The Foundation Corona Committee (SCA) in Berlin, Germany, and its international network questioned the world's most respected scientists and experts over several months. Their statements are consistent and allow for clear conclusions and answers. The Committee is committed to independent, transparent and evidence-based analysis.
The questions and answers presented in the following relate mainly to Germany and the German legal area, but comparable findings allow similar conclusions to be drawn for other countries.
By VF - 01. October 2020
Answers to the main questions relating to the Corona Contagion, government countermeasures and lockdown consequences:
1. HOW DANGEROUS IS SARS-COV-2?
Fears that SARS-CoV-2 could be significantly more dangerous in terms of transmissibility, disease burden and mortality than influenza have proved unfounded. In most cases, the infection is asymptomatic or comes with mild flu symptoms.
Elderly, weakened people with previous illnesses run a higher risk of getting Covid-19. However, many of the very severe courses of the disease, especially at the beginning of the epidemic in March 2020, are due to panic-induced treatment errors (intubation, etc.). Late effects have not yet been proven. An evaluation of a total of 23 studies carried out worldwide has shown that the corona infection death rate (IFR) for people over 70 years of age is around 0.12 %, while for people under 70 years of age it is only 0.04 %.
2. IS SARS-COV2 "NOVEL"?
There is much to suggest that the Wuhan virus is only a temporary further mutation of the long known family of cold inducing corona viruses. Studies of pre-Covid 19 blood samples suggest that more than 80% of people may already be immune to the novel coronavirus because of its similarity to other cold inducing coronaviruses, or have cellular cross-immunity that provides them with temporary protection against all the SARS coronaviruses now circulating.
3. DOES THE VIRUS BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES?
National borders are not of interest to viruses. They spread worldwide, but different disease/death rates can be explained by local differences. Poor health care systems, hospital germs, panic decisions, treatment errors, drug experiments have in many places, to varying degrees, led to patients not receiving optimal care. Legal and organisational reasons also make comparisons between countries difficult: the way patients are counted varies greatly, and financial disincentives encourage patients to be classified as corona patients.
4. IS COVID-19 A SERIOUS DISEASE AND IS IT WIDESPREAD?
No, most people do not have flu symptoms or have only minor flu symptoms. Children and young people are very rarely affected. The autopsies performed by a Hamburg forensic doctor on more than 100 elderly people who died with a positive corona test revealed at least one other serious cause of death in all cases. Other published figures are mostly based on non-transparent attributions and assumptions without excluding other causes.
5. ARE HEALTHY (IMMUNE-STRONG) PEOPLE AT RISK?
No, the body is protected by cross-immunity, antibodies and/or at the cellular level by "killer lymphocytes". As with all influenza, old, multimorbid people with low immunity are at risk.
6. DO YOU DIE OF COVID-19?
Coronaviruses can also cause the barrel to overflow. If the virus test is positive, the cause of death is usually a serious underlying disease. The average age was 80 (Italy) to 86 (Sweden) years. The vast majority do not die because of SARS-CoV-2, but die with a positive SARS-CoV2 test. The US CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) now also expects that only about 6% of the more than 1,000 "corona deaths" counted so far will have died exclusively from Covid-19. If this ratio were also to apply to Germany, only 570 people (instead of around 9,400) would have died exclusively from Covid-19. For the other 94%, the CDC has identified at least one other cause of death.
7. IS THE PCR TEST A VIRUS DETECTION TEST?
No, the test only detects virus fragments and does not indicate infection, contagiousness or disease. It is non-specific with regard to SARS-CoV-2 and sometimes gives positive results even for older viruses that are still circulating and their descendants. People who test positive are rare (less than 1% since June 2020, most of them without symptoms) and a large number of them are likely to have a false positive test result. According to the results of the inter-laboratory comparison of the German Accreditation Body, the false-positive rate for a blank sample is 1.4%, for a sample mixed with a harmless corona virus 7.6%. The positive results in summer 2020 should therefore largely reflect the background noise of the test itself.
