Videnskabelig dokumentation om Corona virus COVID-19

Se her om den nyeste videnskab om Corona virus COVID-19 – meget mindre farlig end man har troet viser nye studier!

Critique of Drosten paper

Retraction Letter by ICSLS – Corman-Drosten et al

Corman Drosten artikel original eurosurv-25-3-5

Review Report by ICSLS – Corman-Drosten et al

Global Report2019-nCoV Summary of facts documentation September 2020

Download Global Report2019-nCoV

A Comprehensive Analysis of the Covid-19 Crisis: download the paper below:

download paper 1

Download this new paper on “CORONA SCIENCE – COMPLETE UPDATE 2020-06-09” (please share!)

download paper 2

June 2020

A. General section
Studies on the lethality of COVID-19
In May John Ioannidis, Professor at Stanford University, has published an overview of antibody-studies that have been conducted so far. According to those, the lethality rate of COVID-19 (IFR) lies below 0.16% in most countries and regions. Three hotspots, however, have shown a upper limit of 0.40%.
In its most recent report, the US health department CDC reduced the IFR of COVID-19 to 0.26% (best estimate). Even this number should be regarded as upper limit, since the CDC conservatively assumes the rate of asymptomatic cases to be 35%, whereas most of the studies base their work on an asymptomatic case rate of 50-80%.

In the end of May, a Swiss team of immunologists lead by Prof. Onur Boyman published the probably most important study on this topic so far. The results of this preprint study show that common antibody tests, which measure the number of antibodies in the blood (IgG and IgM), can only identify at most about a fifth of all COVID-19 infections.

The reason for this is that, with most people, the new Coronavirus is already being neutralised by antibodies on the mucous membrane (IgA) or by cellular immunity (T-cells). In this process only mild or no symptoms appear.

This means that COVID-19 might be even wider spread than assumed so far and lethality per infection may be up to five times lower than indicated in former studies. The actual lethality rate could be far below 0.1% which would be comparable to the rate of seasonal Influenza.

In fact, several studies have meanwhile shown that up to 60% of all people already have a certain cellular immunity against COVID-19 obtained by contact to other coronaviruses (cold virus). Especially children often get in contact with such coronaviruses which could be an explanation for their low sensitivity to COVID-19.

The new Swiss study might also explain why even in hotspot areas such as New York or Madrid studies on antibodies only found an infection rate of about 20% at most, since this would resemble an actual rate of almost 100%. In many regions the spreading should actually have reached far more than 50% and therefore lies within the limits of herd immunity.

An approval of the Swiss study would also confirm the assessment of Oxford epidemiologist Prof. Sunetra Gupta, who assumed COVID-19 to be rather widespread and with a low lethality rate between 0.01% and 0.1%.

Despite the low lethality rate of COVID-19 (deaths per infection) its mortality rate (deaths per population) can be regionally and temporarily strongly increased, if the virus spreads quickly and reaches high-risk groups such as patients in nursing homes, as it has been the case in several hotspots (cf. below).

Due to its rather low lethality rate COVID-19 is at most on level 2 of the pandemic severity index, which was developed by the US health department and describes five levels in total. The principal measure to be taken on level 2 is merely the “voluntary isolation of sick people”. Further measures such as mandatory face masks, temporary closing of schools, distance regulations, tracking of contacts, vaccinations, and lockdowns of societies, however, are not shown.

A study on influenza pandemics conducted in 2019 by the WHO concluded that from a medical point of view contact tracking is under no circumstances to be suggested, since it is not an expedient solution for easily spread and generally mild respiratory diseases.

Some argue the rather low lethality has not been identified in the beginning. That is not utterly true, since data from South Korea, cruise ships and even from Italy showed already in March that there is a rather low risk for the general public.

Many health departments were familiar with this data as leaked emails from Denmark in mid-March show: “The Danish health department continues to assume that COVID-19 cannot be called a generally dangerous disease, since it neither shows a usually severe course nor a high mortality rate.

However, some broadcasters and laymen continue to calculate a lethality rate that is much higher, partly over 1%, by dividing the number of death cases by infections. This method is naturally not valid, since it does not consider the population’s age and risk structures, which are decisive factors when talking about COVID-19.

The latest data of the European mortality monitoring network (EuroMOMO) show that in many countries, such as France, Italy and Spain, a mortality rate below average can be seen. This is caused by a very high average age of deaths due to COVID-19 and this age group now shows less deaths than usual.

Example: death rate per age group in Massachuesetts, USA (source:[/caption]

See also:

The role of nursing homes
Nursing homes played a key role in the COVID-19 pandemic. In most countries one to two thirds of COVID-19-related deaths occurred in nursing homes. In Canada and some US-states the rates were even higher, up to 80%. Also, in Sweden, where there was no lockdown, 75% of the deaths occurred in nursing homes and apartments.

Therefore, it is rather alarming that some authorities obliged their nursing homes to take in people from clinics/ hospitals which almost always lead to numerous new infections and deaths. This was the case in Northern Italy, England and the strongly affected US-states of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

In Northern Italy the wide-spread fear of the virus and the announcement of the lockdown caused many nurses, who mostly come from eastern European countries,  to quickly leave the Italy, which accelerated the collapse of the elderly care system even more.

In the US at least 42% of all COVID-19 related deaths are part of the 0.6% of the population that live in nursing homes. Especially nursing homes, however, need apt protection and do not profit of a general lockdown of society.

Additionally, it often is unclear if a person has really died from COVID-19 or from weeks full of stress and strict isolation. For this, only 10,000 of 30,000 additional deaths in English nursing homes are officially registered as caused by COVID-19.

