Corona false positive?

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
quality control This article was based on formal and / or substantive defects on the quality assurance side of the editorial Medicine entered. Please help fix the shortcomings in this article and join the discussion there . The minimum requirements for medical articles are to be met, thereby avoiding a possible deletion of the article or article passages within four weeks.
Medical editors

Corona false positive? Dates, Facts, Backgrounds is a non-fiction book by the medical doctor Sucharit Bhakdi and his wife, the biochemist Karina Reiß , which was published in paperback and e-book on June 21, 2020 by Goldegg Verlag . In view of the publication date, the level of knowledge up to May 2020 was given in the book. For nine weeks (as of August 2020) it was Spiegel's bestseller in the “Non-Fiction Pocket Book” category and also reached number 1 on the bestseller lists for non-fiction books in Austria and Switzerland. According to Bhakdi, "85 percent" of the time was written by his wife. According to experts, the medical statements made in the book are considered tendentious or not verifiable. Statements from the book have also been picked up by conspiracy theorists .

content

The introduction gives an overview of the beginning of the pandemic , which the authors did not describe as such , general facts about coronaviruses are summarized. The authors characterize their point of view with drastic adjectives (“terrible”, “draconian”, “surreal”, “countless” dead). Dressed in a rhetorical question , the authors convey their conclusion from the official Chinese statistics of only 5,000 deaths in a population of 1.4 billion people: The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 or the disease it causes, COVID-19, are not as dangerous as is thought. In relation to Germany, they complain that they have accepted the "collapse of social life and the economy" as they call it.

In the following, the authors take the view that a statement on the dangerousness of SARS-CoV-2 was initially not possible. The reasons given are deficiencies in data collection . Politics and the media had given a “distorted” and “misleading” picture. The new virus had been searched for "specifically"; in the case of positive test results, no distinction was made between infection and disease in the presence of virus material, and the danger to the world was overestimated. Every death with a positive test result was also counted as a person who died of the virus, against medical guidelines. Too little is being autopsied . A French study from March 19, 2020, which had not been refuted by then, had proven the comparability with other coronaviruses and thus the relative harmlessness. Furthermore, the first test procedure developed by Christian Drosten is criticized for its unknown sensitivity and specificity and is not declared to be valid . The epidemic in Europe came to an end in mid-April in Germany, and further tests mainly yielded false-positive results. After the third week of April at the latest, “all testing should have stopped”. In addition, the tests should have taken place promptly on large and representative population groups, which did not happen, and the criteria for testing should not have been changed. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) and the health authorities are accused of “chaos, lack of planning and scientific ineptitude”. Only the Heinsberg study is praised, it proves the low mortality rate. On alleged by the authors high number of unreported cases if it were a "laboratory pandemic" that grow with the number of targeted testing. The number of deceased is shown as minimal using the example of the age cohort of the over 80-year-olds, immediately afterwards the unsubstantiated question is raised as to whether SARS-CoV-2 is about to replace another coronavirus. In comparison to seasonal influenza , the mortality rate is described as "comparable to a classic moderately severe flu wave ". SARS-CoV-2 is therefore not overly dangerous. In other countries such as Italy, Spain, Great Britain and the USA, the same mistakes were made as in Germany, the authors see the high level of fine dust pollution in northern Italy as a factor that needs to be examined with regard to the death rate. The RKI is accused of a lack of responsibility and competence.

In Chapter 3 on the Corona situation in Germany , the authors criticize the perceived “arbitrariness” and “lack of plan” as well as “ alarmism ” with regard to the measures taken by the federal and state governments, inconsistencies in their announcement and enforcement, for example through federalism . Christian Drosten, Lothar H. Wieler , Jens Spahn and Markus Söder are discussed on the basis of their professional qualifications as to the competence for advice and enforcement. Germany should have taken a “special route”. John Ioannidis , on the other hand, is praised for his views on the pandemic . Once again, SARS-CoV-2 is compared in terms of its threat to influenza viruses and claims that the novel coronavirus is "not really dangerous". With reference to the influenza pandemic in 2009 (so-called "swine flu") it is claimed that "only a few hundred" were killed. The spread of the novel coronavirus reached its peak in early / mid-March. On March 23, when the lockdown came, the peak had already been exceeded and the pandemic on May 25 was already over. According to the authors, only measures taken at the end of February could have made a difference. The effect of the lockdown measures is reminiscent of the former GDR . The hospitals have been largely empty and treatments have been postponed. There is no announced second wave. An exponential increase in the number of infections is denied. Regarding the mask requirement, the authors say that everyday masks or mouth and nose protection "do nothing" and dress their opinion on their introduction ("even worse", "stupid") in a rhetorical question. Wearing such a mask brings with it "serious health risks", especially for people with lung diseases; The viruses are also smaller than the mesh size of masks and therefore “fly through”.