8. HOW VALID IS THE PCR-TEST?
The biochemist and Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis developed the PCR test in 1983 to amplify DNA sequences in vitro. According to Mullis, his test was not suitable for diagnostic purposes. Even today, the test cannot be used to determine whether an active viral infection is present. The gene sequences found with the test can just as well come from a viral infection that has already been overcome or from a contamination that does not lead to an infection at all. However, it is questionable whether the so-called Drosten test even detects the correct gene sequence. Many German laboratories use so-called in-house tests on the basis of the test protocols published by the WHO (cf. e.g. the so-called Drosten test assay of 17 January 2020. According to European standards, these generally require official validation. In practice, however, such validation has been largely dispensed with in view of the "emergency situation".
9. ARE THE MASS TESTS USEFUL?
No, where there is nothing anymore (reports by the observation practices of the Robert Koch Institute - RKI) such test is only harmful by false positive findings (≈ 1%). Even automated evaluation does not improve this situation, it just makes it less transparent.
A high-quality and transparent expansion of the state-organised influenza sentinel of the influenza working group at the RKI would be a good measure for assessing the risks and the respective pathogen spectrum in the annual common cold waves.
10. CAN THE PCR TEST SWAB BE USED FOR DNA ANALYSES?
The PCR test smear contains not only viral material but also DNA of the patients. A genetic analysis would in principle therefore be possible with the sample. However, according to data protection regulations, a genetic analysis of the patient's DNA, which is inevitably present in the sample, may only be carried out with the patient's consent. If the DNA is to be used for research purposes, the patient must be informed exactly which specific research project is involved. In practice, however, the patients are not informed very well, they are usually not told which doctor is responsible or which laboratory is carrying out the tests, let alone is their consent obtained for any further tests on the sample. In the hectic pace of the virus epidemic, there has been virtually no monitoring of compliance with data protection regulations.
11. WHAT IS A PANDEMIC?
According to the WHO criteria in force until 2009, the identification of a pandemic required an event with the most severe course of disease and extreme mortality. In May 2009, the definition was revised so that the seriousness of the disease was no longer the determining factor, but only its worldwide spread. According to this definition, the criterion of global spread, it is now to be expected with every annual wave of influenza.
12. IS IT AN "EPIDEMIC SITUATION OF NATIONAL TRAGEDY" IN GERMANY?
The measures taken by the federal and state governments were aimed at avoiding hospital congestion ("flatten the curve"...). According to the constantly updated report of the University of Konstanz (www.corona-vis.de) there was at no time an overload of hospitals. Neither the illness and death rates nor the hospital occupancy rates were or are indicative of an epidemic situation of national significance. All measures are based on the assumption of an epidemic based on PCR test results. The PCR test cannot detect an existing infection. It only measures whether there are sequences of the virus in question in the body, which can also be the result of a contamination that has been overcome for a long time.
13. IS THE CURRENT WAVE OF INFECTION MORE DANGEROUS THAN PREVIOUS WAVES OF INFLUENZA?
No, the flu wave in 2017/2018 led to about 25,000 (estimated) additional deaths in Germany, whereas there are only about 9,500 deaths "in connection with Covid 19" from February to August 2020, i.e. 45 corona-positive deaths per day. The daily death rate in Germany for all causes of death is about 2,600 people.
14. CAN THERE BE A "SECOND WAVE"?
The phenomenon of a (singular) second wave is epidemiologically not known, there is a natural seasonal course of all common cold viruses, including corona viruses. The winter flu waves usually end around the 14th week in our country and return as mutations next winter. There is no evidence or indication that corona cold viruses are generally more aggressive when they return as mutations. The "summer flu" is mostly based on other viruses (e.g. rhinoviruses.), which apparently multiply unusually strongly in summer 2020 despite or even because of the masks.
15. DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF THE VIRUS AT ALL COSTS?
No, only the really vulnerable, mostly old or immunocompromised people should be protected. It is like any wave of influenza: you cannot prevent the spread of the virus, but you can protect those who are at risk.
16. ARE MASKS (MOUTH-NOSE PROTECTION) USEFUL?
Five reasons speak against the use of masks:
a. the SARS-CoV-2 viruses are smaller than the pores of "everyday masks" and are not retained
b. the rebreathing of CO2 (hypercapnia) causes poor performance and headaches;
c. the moisture from prolonged wear is a breeding ground for bacterial and viral infections;
d. the frequent putting on and taking off and disposal of masks leads to the spreading of viruses.
e. the psychological, social and economic consequences are considerable.