Only in April around 10,000 dementia patients in England and Wales died additionally, without being infected by Corona, due to being isolated for several weeks. Meanwhile, various countries have demanded or initiated investigations regarding the situation in nursing homes.

Deaths in nursing homes, absolute and relative (LTCCovid).

The role of hospitals
The second key factor in terms of infections and deaths, besides nursing homes, is the hospitals themselves. A case study in Wuhan already showed that about 41% of the hospitalized patients had become infected with Covid19 in the hospital.

In Northern Italy, Spain, England and other severely affected regions, the infection in hospitals also played a decisive role, i.e. the hospitals themselves became the main site of transmission of Covid19 to already weakened people (so-called nosocomial infection) – a problem that was already observed in the SARS outbreak of 2003.

According to current knowledge, those countries that were able to prevent outbreaks of infection in nursing homes and hospitals had comparatively few deaths. In contrast, the general lockdown played no or a counterproductive role (see below).

It is known that common corona viruses (cold viruses) can also be dangerous for people in nursing homes. Stanford professor John Ioannidis already pointed out in mid-March that corona viruses reach a case mortality rate of up to 8%.

The clinical picture of Covid-19
In May, the well-known Hamburg forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel presented his worldwide first study (English) on the first 12 of 190 detailed corona obductions at a press conference (German).

Professor Püschel again emphasized that Covid-19 “is not as threatening as was first suspected”. The danger had been “influenced far too much by media images”. The media had focused on serious individual cases and had stirred up panic with “completely wrong messages”. Covid-19 is not a “killer virus” and the call for new medicine or vaccines is “marked by fear”.

The actual cause of death in the cases investigated was pneumonia, but in about 50% of the cases venous thrombosis in the legs was also present, which can lead to fatal pulmonary embolism. In some cases, the kidneys and heart muscle were also affected. Professor Püschel therefore recommends the preventive administration of blood-thinning medication in cases of serious Covid disease.

Regarding thromboses and pulmonary embolisms, Professor Püschel emphasized – as other experts have done before – that a “lockdown” with quarantine at home is “exactly the wrong measure”, as the lack of exercise additionally promotes thromboses. US specialists have also warned of this risk, after unexpected thromboses occurred even in Covid-negative persons.

In turn, many media misinterpreted the autopsy findings and spoke of Covid-19 as a dangerous “multi-organ disease”, which allegedly leads to thromboses and pulmonary embolisms, unlike influenza. This is admittedly wrong: It has been known for 50 years that even severe influenza greatly increases the risk of thromboses and embolisms and can affect the heart muscle and other organs. Even the recommendation regarding preventive blood thinners for severe influenza has been known for 50 years.

Children and schools
In the meantime, numerous studies have shown that children hardly ever fall ill with Covid19 and do not, or hardly ever, transmit the virus, which was already known from the SARS outbreak in 2003. There was therefore at no time a medical reason for the closure of schools.

Accordingly, all those countries that reopened their schools in May did not register an increase in cases of infection. Countries like Sweden, which never closed their primary schools anyway, had no problems with this either.

A preprint study by the German virologist Christian Drosten argued that the risk of infection by children is comparable to that of adults and schools should therefore remain closed. However, several researchers found methodological errors in the study. Drosten then withdrew the recommendation regarding school closures.

In some schools, for example in France and Israel, alleged “corona outbreaks” have nevertheless occurred. However, these are probably transmissions from teachers to pupils who, to their sorrow, are regularly tested, although they show hardly any symptoms and are themselves hardly or not at all contagious.

About Kawasaki disease, the British Kawasaki Disease Foundation once again criticised the dubious and lurid media coverage. In fact, there has been no significant increase in Kawasaki cases and no proven link to Covid-19. General inflammatory reactions in individual children are also known from other virus infections, but the number of cases reported to date is extremely low.

German medical associations also published an all-clear: Covid-19 is unnoticeable or very mild in almost all children. Schools and day-care centres should therefore be opened immediately and without restrictions, i.e. small groups, distance rules or masks are not necessary.

School kids in France, that have to play in boxes (15. 05 2020, DailyMail)

The effectiveness of masks
Regardless of the already comparatively low mortality of Covid19 in the general population (see above), there is still no scientific evidence for the efficacy of masks in healthy and symptom-free people in everyday life.

A cross-country study by the University of East Anglia concluded that making masks mandatory was of no benefit and could even increase the risk of infection.

Two U.S. professors and experts in respiratory and infection protection from the University of Illinois explain in an essay that respirators have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). Nor would the widespread masks have prevented the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan.

A study published in April 2020 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine concluded that neither fabric masks nor surgical masks could prevent the spread of the Covid19 virus by coughing.

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine in May 2020 also concluded that respiratory masks offer little or no protection in everyday life. The call for mandatory masks is an “irrational fear reflex”.

A May 2020 meta-study on influenza pandemics published by the US CDC also found that respirators were ineffective.

In Austria, the obligation to wear masks in retail and catering will be lifted again from mid-June onwards. In Sweden, a mask obligation was never introduced, as it “does not provide any additional protection for the population”, as the health authority stated.

Numerous politicians, media people and police officers have already been caught putting on their respirators in a crowd of people especially for the TV cameras or immediately taking them off again when they thought there was no longer any filming.

In some cases, there have been brutal police assaults because a person “did not wear their mask properly”. In other cases, people with a disability who are medically certified as not being able or obliged to wear a mask were not allowed to enter shopping centres.

Contrary to all this evidence, a group called “masks4all“, founded by a young leader of the World Economic Forum (WEF) Davos, propagates a worldwide obligation to wear masks. Various governments and the WHO seem to be responding to this.

