Crimes against the people! Lockdown measures are based on unscientific advisory opinions
Politicians and national media keep telling citizens regarding the Corona and Lockdown measures that they should listen to the experts in science and not question anything. But more and more at-tentive observers, including from the scientific community itself, are realizing that the selected experts only serve to support the government's political decisions. There seems to be an urgent need for action here[continue reading]
License: Creative Commons License: Attribution CC BY
04.05.2021 | www.kla.tv/18665
World renowned, leading medical scientist in epidemoligie and Stanford professor John Ioannidis published a study together with Stanford colleague and infectious diesease specialist Eran Benda-vid. It examines the effectiveness of the harsh lockdown measures that have been implemented in varying degrees of severity in almost every country in the world over the past few months. The study was published in the British journal "European Journal of Clinical Investigation". As early as March 2020, Ioannidis warned that damage due to mass quarantine could be, quote, "much worse than anything the Corona virus can do." Back in March, he called the scenarios, pub-lished by politicians and the media of 40 million deaths worldwide if nothing is done science fic-tion. In October, he published a peer-reviewed meta-study in the Bulletin of the World Health Or-ganization. In it, he calculated "an average infection mortality" from Covid-19 of 0.23%, only 0.03% higher than mortality from severe flu outbreaks. By comparison, the Robert Koch Institute boss Wieler and professor Christian Drosten attributed an infection mortality of one percent to Corona. And now in January 2021, the new study that confirms what Ioannidis was still warning about in the spring of 2020. The lockdowns have failed. The consequential harms, even in the older population group, i.e., those whom it was actually intended to protect the most, cannot outweigh any benefits. For example, the proportion of COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes was often higher under stricter measures than under less restrictive measures. Not to mention the momentous impact of isolation or business closures on the rest of the population. This study by Prof. Ioannidis, who is one of the most cited scientists in the world, should really shake the narrative of the benefits of lockdown at its foundation. Instead, the coercive measures are now continuing. The media, however, which as the government's control body should bring to light precisely these inconsistencies between scientific studies and political decisions, remain silent on the matter. On-ly the journalist Boris Reitschuster repeatedly asks critical questions at the Federal Press Confer-ence. For example, why world renowned experts, like Ioannidis, are not heard. The German Chan-cellor responded by saying that scientists are selected according to what is at the heart of the de-liberations. But on the whole, there are also basic political decisions that have nothing to do with science involved. This very dubious, even illegal approach is now also confirmed by an e-mail exchange between the Ministry of the Interior and scientists that became public on February 7, 2021. This shows that Secretary of State Markus Kerber asked the researchers of the Robert Koch Institute and other in-stitutions to develop a calculation model on the basis of which the Ministry of the Interior under Horst Seehofer could justify harsh corona measures. For a year now, politicians and media have been telling citizens over and over again that they should listen to the experts in science and not question anything. But more and more attentive ob-servers, even from the scientific community, are realizing that the selected experts only serve to substantiate the government's political decisions. So are the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina's "ad hoc expert opinions" also part of this scientific work required by the Ministry of the Interior? After all, the 7th ad hoc assesment justified the current hard lockdown, which started at the holidays in December 2020. This report has already been sharply criticized by three high-ranking scientists and described as unscientific. Kla.TV reported on professor Aigner, who left the Academy of Sciences in Mainz in protest be-cause they did not criticize what, in his opinion was an unscientific report by the Leopoldina Na-tional Academy of Sciences . Two other scientists, professors Michael Esfeld and Stephan Luck-haus, resigned from the (Leopoldina) National Academy because a broad, scientific debate was not taking place. Every attempt to bring these significant counter-voices to public scientific discussion has so far been consistently blocked, distorted or censored by all system media. This is not only undemo-cratic and dictatorial, but also a crime against the people, because based on the studies of inde-pendent scientists, the forced closures, with all their devastating consequences, prove to be com-pletely disproportionate and illegal! These unconstitutional excesses and censures give rise to fear of Lockdown measures which have still much worse and serious consequence. This is why civil courage is urgently needed by each and every individual. According to professor Esfeld, our society is in danger of running into an unholy alliance of allegedly scientific findings and coercive, political measures. According to him it is urgently nec-essary to oppose this by educating and informing the public! People must step out of their self-inflicted immaturity. What can individuals do? Everyone can actively demand a public discussion and that the experts are heard: especially that those voices are heard who have been censored up to now: in politics, the media and the judiciary, which are responsible for upholding the principles of the rule of law. In parallel, these suppressed expert voices must be disseminated at the grassroots level: among citizens, authorities, at the par-ty base, and so on. Fear-fueled divisions in society, right down to one's own family, must be overcome by learning to listen to one another again. This is the only way to counteract the rapidly progressing disenfran-chisement of citizens.
E-mailverkehr zwischen Innenministerium und Forschern https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article225864597/Interner-E-Mail-Verkehr-Innenministerium-spannte-Wissenschaftler-ein.html
Prof. Luckhaus verlässt Leopoldina https://de.rt.com/inland/112548-aus-protest-gegen-corona-politik/
Studie von Prof. Ioannidis https://reitschuster.de/post/stanford-studie-kein-nutzen-durch-lockdowns-aber-risiken/