Chapter 4 presents details of the capacities of the German health system . With regard to the capacities of intensive care units , Germany is the leader in Europe, and there was no risk of overload, since the vast majority of those infected are not seriously ill. Too many patients were ventilated invasively instead of non-invasively , which meant that the risk of additional pneumonia ( ventilator-associated pneumonia , VAP) was accepted. Aerosols played only a minor role in the transmission of the disease. The rhetorical means again include an attack on Lothar Wieler, President of the RKI, under the heading: “What did our government do right?” There is only a single question mark. The authors then summarize that the German government had proclaimed an epidemic of national scope that did not exist, denied the citizens their maturity and made arbitrary rather than evidence-based decisions. The Chancellor and the members of the Federal Cabinet had violated their oath of office .

The authors claim in Chapter 5 that government decisions to fight pandemics have created " collateral damage ." When weighing up “human life versus human dignity ”, both were sacrificed. The “senseless” and “exuberant” government decisions would have saved only two to a maximum of 15 lives per 10,000 in the group of those over eighty. On the other hand, it is to be feared that they would have claimed human lives. Their consequences are, among other things, the non-treatment and postponement of the treatment of other, also threatening diseases, economic consequences up to the destruction of livelihoods, emotional stress, suicides , educational deficits in children especially from poor families or difficult social conditions as well as "hunger pandemics" and " brutal “enforcement of measures in African countries. They essentially justify this with the health consequences of unemployment , an assumed increase in domestic violence and the consequences for older people who would suffer from isolation, lack of exercise and loneliness, which not only robs them of their quality of life , but also of their lifetime shorten. Life care will made impossible by visiting bans.

The question of Sweden as a role model? (Part of the title of the sixth chapter) is answered in the affirmative. In contrast to the German government, the Swedish government has "good politicians who [...] have the courage to make their decisions on the basis of facts" and "good advisors". In Sweden, people have relied on education and the personal responsibility of the citizens without severely restricting basic rights, while the German press and politicians like Karl Lauterbach and Markus Söder have spoken badly about the Swedish way of doing things. The team of authors tries to back this up with examples from other countries, citing Hong Kong, Iceland , South Korea and Japan . The usefulness of lockdown measures is generally disputed with reference to the Nobel Prize winner for chemistry Michael Levitt . Since the "epidemics" are over, this can be proven by means of the death rate, even if the definition of the death rate is considered incorrect by the authors. In the attached graph, which shows the number of deaths from COVID-19 per million inhabitants, the death rate in Sweden is around five times higher than in Germany. Despite a lockdown, the risk groups were not better protected in many countries, because around half of the victims died in old people's homes and nursing homes: "Nursing homes require targeted special protection, general lockdown measures do not contribute in any way."

In the seventh chapter the question is asked which measures would have been the right ones. In short, the answer is repeated, the statement that one should have consistently protected the risk group, especially in old people's and nursing homes. Then the authors discuss a possible SARS-CoV-2 vaccine under the rhetorical question "Vaccination as a panacea?" And reject it. The antibodies produced by a vaccination cannot "primarily" be said to result in a person's immunity. Another part of the immune system , the so-called "killer lymphocytes" ( cytotoxic T cells ) is widespread and effective, but can neither be detected by tests for the presence of antibodies nor stimulated by a vaccination. Due to cross immunity after infections with other coronaviruses, many people are already protected against severe courses of COVID-19. Therefore, SARS-CoV-2 is "not dangerous to the public". The immune response of older people is often weaker, so that a vaccine must contain active enhancers that would bring the risk of "serious side effects". A lot of vaccinations are useful, these are not. Even with the H1N1 2009/10 pandemic , the development of a vaccine was not necessary. The WHO changed the definition of a pandemic in 2009, shortly before that “harmless” “swine flu pandemic”, so that a pandemic could also be declared for harmless pathogens. While the authors again criticize Christian Drosten for his "fearful" statements at the time, they emphasize that at that time only two people in Germany protested against the mass purchase of vaccines by the federal government and the federal states: the author Bhakdi himself and Wolfgang Wodarg , at the time a board member of Transparency International .

In the eighth chapter, in view of the Corona crisis, the authors state a complete failure of the public media and the established press as the fourth power . You have become the "submissive mouthpiece of the government", have stoked fear and not questioned the RKI figures. An open exchange, for example, between Drosten and Wieler with Bhakdi and Wodarg did not take place. The ENT doctor Bodo Schiffmann ultimately did what the media would have done and posted informative videos on YouTube with “inexhaustible energy” . This was necessary because "system journalism" aroused fears with misinterpreted numbers. There is an "opinion censorship" so that critical voices only have the way to social media , where unpleasant posts, for example those criticizing the WHO, are deleted. The population had become a victim of the fearful media reports that the government had used the pandemic to raise its profile.