In this context, critics suspect that the masks are more likely to fulfil a psychological or political function (“muzzle” or “visible sign of obedience”) and, if worn frequently, may possibly lead to additional health problems.

About the origin of the virus
In mid-March, some researchers argued in a letter to the journal Nature Medicine that the Covid19 virus had to be of natural origin and could not come “from a laboratory”. They cited the structure of the virus and the fact that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor does not correspond to the theoretical maximum.

In the meantime, however, numerous renowned virologists have contradicted this argumentation. An artificial origin in the context of virological functional research is “at least as plausible” as a natural origin. In fact, intensive research on such corona viruses has been going on for almost 20 years (the SARS outbreak of 2003) in several laboratories.

Arguments in favour of an artificial origin include that the binding to the human ACE2 cell receptor is much stronger than in all common origin animals, and that no direct origin animal could be identified so far. In addition, the virus contained some conspicuous gene sequences that could have been artificially inserted.

The initial theory of the animal market in Wuhan has since been rejected, as none of the animals there tested positive and a third of the very first patients had no connection to the animal market. The animal market is now seen as a secondary transmission site.

It is known that the virological laboratory in Wuhan, in collaboration with the USA and France, has been conducting research on corona viruses, including the production of “potentially pandemic pathogens” (PPP), which are particularly easily transmitted and/or particularly dangerous. In addition, several laboratory accidents involving the release of viruses have already occurred in China and also in the USA.

The unbiased observer must therefore continue to consider several realistic possibilities: A natural origin of the virus (as assumed for SARS 2003), a laboratory accident in the context of functional research (presumably in Wuhan), or even a deliberate release by a geopolitically interested actor in the East or West.

Nevertheless, the Covid19 virus is not a “bioweapon” in the classical sense: The virus is easily transmitted, but not particularly dangerous for the general population. Animal experiments have shown that considerably more deadly corona viruses can be produced.

Vaccinations against Covid-19
Numerous experts have already pointed out that a forced vaccine against the new coronavirus is not necessary or useful because of the overall low lethality (see above) and the already declining spread. The protection of risk groups, especially in nursing homes, could be much more targeted.

Some experts, such as the Swiss infectiologist Dr. Pietro Vernazza, have also pointed out that experience has shown that the high-risk group in particular benefits least from a vaccination because their immune system no longer responds adequately to the vaccine.

Various experts have also pointed out the considerable health risks of a forced vaccination. In fact, the vaccination against the so-called “swine flu” of 2009/2010, for example, led to sometimes severe neurological damage, especially in children, and to claims for damages in the millions.

Nevertheless, several billion dollars of private and public funds have already been collected for the development of a vaccine. An “immunity card” for work and travel is also still being discussed. However, contrary to most media portrayals, the two leading vaccine projects have in some cases led to serious complications.

In the case of the vaccine from the University of Oxford, all six rhesus monkeys fell ill with Covid19 in animal experiments despite being vaccinated and were equally infectious as the unvaccinated monkeys. Nevertheless, the vaccine was continued into the test phase with humans. The project leader explained, however, that the corona virus had already become so rare in the population that the clinical trial was 50% unlikely to yield a result.

In the case of Moderna‘s novel RNA vaccine, which was unusually tested directly in humans, 20% of the participants in the high-dose group had a “severe side effect“, although Moderna only allowed very healthy people to participate in the trial.

One of the Moderna participants was then presented and interviewed as a “hero” by CNN. However, it was agreed not to mention that the participant fainted after the vaccination and became “as sick as never before in his life“. Several experts also criticized that Moderna had not sufficiently disclosed its clinical data.

The head of the US programme for the rapid development of a corona vaccine was previously himself a director at Moderna. President Trump also announced that the vaccine might be distributed nationwide with the US military. Some countries, such as Denmark, have already created the legal basis for compulsory vaccination of the entire population. In Germany, too, various politicians have spoken out in favor of compulsory vaccination.

Proponents of compulsory vaccination, such as the President of the World Medical Association, Frank Montgomery, argue that the population must be vaccinated to protect those who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons. However, given the rather low lethality of Covid19 and its already very widespread use, this argument seems highly questionable. In addition, there are the serious vaccine risks outlined above.

Nevertheless, the head of the largest European ticket portal Eventim explained that there might be “events again only when there is a vaccine or a correspondingly effective medication – we will have to wait a while longer”.

Leaders at the Global Vaccine Summit on 4 June 2020 (GAVI)[/caption]

Medicines for Covid-19
The situation regarding helpful drugs for severe cases of Covid19 remains very unclear. There is only some consensus that blood thinners are helpful in preventing life-threatening thrombosis and embolism (as in severe influenza).

The malaria drug hydroxycholoroquine (HCQ) has been the subject of heated debate for months. At the end of May, the scientific journal Lancet published a study according to which HCQ leads to an increase in heart problems. The WHO subsequently discontinued all its HCQ studies. Shortly afterwards, however, it became known that the Lancet study was based on a manipulated data set.

The Lancet study and another study in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) had to be withdrawn, which is one of the biggest medical scandals in recent years. The reason for the manipulated study is not clear, but the main author seems to be involved in a study on the competing drug Remdesivir at the same time.

The use of Remdesivir by the pharmaceutical company Gilead came under pressure after a first study showed that the drug could not reduce the risk of death. However, many media ignored this and still reported positively about the drug.

A former French health minister revealed in an interview that the editors of Lancet and NEJM stated in a confidential discussion that the pressure and influence of pharmaceutical companies had become so great that one could no longer speak of science. Both editors are said to have even spoken of a “criminal” approach.

Various hospitals use or study HCQ in Covid19 patients, sometimes in combination with zinc, vitamins or other drugs. However, it is known that HCQ can lead to fatal complications in the metabolic peculiarity of favism, which occurs particularly in people from Africa and the Mediterranean region.