17. DO MASKS MAKE PEOPLE MENTALLY ILL?
According to a recent study, 60% of people who feel clearly burdened by the prescriptions are already experiencing severe (psychosocial. consequences. This manifests itself in a greatly reduced participation in life in society due to aversion-induced MNS avoidance efforts, social withdrawal, reduced health self-care (up to the avoidance of doctor's appointments) or the intensification of previous health problems (post-traumatic stress disorders, herpes, migraine).
18. IS "SOCIAL DISTANCING" (DISTANCE OF 1.5 M OR MORE) USEFUL?
No, an infection is also dose-dependent, and in the case of short-term contacts of a few minutes, transmission by a non-infected virus carrier is unlikely. Without contamination through coughing, sneezing, spitting there is hardly any danger. However, symptomatically infected persons should avoid contact, especially with weakened persons and crowds of people, such as in buses, trains and waiting rooms, and if necessary stay at home.
19. MEASURES FOR CHILDREN ARE NECESSARY
No, children and adolescents (and their regular contact persons) are rarely affected by disease symptoms and are constantly getting to know new viruses without serious problems ("snotty noses"). Endangered teaching and supervisory staff can only be protected in a few justified cases. Prescribing masks to children does much more harm than good.
20. WHAT IS THE RNA VACCINATION ABOUT?
So-called mRNA/DNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are being developed. These are partly introduced into the cells by means of electrostimulation and then - potentially - use all the body's own cells as a bioreactor for the production of antigens. This represents de facto genetic manipulation of humans, even if the law says otherwise. It is also a procedure that has never been routinely used on humans.
21. CAN A SAFE VACCINE BE DEVELOPED WITHIN A FEW MONTHS?
Under normal circumstances, a development period of six to eight years is needed to produce a safe conventional vaccine. The novel corona vaccine is now expected to be approved in a few months in a so-called "telescopic" procedure, where parts of the study, which are actually connected in series, are carried out in parallel. Many experts consider this to be highly dangerous and incompatible with the precautionary principle applicable in the EU and Germany. The (negative) effects of the new technology could not be estimated, in particular it was not possible to foresee which type of cells and how many of these cells would be genetically converted into mRNA bioreactors. It is also not possible to rule out with certainty that the cells will enter the human germ line, so that any damage may manifest itself only at a late stage or possibly only in future generations. The extremely shortened observation times prevented the detection of possible late effects caused by neoplasms or autoimmune diseases as well as the effect on defence processes in other infectious diseases or vaccinations.
22. WHY DID SO MANY CATS DIE DURING A CORONAVIRUS VACCINATION?
In the attempt to develop a corona vaccine for cats, all cats died when they were exposed to the wild virus after vaccination due to an out-of-control immune response (so-called excessive antibody-mediated reactions). Experiments with a SARS vaccine indicated that a similar problem could arise in humans. Also against this background, experts consider it highly dangerous to open shortened approval channels for the SARS-CoV2 vaccine.
23. WAS THE LOCKDOWN ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY?
No, it was harmful in many respects and according to RKI data the wave of infection subsided automatically before it started. Studies by the Israeli mathematician Prof. Isaac Ben-Israel have shown that with and without lockdown, the virus ceased to exist worldwide after about 45 days. Even the much-vaunted R-value shows this at the latest from Easter onwards. The R-value may have been artificially distorted by increased testing (more false positive tests).
24. DID THE MORTALITY FIGURES DECREASE AFTER THE LOCKDOWN?
No, on the contrary, the statistical curves show that after the lockdown the mortality rates have increased in many countries. This can only be explained by the collateral damage of the lockdown: Postponement of operations, prevention and treatment of emergencies, avoidance of visits to doctors and hospitalisation, isolation and neglect of people in need of care, increase in mental illness, suicides, etc.