In the next chapter Quo vadis? there is a comparison with the final phase of the Weimar Republic . The measures to contain the new type of coronavirus have resulted in, among other things, "arbitrariness in political decisions, massive restriction of fundamental rights, censorship of freedom of expression, synchronization of the media and defamation of dissidents". One feels “reminded of a dictatorship” unless one “slept in history class”. In a quote from Pablo Goldschmidt , reading Hannah Arendt is recommended in order to better understand the current situation.

The final word is a short summary of the content, the appendix names over 200 Internet sources, but only URLs without a title, or the date of publication or access .

reception

In their review of July 16, 2020 on the MTA Dialog online portal . The journal of the medical-technical assistants (MTA) contradicted Hardy-Thorsten Panknin and Ludwig Zahn the representation of the authors. The choice of specialist literature is selective. The authors only used those studies that fit their own reasoning. The way in which the opinions of other scientists are treated as polemical is also criticized . It is worrying that some positions in the book are also represented by conspiracy theorists and system critics . The reviewers write that "playing down the disease (...) hardly seems appropriate until all the facts are on the table".

In his review in the debate magazine The European (June 15, 2020), the philosopher Karim Akerma takes the view that the book has humanistic motifs and is a good starting point to deal with what happened. Akerma agrees with the assessment of the precarious situation in the old people's homes, which he describes as "Gerontolager". Bhakdi's relativizing assessment of Italy is also supported. The mistaken path of the privatization of hospitals ("return at the expense of health"), said Akerma, must be reversed.

Christian Rabhansl from Deutschlandfunk Kultur (August 8, 2020) admits that there are many open questions about the pandemic. According to Rabhansl's contribution, Bhakdi and Reiss open up “an ideal projection surface for all bad reasons - from widespread inability to bad will to a global conspiracy. A book that promises sober facts, but provides a lot of polemics. ”According to Rabhansl, the exact position of the authors remains open in many places -“ except that they are against it. The defining stylistic devices of this book are whispering, rhetorical questions, insinuations and allusions. ”Rabhansl's main criticism is that precisely because of the many uncertainties rightly portrayed by Bhakdi and Reiss, decisive action was necessary, similar to a fire service like Alexander did Unzicker portrayed appropriately in the online magazine Telepolis . In view of the dead in Italy, calling for long-term studies before action, as Rabhansl suggests to the authors, is “cynical”, “as if precaution was something for cowards”.

Dirk Engelhardt from the magazine Der Freitag (August 9, 2020) describes the book's sales success, which seems unusual to him, and cites the opinion of blogs such as Presse Online, who consider Bhakdi to be a “ray of hope”: “The work rolls the story of this dramatic political and medical error and gives those interested a lot of powerful arguments. ”The publisher also supports the view that the enormous demand for the title is also due to“ that the one-sided reporting by the media has created a vacuum into which the book is now burst. "

René Schlott, also from the magazine Freitag , praises the "impeccable vita" of the two authors and asks himself after reading "how the crisis would have gone if the government [...] had consulted [...] with von Streeck and not in Berlin, where the political decisions and how they come about, not only in the case of Corona, are characterized by a shortness of breath and momentum that sometimes makes you dizzy. ”Schlott positively notes that Reiss and Bhakdi name this and many other problem points. However, he would like to see “more depth when reading, a more differentiated argumentation, better prepared data and facts”. The tone of the authors is "alarmist". Schlott speculates that the book was written for a group of readers “who are mainly informed on the Internet anyway and who have their main source of information in so-called social networks ”.

In a joint statement from the Medical Faculty of the Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (CAU), the Cluster of Excellence “Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation” (PMI) and the University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein on August 18, 2020, the book “tendentious statements that calls into question the scientific diligence of medical research in Germany and internationally ”, attested. Since the corresponding medical student body of the CAU in Kiel found a "multitude of facts wrong or greatly abbreviated" in the book, they asked the authors to correct the statements.