Unfortunately, it can be assumed that incorrect or overly aggressive medication with HCQ, steroids, antibiotics and antivirals as well as invasive ventilation during the corona pandemic has led to numerous additional and avoidable deaths.

Expert opinions (selection)
– A senior physician for intensive care medicine at the University Hospital of Zurich, who himself cared for critical Covid-19 patients, criticized in a much-noticed video the “scaremongering” associated with the disease. For the vast majority of people there is no significant risk of dying, the figures are comparable with previous flu waves. Risk groups could be specifically protected, while the general lockdown only prevented the immunisation of the general population. In addition, people are dying because of the prescribed medical underprovision in other areas. The medical and social damage has long since outweighed the benefits. Even the partially obligatory face masks for school children have “no medical sense and benefit” and place a heavy burden on the children. The “daily counting” of the cases is nonsensical and only spreads fear. The counterproductive measures must be stopped quickly. Swiss media tried to put pressure on the University Hospital Zurich after the widespread distribution of the video. The original video has since been removed by the doctor.

– The Swiss chief physician for infectiology, Dr. Pietro Vernazza, explains using current case studies as an example that fever measurements and contact tracing are not useful because of the often symptom-free courses and easy transferability of Covid19.

– The well-known Swiss immunologist Dr. Beda Stadler explains in an article that Covid19 is a “very selective disease” and only very few people are at real risk. The media, on the other hand, had concentrated on the few atypical individual cases, which exist for every disease. Many scientists had focused too much on their models and too little on reality. The planned contact tracing was medically “senseless” and spread “at most panic”.

– The British chief physician Dr. Chris Witty explained in a lecture that Covid19 poses no danger “to the majority of the population”. Most people do not suffer from it or only mildly, and even those who are very ill have a good chance of recovery.

– Stanford professor and Nobel laureate in chemistry Michael Levitt explains in a new article that the lockdowns did not save any lives but cost many. A “panic virus” has spread among politicians worldwide.

– Professor Karel Sikora of the University of Buckingham argues in an interview that fear will ultimately kill “many more people than the virus”, including untreated heart and cancer patients. Schools should be opened quickly and masks should remain an individual decision, as their usefulness is not proven. One should return to an “old normal” and not a “new normal”. (Note: The video with Professor Sikora was temporarily deleted from YouTube and only reopened after protests).

– Former Israeli Health Minister Professor Yoram Lass considers the lockdown measures to be “completely disproportionate” and an acute threat to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Covid19 was comparable to a flu epidemic and would never have justified such a political destruction of livelihoods. People had been intimidated and “brainwashed”.

– The Oxford Professor of Epidemiology, Sunetra Gupta, argues in a recent interview that the lethality rate of Covid19 is likely to be below 0.1% and that many people have already come into contact with the virus without forming antibodies.

– A staff member of the German Ministry of the Interior, responsible for disaster control, together with external experts, wrote an approximately 100-page analysis paper on corona crisis management, which was leaked to the press at the beginning of May and provoked strong reactions. In the analysis paper, Covid-19 is described as a “global false alarm”, as for the general population “there was probably at no time a danger beyond the normal level”. The collateral damage caused by the lockdown is now significantly higher than the discernible benefit and far exceeds the risk potential of coronavirus. In March and April alone, for example, over one million operations were not carried out in Germany. In addition, the data provided by the RKI were “not usable” as a basis for decision-making. The official was subsequently granted leave of absence and was banned from duty because he had produced the paper “without authorisation”.

– A group led by Professor Sucharit Bhakdi has founded the Medical and Scientific Association for Health, Freedom and Democracy (MWGFD), which has already been joined by over 16,000 supporters. At the beginning of June, the group published an appeal to the federal government and all state governments to immediately and completely lift the imposed corona measures (video of the initiative). Professor Bhakdi’s book, “Corona Fehlalarm?”, which will be published at the end of June, is already an Amazon bestseller simply because of the advance orders.

– Rubicon: 250 worldwide expert voices against Corona dogmas

Success stories
Sweden: Sweden did not have a lockdown, compulsory masks, or primary school closures, but relied mainly on the self-responsibility and cooperation of the population. This approach worked well, and Sweden saw only low mortality in the general population during a strong seasonal flu epidemic.

Nevertheless, the overall mortality rate was significantly higher than in neighbouring Scandinavian countries or Germany and is comparable to that in England. The often concealed reason for this is that about three quarters of Swedish deaths occurred in nursing homes and nursing apartments. The median age of Swedish deaths is probably the highest in the world at 86 years.

The Swedish government has apologised for the inadequate protection of nursing patients and announced an investigation. Many media tried to portray this as an alleged “failure of the no-lockdown strategy”, even though nursing homes need targeted protection and do not benefit from a social lockdown.

Incidentally, however, even overall mortality in Sweden remained below the strong seasonal flu epidemics of the last thirty years. Moreover, Sweden should now benefit from a very high natural immunity, especially in view of the latest immunological studies on the actual range of antibody tests (see above).

Florida: Florida introduced only minimal restrictions and no general lockdown, despite numerous senior citizens. Even the popular beaches were reopened early, which was heavily criticized by many US media. Nevertheless, Florida scored very well compared to other states and counted at last about 2300 deaths with 21 million inhabitants, which corresponds to the mortality of Germany.

The governor explained in an interview that, contrary to media reports, the figures from South Korea and Italy made it clear early on that Covid19 was only dangerous for a very small risk group and therefore provided the best possible protection for nursing homes. Nursing homes were even more important in terms of prevention than the clinics themselves, and this strategy had proved its worth. At the end of May, the governor announced that summer camps and youth activities could be carried out without restrictions.