25. WHAT DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE SO-CALLED "PANIC PAPER"?
The paper "How to get a grip on Covid-19" was leaked from the Federal Ministry of the Interior. There, the government is recommended to use a shock strategy to motivate people to follow hygiene regulations. In particular, the fear of an agonising death by suffocation of a loved one should be evoked, for which one could be responsible oneself if, for example, one does not wash one's hands thoroughly enough. The instructions for such a manipulative communication strategy have been received very critically by parts of the public. Fear has immunosuppressive effects and is therefore not helpful in a phase of fighting a virus.
26. WHAT WAS/IS SO BAD ABOUT THE SITUATION IN THE HOMES?
Great suffering has been caused in the nursing homes by the lockdown. Far-reaching visiting bans have been imposed, both on relatives and on doctors, physiotherapists, speech therapists, chiropodists, etc. As a result, the state of health of many people in need of care has deteriorated, in some cases irreversibly. The abrupt change in living conditions - e.g. the absence of helping relatives - has put dementia sufferers in particular under great stress and emotional strain. In this situation many have lost the courage to face life. Many home residents have died alone, without their relatives, a terrible burden even for the bereaved.
27. WHAT BASIC RIGHTS HAVE BEEN OR ARE AFFECTED BY THE MEASURES? (in Germany)
The measures have affected and in some cases still affect the fundamental rights of the population. Particularly affected are freedom of opinion (Article 5 (1) sentence 1 GG., freedom of religion (Article 4 (1) and (2) GG., freedom of the arts (Article 5 (3) GG., freedom of science, research and teaching (Article 5 (3) GG., freedom to choose and exercise an occupation (Article 12 (1) GG., freedom of assembly (Article 8 (1) GG., right of ownership (Article 14 GG., specifically the right to an established and practised business, freedom of movement and freedom to choose a place of residence (Article 2 (2) sentence 2, the right to education (Article 26 of the European Parliament and Council), freedom of activity of political parties (Article 21 of the Basic Law), the right to free development of the personality as part of the general freedom of action (Article 2 (1) of the Basic Law.
28. MAY THE STATE CONTINUE TO RESTRICT FREEDOM WITHOUT RESTRICTION?
Especially in the case of massive restrictions on freedom, the state is obliged to constantly check whether these are absolutely necessary to avert danger, whether there are milder means and/or whether the collateral damage is more serious than, for example, health protection. In doing so, the state must constantly and actively seek to gain knowledge (e.g. regarding the danger of the virus, increase in lockdown victims) in order to reduce encroachments on fundamental rights to the absolute minimum necessary.
29. HOW MUST THE RISKS OF VIRUSES AND COUNTERMEASURES BE WEIGHED UP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE GERMAN CONSTITUTION?
The constitutionally compliant, legally relevant question is: Is the relationship between the reduction of the risk of contracting and possibly dying from Covid-19 and the (realised. Risk that the defensive measures will have negative effects. So in the end it is a matter of weighing up the risks of life. Only if the remedy is no more harmful than the disease can a measure be justified.
30. IT MAY BE THAT A HEALTH MEASURE DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD
No, for doctors, the principle of primum nil nocere = above all do no harm also applies in the public health sector. Measures that do more harm than good are unethical and must be avoided.
31. WHY DO THE COURTS CURRENTLY DECIDE WITHOUT CONSULTING EXPERTS?
The Corona Regulations provide that opposition to measures does not have suspensory effect. State action can therefore only be challenged by way of summary judgment if immediate remedy is sought. A limited test standard applies there. The claim must be substantiated; the judges are not obliged to provide intensive information themselves. However, even in summary proceedings the judges are subject to the principle of official investigation and would in principle have to conduct a plausibility check. Unfortunately, they do not do so, but rely on the RKI's assessment that a "dangerous" situation has been identified. This is inadmissible because the figures of the RCI do not indicate a "dangerous situation".
Translated from the Original by ET
The report is here!
The report on the results of the hearings of the first 13 Committee meetings is now available. (in German)
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, who practices law in California as well as Germany, and the #coronavirus investigative committee have prepared a class action to help people to claim damages caused by the corona fraud and the crimes against humanity committed by authorities. See: https://www.corona-schadensersatzklage.de
We pro-actively advise and support the activities regarding the Corona claim for damages.
Dr. Fuellmich stated that they themselves are only representing German clients, but plan to publish names of lawyers and law firms internationally who will be taking part in legal action for redress against the corona measures.