The doctor and medical journalist Alan Niederer reviewed the book in NZZ Wissenschaft on August 20, 2020. The questions raised are important and the criticism of the disease management is justified; Bhakdi's criticism of the database, which did not allow an assessment of the death rate, and the criticism of the registration of positive test results as the cause of death from the virus, are correct. Bhakdi is right to be angry about the lack of protection, especially for risk groups, and he is of course entitled to other concerns about government measures. Niederer asks himself whether the book had been critically checked, because in some places the author makes it too easy for himself and the book becomes highly problematic where it leaves the scientific level. "The well-founded criticism of the database (...) becomes an irrational campaign," in which Bhakdi often sarcastically and arrogantly distributes on all sides: The failure of the media is exaggerated, the claim that there is no exponential growth is simply wrong , Suspicions and allegations such as those against Christian Drosten are speculative . In Niederer's opinion, the book lacks an understanding of the roles and responsibilities in fighting pandemics, facts are ignored and the scope for interpretation is narrowed. Bhakdi's view of politics and society is limited: the assumption of stupidity, intention, incompetence and corruption determine his perspective. His appearance at Ken Jebsen shows either kinship or naivety. In the opinion of the reviewer, the peak of unbelievability is reached when Bhakdi claims a violation of fundamental and human rights and compares himself with the Nazi era. However, Niederer does not issue a warning against reading, as the responsible citizen is able to judge the content. The publication of the book and the criticism of it show that Bhakdi's “ populist narrative ” of democracy and the media is wrong.

Michael Wurmitzer sees social media and conspiracy theorists behind the sales success of the book in Standard from August 22, 2020. Bhakdi has been running his own YouTube channel since March, and he also appears "on conspiracy theorists with high-reach channels such as KenFM". Contrary to the assessment of the publisher of Goldegg Verlag, Minoggio-Weixlbaumer, who sees the book fulfilling an "educational mandate" of the publisher, Wurmitzer asks what evaluation the publication had undergone. The lack of involvement of external experts is criticized; Bhakdi's research biography alone is evidence of the presentation.

expenditure

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b 1211316815 - Catalog entry of the German National Library
  2. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 147 .
  3. ↑ book report. Retrieved August 25, 2020 .
  4. ↑ Ostsee Zeitung: Rostock expert counters statements in the book "Corona False Alarm?" , From August 13, 2020
  5. ^ A b c Comments on the publication "Corona false alarm?" In: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel. August 27, 2020, accessed on August 27, 2020 .
  6. ↑ Hardy-Thorsten Panknin, Ludwig Zahn: Corona - false alarm ?: Data, facts, background. In: MTA Dialog, July 16, 2020.
  7. ↑ a b Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 11 .
  8. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 14 .
  9. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 17 .
  10. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 18 .
  11. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 21 .
  12. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 23 .
  13. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 45 .
  14. ↑ a b Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 48.52 .
  15. ↑ Drosten is also approached polemically: “He somehow seems to enjoy warning?” Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 69 .
  16. ↑ A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. March 17, 2020, accessed on August 25, 2020 .
  17. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 55 .
  18. ↑ The WHO came to at least 18,449 deaths on August 6, 2010: WHO: Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 - update 112 from August 6, 2010, accessed on August 30, 2020.
  19. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 66 .
  20. ↑ The size of the particles in the case of droplet infection or infectious aerosols is not discussed: Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 64 f .
  21. ↑ “Aha, that's another explanation. Could be from a vet. ”Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 74 .
  22. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 82 f .
  23. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 86 f .
  24. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 103 .
  25. ↑ a b Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 110 f .
  26. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 113 .
  27. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 117 f .
  28. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 119 f .
  29. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 122 f .
  30. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 125 .
  31. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi, Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm? Data, facts, background . 5th edition. Goldegg Verlag, Berlin, Vienna 2020, ISBN 978-3-99060-191-4 , pp. 142 .
  32. ↑ Hardy-Thorsten Panknin, Ludwig Zahn: Corona - false alarm ?: Data, facts, background. In: MTA Dialog, July 16, 2020.
  33. ↑ Karim Akerma: Corona - did our government act for the good of the people? in: The European, June 15, 2020
  34. ↑ "Corona false positive?" - As if precaution was for cowards. In: deutschlandfunkkultur.de. Deutschlandfunk Kultur , August 8, 2020, accessed on August 15, 2020 .
  35. ↑ Sucharit Bhakdi / Karina Reiss: Corona false alarm ?. Data, facts, background. Retrieved August 17, 2020 .
  36. ↑ PR, press: Bhakdi- The censored Bestsellers- corona false alarm. In: Presse.Online | Latest news. June 28, 2020, accessed August 11, 2020 .
  37. ↑ Literature - Still a success. Retrieved August 11, 2020 .
  38. ↑ René Schlott: Corona, seen differently . In: Der Freitag edition 32/2020, August 9, 2020.
  39. ↑ Alan Niederer: Sucharit Bhakdi: Why his book about Corona is problematic. Accessed August 21, 2020 .
  40. ↑ "Corona false alarm?": How a book without classic PR became a bestseller - derStandard.de. Retrieved on August 29, 2020 (Austrian German).
  41. ↑ In contrast to the entry in the DNB and the title page, the book cover states : “Figures, data and background”, see view from Goldegg Verlag , accessed on August 19, 2020.