Japan: Japan registered some of the first cases of Covid19 outside China but did not introduce a lockdown. In late March, the Japan Times asked, “Where is the coronavirus explosion?” Bloomberg now reports that this has not happened to date: there were no movement restrictions, restaurants and hairdressers remained open, there were no “tracking apps” and no mass testing of the general population. Nevertheless – or perhaps because of this – Japan now has by far the lowest death rate compared to the G7 industrialized countries.

It is sometimes argued that respirators have been crucial to Japan’s success. But respirators are voluntary in Japan and did not stop the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan, while Sweden, Florida and other successful regions did not use masks in the general population.

Belarus: Of all the industrialized nations, Belarus has probably introduced the least restrictions and even held major events such as the 75th anniversary celebrations of the end of the Second World War. Nevertheless, even after more than three months, Belarus officially counts less than 300 Covid deaths. Long-term president Lukashenko, who had repeatedly described Corona as a “psychosis”, declared in mid-May that the capital Minsk had already passed its peak. The decision to treat Covid19 cases like normal pneumonia was the right one, he said. Whether the Belarusian figures are really correct, however, will ultimately only be shown by the statistics on total mortality.
Further news

Transmission routes: A new report by the US health authority CDC concludes that the virus is mainly transmitted through direct human contact and “cannot spread easily on surfaces. The German virologist Hendrik Streeck was already able to prove that the new corona virus does not or hardly ever spreads via objects and aerosols floating in the air.

Distance rules: Iceland declared the distance rules optional at the end of May and bars and clubs reopened. Switzerland converted the distance regulations into a voluntary recommendation. A Cochrane study from 2011 already showed that there is little evidence to date of the effectiveness of “social distancing” measures.

Operations: According to an article in the British Journal of Surgery, around 28 million operations were cancelled or postponed worldwide during 12 weeks because of corona measures, including many cancer operations.

Years of life: An evaluation of four US professors comes to the conclusion that the lockdown in the USA will cost about twice as many years of life as Covid-19 and was therefore also from a medical point of view a highly counterproductive measure.

Dissemination of corona viruses: A new study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases shows that corona viruses occur “sharply seasonally” between December and April/May.

Virus test: A German mathematician explains why, even with fairly accurate PCR tests, the low remaining infection rates in many countries consist largely of false positives, making the pandemic seem never-ending.

“Second wave”: Studies on a “second wave” are sometimes based on completely unrealistic assumptions such as a constant risk of infection and death across all age groups. Nevertheless, the example of the Hong Kong flu of 1968 shows that the global spread of pandemics can extend over several seasons.

Italy: In Milan, almost 5% of the population already had antibodies against Covid19 in mid-February, i.e. even before the outbreak of the epidemic there. This again indicates that the virus circulated in Europe earlier than previously thought.

Unemployment: The International Labour Office (ILO) estimates that half of the world’s workers or 1.6 billion people are at acute risk of losing their livelihoods as a result of the political corona measures.

Fact check: 13 misleading and false claims about the corona epidemic

Review: Why American life went on as normal during the killer pandemic of 1969

Review: The ‘Great Pandemic Of 1957’ – And Why Nobody Remembers It

The role of the media
Most traditional media, almost all of which are integrated into geopolitical networks, spread massive fear propaganda during the Corona period, as is usually known in connection with wars of aggression or alleged terrorist attacks.

The risk to the general population was greatly exaggerated, government policies were hardly questioned, the situation in hospitals was dramatized, manipulative images were used, campaigns were staged, and protesters were systematically defamed as “idiots”.

Some conservative media did criticize the economically damaging lockdown measures. But the real question will be whether they will also criticize the now planned surveillance measures such as the overall social contact tracing.

Most independent media sooner or later realized that the risk of the coronavirus was exaggerated and politically instrumentalized. Only a few independent media did not realize this, perhaps because they lacked the medical background knowledge.

Some analysts compared Covid-19 to a psychological operation that uses the fear of the virus to bring about political and social change.

US platforms such as Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter carried out extensive censorship of corona issues, deleting critical views even from doctors or limiting their dissemination, as has long been the case with geopolitical issues.

However, modern media users have the possibility to use manipulation-free search engines such as DuckDuckGo and independent video platforms such as Bitchute, as well as to generally use an advertising and tracking blocker on propagandistic media sites.

The Landing AI Social Distancing Detector (Youtube)

Political developments
Numerous observers have already pointed out that the “corona crisis”, which is predominantly politically induced, is or could be instrumentalized for far-reaching social and economic changes.

NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden warned as early as March that governments are using the temporary corona crisis as an occasion or pretext for the permanent expansion of social surveillance and control, thus creating an “architecture of oppression”.

Among the measures currently under discussion or already introduced are

1. the introduction of applications for tracking contacts across society

2. the establishment of units to enforce the persecution and isolation of citizens

3. the introduction of digital biometric ID cards to control and regulate participation in social and professional activities

4. the extended control of travel and payment transactions (cash abolition).

5. the creation of legal bases for access to citizens’ biological systems by governments or corporations (through so-called “compulsory vaccinations”).

More than 600 scientists have warned against “unprecedented surveillance of society” through problematic apps for contact tracing. In some countries, this contact tracing is already carried out directly by the secret service. All over the world, the civilian population has already been monitored by drones and sometimes massive police violence.

In May, Apple and Google added a contact tracking interface to the operating systems of three billion mobile phones, which can now be used by national authorities.

This is despite the fact that a WHO study on pandemic influenza 2019 concluded that contact tracking is not medically useful and “not recommended under any circumstances“. In fact, the epidemiological benefit of such apps is highly doubtful.

