said. “But we are seeing a higher number of deaths than usual.”
This distinction between dying with the virus or because of it is precisely what is lacking in many COVID-19 statistics, with many freedom-destroying restrictions being imposed on the basis of exaggerated numbers. But she added: “Our residents need nursing and care. When they are contaminated with the coronavirus, that can be just too much.”
Seeing some 20 percent of their patients die in such a short time took a heavy toll on families and caregivers, all the more because they were hoping to relax after months of strict observance of security measures thanks to the vaccine.
“When vaccinations started, we expected that contaminations would decrease, but that did not happen and we are very upset about that,” said Bongers.
The fact is that the number of infections had never been so high, and they had never happened so fast, even though special measures were taken when the outbreak began to isolate positive patients in their rooms and severely restrict outside visits to three per week by only one person. Also, the wave of contaminations did not set in very soon after the first shot, when it could have been argued that it had no time to foster immunity, but a full two weeks later, when at least some efficacy could be hoped for if the experimental vaccine is actually living up to its promises. While it is not established that it decreases infections, it does purport to diminish the severity of COVID-19, the disease associated with the virus. But at St. Elisabeth’s in Amersfoort, 22 out of 70 patients who were tested positive died: more than 30 percent.
Is the experimental “vaccine” useless, besides being poorly understood as to its potential long-term side effects and profoundly objectionable because of the use of aborted fetal cells in its development? In the case of the Wuhan virus, time may tell, but that even is unsure because coronavirus epidemics have a life of their own and naturally peak and diminish according to their own pattern.
Is it also harmful? In the Netherlands, the agency where undesirable effects of the experimental shots are centrally catalogued, Lareb, had already registered 5,086 suspicious cases of illness and discomfort by Tuesday, for a total of about 800,000 inoculations. Headaches, muscle pain and nausea are quoted in most cases, but 26 severe allergic reactions were also documented.
Even more worrisome are the 65 deaths closely following vaccination reported to Lareb by last Tuesday, mostly among elderly patients: 55 of the deceased were aged 80 or older, and the other ten were between 65 and 80.
Lareb pointed out that all the victims were in “vulnerable” health conditions because of serious underlying illness or very old age. The agency’s director, Agnes Kant, stressed that death after the vaccine should not automatically be attributed to the jab: “In the Netherlands, an average of 750 to 800 residents of nursing homes die per week, as well as 2,000 persons aged over 80. Some of these can just happen to have received the vaccine shortly before.”
She conceded that in some cases the shot may have deteriorated the condition of the very old. “Days after the vaccination, they got complaints that are known side effects,” she said, adding, “Complaints such as fever are not the cause of death on their own. But is known that for very vulnerable elderly people, they constitute a risk. That is why this fact is included in the guidelines, so that it is carefully considered with regard to group vaccination.”
In the Netherlands as in many other countries, it is precisely the most vulnerable who are first in line to receive COVID-19 vaccines — one nephew of a 102-year-old woman who is very well and intellectually sharp is even making a public scandal out of the fact that she was overlooked during the vaccination campaign in her region because of her good health.
It is also remarkable that authorities are downplaying possible harmful effects and even death following inoculation, when COVID deaths are registered even when the deceased had a terminal illness.
Few Dutch residents of care-homes are refusing the experimental vaccine, which is being presented as the way out of restrictions that are separating them from their families. But in homes run by the most traditional Protestant group in the Netherlands, about half of the residents with bad health conditions are saying no to the vaccine, because they wish to “trust in the Providence of the Law” without “damaging” their trust by the “interference of a vaccine.”