Lareb's director Kant — no batch link to deaths, no cover-up

Agnes Kant (defence)

Defence filing · the court has not ruled on these claims

In 30 seconds

The short rejoinder of Agnes Kant, director of Lareb, the Dutch side-effects monitoring centre. She answers the claimants' allegations that Lareb covered up batch-linked harm and lacked capacity to handle reports.

Cheat sheet

Kant denies that Lareb's procedures were a 'cover-up' and says its analyses found no serious adverse reactions tied to specific batches.
She says an RIVM memo of 3 December 2020 explained why batch numbers were recorded, not a 'preferred reality'.
On batch EM0477, she says death-report counts alone prove nothing; they depend on who got the batch, when, and how many.
She says Lareb compares each batch's side-effect profile with other batches using an automated tool, then digs deeper where needed.
She accepts report numbers were high, linking this to new vaccines, easy reporting and wide attention, and asks for dismissal.

Key passages · underlined

This assertion is factually incorrect. Lareb’s analyses of reports of deaths found no evidence of a link to a batch number. No conclusions can be drawn solely from the number of reports of deaths relating to a specific batch number.

Why it matters The Lareb director's direct answer to the claimants' 'killer batch' allegation about EM0477.Page 2 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy

Using an automated analysis tool, the spectrum of reported adverse reactions per batch number is compared with the spectrum of the other batches. If certain adverse reactions occur more frequently in a specific batch, a further analysis of these reports is carried out.

Why it matters Explains how Lareb says it checked batches. The claimants call this process 'nothing more' than software.Page 3 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy

The number of reports received regarding Covid-19 vaccinations was indeed relatively high compared to other vaccinations. The considerable focus on side effects and the ease of reporting likely played a part in this.

Why it matters A notable concession that reports were unusually high, paired with Kant's explanation for why.Page 4 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy

Every defendant denies the claims, and the court has not ruled on them. Allegations are the claimants' pleaded positions, quoted as theirs. This is analysis and commentary, not legal advice. Interest of Justice is not a party to the case.

Lareb's director Kant — no batch link to deaths, no cover-up

Free to read, for good. Not free for IoJ to host.