It is often argued that contact tracing apps remain “voluntary” and are “compliant with data protection”. However, neither of these arguments is really true in practice.

In several countries, the use of the applications is already mandatory in general or for certain activities. In India, for example, various employers, administrations, landlords and transport companies require the tracing app. In Argentina, everyone who is in “public space” must activate contact tracing.

German politicians have also already spoken out in favour of giving preference to app users when travelling or visiting restaurants. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, for his part, spoke of the use of “sensors” to monitor the distance of children.

In Singapore, fewer people than expected have installed the “voluntary” app, which is why the government now wants to make it mandatory for certain public spaces or services. In some parks, distance control is also monitored by robots.

In Australia, people who do not want to use the app for contact tracking are insulted by the media as idiots and endangerers and thus put under social pressure.The data protection of the allegedly “decentralized” contact tracking is also problematic. The Dutch IT professor Jaap-Henk Hoepmann already explained in April that even supposedly decentralized solutions can be used very easily for monitoring.

The president of the German Informatics Society also suspected, based on the speed of the introduction, that the functions in the devices had “long been in there” and only a little “fine-tuning” was required. He sees the apps as a “Trojan horse“.

Parallel to the introduction of the apps, numerous countries have begun to set up special units to track contacts and isolate citizens.

In the USA, billion-dollar bills have been introduced to establish a national Corona Testing and Tracing Corps with up to 180,000 members. The states of New York and California are already in the process of establishing “contact tracing armies” with up to 20,000 members each. In Washington State, the National Guard is to participate in this, and those who do not cooperate “voluntarily” may be forced to do so.

Italy has also announced the creation of a corps of 60,000 volunteers, and Switzerland and other countries have already begun to build such units. In Germany, mass testing has already taken place in homes under threat of police coercion.

The software for the overall social contact tracing in the USA, Great Britain and possibly in other European countries is provided by the CIA-related technology company Palantir of the US billionaire Peter Thiel. In Israel, contact tracking software from the spy company NSO is used to monitor human rights activists.

A whistleblower who had participated in a training program for contact tracers in the USA described it as “totalitarian” and a “danger to society”.

All these measures are being taken, although the epidemiological benefit is unclear and the WHO explicitly opposed contact tracing, which is otherwise used mainly for serious sexual diseases or food poisoning, which, unlike common respiratory diseases, are easy to track.

In addition to applications and special units for contact tracing, there are still concrete projects or plans for “immunity cards“, with which, for example, the travel and work activities of the population could be controlled. In fact, the EU has been planning to introduce such a vaccination passport since 2018.

Such “vaccination cards” are in turn linked to a worldwide “vaccination programme“, which is also currently being worked on. For example, US billionaire and vaccine investor Bill Gates called for a corona vaccination for “seven billion people”. AstraZeneca is preparing to produce two billion doses of the still untested Oxford vaccine.

Meanwhile, in the economic sphere, there are signs of a digitalisation and centralisation push in favour of a few technology companies, as the American National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), headed by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, demanded in a strategy paper as early as 2019 in order to keep pace with China.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) Davos, which together with the Gates Foundation and Johns Hopkins University was already involved in the well-known coronavirus pandemic exercise “Event 201” in October 2019, called for a global “Great Reset” in this regard to prepare economic and social structures for the 21st century.

Meanwhile, in an Open Letter, several Cardinals and Bishops of the Catholic Church warned that under the pretext of the coronavirus a worldwide panic had been triggered to introduce unacceptable forms of worldwide surveillance and control of the population.

The idea that a pandemic can be used to develop global instruments of surveillance and control is not new. As early as 2010, the American Rockefeller Foundation described a “co-stepping scenario” in a working paper on future technological and social developments, in which today’s developments were anticipated with surprising precision (from page 18).

Creative contributions
– Video: They Live – Coronavirus Edition (Trigger Happy Media)
– Video: Out of Touch – Run for your life (Kevin James)
– Video: What It’s Like to Believe Everything the Media Tells You (JP)
– Video (EN): Coronavirus – The Masterplan (Björn Templ)
– Video (DE/IT): Naples: Freedom has no price (MCC)

They Live – Coronavirus Edition

B. Countries and regions


– Denmark: In Denmark, it became known through leaked e-mails that in March, contrary to political representations, the health authority spoke out against a lockdown and wrote: “The Danish health authority continues to believe that Covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease, as it has neither a normally serious course nor a high mortality rate. Furthermore, an actual lower reproduction rate has not been published to justify the lockdown for political reasons. The Danish Parliament has now decided to have a commission of experts investigate government policy.

– Norway: The Norwegian Prime Minister publicly admitted that she panicked in March and that most of the lockdown measures that had been decided upon were probably unnecessary. In Norway, too, it became known that even before the lockdown, the reproduction rate fell towards the stable value of 1. In case of a “second wave”, a much gentler strategy without a lockdown would have to be chosen.

– Sweden: Despite enormous international pressure, Sweden got through the Corona period without a lockdown (see above): Total mortality was within the range of earlier strong flu waves. 75% of deaths occurred in nursing homes and apartments, for which the government launched an investigation. International media have tried to portray this as a “failure of the Swedish strategy”, which is not correct, as nursing homes need targeted protection and do not benefit from a general social lockdown.

– Schools: Both Finland and Denmark did not observe an increase in corona cases after the reopening of their schools. Sweden kept its primary schools open.


Medical aspects:
– After about four weeks of relative excess mortality, Switzerland has already been in a state of mortality below average since mid-May. The cumulative mortality since the beginning of the year is in the range of a normal flu season and far below the high flu season of 2015 (see graph below). Around 50% of deaths occurred in nursing homes that did not benefit from a lockdown. The age median of the deaths is around 84 years, which is even slightly above the average Swiss life expectancy.

– A total of 130 test-positive deaths occurred in the canton of Zurich. More than half of these (78) occurred in nursing homes. Again, slightly more than half of these deaths (40) occurred in two nursing homes, which had to admit Covid19 patients from hospitals and were in part unable to isolate them sufficiently.

– The ETH Zurich has now reformulated its study, according to which the decline in the spread of Covid19 already began before the lockdown, several times in order to no longer openly contradict the Federal Council. But the result remains the same: the lockdown was medically unnecessary and socially counterproductive. The forecasts of the authorities and universities were based on assumptions that were in part completely unrealistic.

– Researchers at the Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne presented a study in which they warned of the risk of a “second wave” that could overwhelm Switzerland. The main author of the study, Professor Jacques Fellay, is also a member of the Federal Council’s Corona Task Force and a proponent of a corona vaccine. However, an independent analysis of this study has shown that it is based on completely unrealistic assumptions and assumes, for example, a constant risk of infection and death for all age groups.

– Medical entrepreneur Stephan Rietiker of Inside-Corona comes to a devastating conclusion with regard to the corona management of the Federal Council. The Federal Council has largely ignored the findings of its own pandemic commission and has made grotesque wrong decisions with serious consequences for the population and the economy. An unsuitable “containment strategy” had been pursued in the naive belief that the time until a vaccine could be “bridged”. The planned general “contact tracing” would swallow up vast amounts of money and in the end “fail miserably”. It is high time to repeal the emergency law and hold the decision makers accountable.

– The Aargauer Zeitung reported on the alleged first child who “died of the coronavirus”. In fact, the infant, who had been flown in as an emergency from Macedonia, died of meningitis not caused by coronavirus.

– In May, the NZZ published a report in which it once again spread the false news that Corona had brought the Canton of Ticino “to the brink of disaster”. In fact, there were no serious problems outside the nursing homes in the Canton of Ticino either.

SRF TV chief editor Tristan Brenn defended himself against accusations that SRF was spreading propaganda about Corona. Shortly afterwards, a wheelchair-bound participant in a Corona demonstration drew attention to how he had been abused by SRF for propaganda.

Political aspects:

– In Switzerland there have been weekly corona and basic rights demonstrations in Bern, Zurich and other cities since April. In some cases, considerable police violence occurred, see “Corona repression in Switzerland“. The participants in these demonstrations were mostly defamed by state-controlled media as confused or extremists.

– The Federal Council plans to convert the existing emergency ordinances into urgent federal legislation, against which an online petition has been launched.

– At the end of May, the Federal Council adopted a legal basis for the “Corona Tracing App“, which must be approved by parliament in the summer. Apple and Google have now equipped their mobile operating systems with a corresponding interface. Use of the app should remain “voluntary” (see above).

– The Canton of Zurich and several other cantons have already set up centres for overall contact tracing, consisting of staff from the police and public health department, who are to contact potentially “infected” persons and place them in quarantine. The experiences of March and April had shown that the centre would have to be greatly expanded or outsourced in the future.

– A survey conducted by the University of Applied Sciences Winterthur ZHAW revealed that 40% of the Swiss population fear increased surveillance through “corona apps”. Nevertheless, a majority planned to use the app for contact tracking.

– US billionaire and vaccine investor Bill Gates made a donation of 900,000 dollars to the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products Swissmedic in February 2020 for “projects in Africa”.

– Switzerland will support GAVI, the global vaccine alliance supported by Bill Gates, with CHF 30 million for the development of a corona vaccine.

– The corona-critical doctor from Aargau, who was brutally arrested in April by a special police unit and temporarily admitted to psychiatric care, called for an external administrative investigation into his case, which the government has now initiated. It had already become known beforehand that, contrary to the police’s assertion, the doctor had neither relatives nor authorities

Cumulative mortality compared to expected value (2010-2020, FSO / Stotz)[/caption]

Germany and Austria
– In Germany and Austria, there has been no significant excess mortality since March. In fact, corrected for population, Germany even showed a slight drop of mortality rate below average since the beginning of the year.

– In Austria, as in Denmark and England, it became known through leaked protocols that the lockdown was politically motivated and that the majority of health experts were against it: These recommended to Chancellor Kurz already in March to abandon the message “very dangerous virus”, because the virus was already widespread and not dangerous for the majority of the population.

– In Germany, almost one million operations were cancelled by the end of May due to the corona lockdown. German oncologists warn of delays in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer due to the lockdown. Cancer is a “far greater danger than COVID-19”, emphasised the medical associations.

– German pediatricians report massive violence against children due to the lockdown. They saw injuries as usual only after car accidents, including bone fractures or shaking traumas. The number of calls to the child protection hotline is rising sharply.

– The Berlin forensic scientist Professor Michael Tsokos reported on “corona suicides” of people who are afraid of infection or believe they are infected. Professor Tsokos criticized the panic-mongering and spreading of “horror scenarios” by the media and some virologists. He fears that the “infectiological pandemic” will now be followed by a “psycho-social pandemic”. In fact, suicides and attempted suicides in Berlin have already “increased dramatically” in the first quarter.

– Economic experts expect about 10,000 additional insolvencies of companies in Germany until 2021 due to the political corona measures.

– In German cities, some of the largest corona and basic rights demonstrations in Europe have taken place since April, with up to 25,000 participants. However, there was also some serious police violence, for example in the arrest of the vegan celebrity chef Attila Hildmann or the 68-year-old former GDR civil rights activist Angelika Barbe. In addition, there have been arson attacks and in some cases life-threatening attacks on demonstrators and media people in Germany by mostly black-masked groups who apparently do not seem to fear state persecution.

Werner Winterstein, the grandson of an Austrian Jewish Minister of Justice who was murdered by the Nazis, took part in a demonstration of basic rights in Vienna and declared that he was “shocked by the quiet seizure of power by elements who speak of ‘new normality’ on the fringes of the democratic model. The division of citizens into different categories due to Corona and the creation of a new denunciation are dangerous developments. He observed a lack of moral courage and submission to authority. The planned corona apps are “in the direction of a total surveillance state” and should be rejected.

United States

– In the USA, there were about 100,000 test positive deaths by the end of May. However, the overall mortality since the beginning of the year has been in the range of the strong flu season of 2017/2018 (see chart below). At least 42% of deaths occurred in nursing homes, which account for 0.6% of the US population and did not benefit from a general lockdown.

– In those states that did not introduce a lockdown or lifted it early, there was no increase in mortality, according to a study by JP Morgan.

– An evaluation by four US professors comes to the conclusion that the lockdown in the USA will cost about twice as many years of life as Covid-19.

– More than 600 doctors warned US President Donald Trump in an open letter about the dangers of an extended lockdown. The lockdown was itself a major medical catastrophe (mass casualty incident). Outside of New York City, not a single US city had been particularly affected by Corona.

– In another open letter to US Vice President Mike Pence, American doctors call for the rapid opening of society. The danger of Covid-19 has turned out to be much less than originally assumed. The risk groups are known and can be protected in a targeted manner. A safe immunization of society is also possible without vaccination. The media had unnecessarily terrorised the population, causing a sharp increase in desperation and suicide intentions.

– Most of the US Army field hospitals, built for a total of 660 million dollars, closed again in May without having treated a single patient.

– A Californian trauma doctor explains in an article that there were more attempted suicides in May than normally in a whole year, and that suicides already far exceed coronary deaths in California.

– In the severely affected state of New York, an independent investigation was called for to order the governor to require nursing homes to accept corona patients. In New York nursing homes, there have been over 5000 deaths. There were also such orders in the heavily affected states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

– New York’s largest hospital association has announced an investigation into the use of invasive ventilators. In April it became known that US clinics receive high premiums if they admit Covid-19 patients and connect them to ventilators, although experts warned long ago of the dangers of invasive ventilation. A New York nurse spoke of a “mass murder“.

– In Washington State, the health authorities confirmed that even murder victims were counted as “coronary deaths” if they tested positive for the coronavirus. The New York Times also listed a murder victim on its front page for “corona victims”. Even George Floyd, who was killed by a policeman at the end of May, tested positive for Corona.

– By the end of May, more than 40 million people in the USA were unemployed. It is estimated that around 42% of the jobs lost will not be opened again and that the worst recession since the Second World War will occur (see below).
US billionaires saw a $434 billion increase in wealth through “Corona”.

USA: Overall mortality in 2017/18 and 2019/2020 (population adjusted). Source: NCHS / Twitter

USA: Job loss in recessions since 1945 (BLS / CRB)

Great Britain
– In England and Wales, the excess mortality rate in March and April was approximately 46,000. This is similar to the strong flu outbreaks of 1999 and 2000 (see graph below). However, the ONS states that almost 30% of this excess mortality is not due to the coronavirus.

– By the beginning of May, for example, 8,000 more people had died in their own homes than usual, and 80% of these deaths, according to the death certificate, had nothing to do with the coronavirus.

– In British nursing homes alone, there were 30,000 excess deaths by the beginning of May, but only 10,000 of these Covid-19 deaths were recorded on the death certificate, according to Cambridge Professor David Spiegelhalter. In England and Wales, for example, around 10,000 additional dementia patients without corona infection died in April due to weeks of isolation.

– Similar to Northern Italy and New York, the fatal decision to transfer corona patients from hospitals to nursing homes was taken in England, and the corona virus spread rapidly within the health care system itself.

– However, most of the additionally built field hospitals remained largely empty.

– The influential computer model of epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, which predicted hundreds of thousands of deaths, turned out to be highly flawed and unrealistic in an independent analysis by software and modelling experts. Ferguson had to resign as government advisor after he himself broke the lockdown to receive his married lover.

Analysis: Who controls the British Government response to Covid-19? (Part 1) and COVID-19: The Big Pharma players behind UK Government lockdown (Part 2)

– In Great Britain, the biggest economic recession since the “Great Frost” of 1709 (during the Little Ice Age) is looming on the horizon.

Positive anecdote: The oldest tailor in Great Britain survived the corona virus at the age of 96 after not eating for ten days.

Mortality in 2020 compared to the strong flu waves of 1999 and 2000 (adjusted to the population and postponed). Source: ONS / OffGuardian[/caption]

South America and Africa
After the corona spread in Europe and the USA subsided, many media focused on the situation in South America, especially in Brazil. However, the fact is that Brazil, with 36,000 deaths per 210 million inhabitants so far, is in a better position than most European countries including Switzerland and is comparable to Germany.

In other Latin American countries such as Ecuador, dengue fever with similar symptoms is spreading in addition to coronavirus, which can lead to a double burden on the health care system. Nevertheless, in Peru, for example, it has been found that 80% of confirmed corona cases remain without symptoms.

Some media reported about allegedly “round the clock” crematoria in Mexico City. A youtuber living in Mexico then visited the city and the hospitals, funeral homes and crematoria there, all of which were very little in operation.

In general, countries in South America and Africa have had a significantly lower corona mortality rate than Europe and the USA, which could be due to the younger population or climatic factors. In contrast, the World Bank expects up to 60 million victims of poverty due to global political corona measures.