I can back up everything I say.
Original database of the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, which was later shut down.
How many times more deaths? Not 10 percent more deaths than with normal vaccinations, not 20 percent, a factor of 50.
They should have stopped immediately, immediately.
So my conclusion is that the RKI, the Paul Ehrlich Institute, was not even remotely in a position
to assess the danger or safety of these injections.
That was a refusal to work, absolutely, you have to put it that harshly.
And everyone knew that, everyone who was in charge.
"Who knew what about the Covid-19 injection and when? And who should have known what and why?"
This is the title of the following contribution, which Prof. Dr. Werner Bergholz gave at the MWGFD press symposium
"Medicine after Corona - Reappraisal and Vision" on 26.10.24.
Dr. Bergholz is a former professor of electrical engineering at Jacobs University Bremen, partner of ISC; that is "International
Standards Consulting GmbH und Co. KG", expert in the field of quality and risk assessment with many years of experience in
industry and board member of Mediziner und Wissenschaftler für Gesundheit, Freiheit und Demokratie e.V., MWGFD for short."
Yes, thank you very much for letting me present this!
As an electrical engineer, it's not necessarily the most obvious thing to deal with.
But I always tell people I've dealt with chip epidemics, disease chips.
And the way you approach the topic with statistical analyses and think about what is actually
really important here - that is very similar.
I work with these methods. Here we go. I'm going to read out a sentence.
Let me read out a sentence. Yes, good. So.
"Nevertheless, a regulation that initially conforms to the constitution can later become unconstitutional with effect for
the future (note: for the future!) if the legislator's original assumptions are no longer valid because
they are shaken by subsequent findings or developments."
This is a quote from the Constitutional Court's decision on whether the facility-based reporting requirement, i.e. mandatory
vaccination, would be constitutional, and they came to the conclusion that yes, it is, because people who work in care homes,
if they are vaccinated, pose a significantly lower risk, risk of infection, for people who are no longer in such good health.
And that of course has a huge legal impact.
Josef Finger already recognized two years ago that this is the back door in this resolution.
And now that the Osnabrück Administrative Court has submitted this question - is it still constitutional - to the
Constitutional Court, a so-called order of reference, we are curious to see whether they will now exploit this loophole.
For the future! That is a very important sentence.
In other words, they indirectly said, yes, we just didn't know any better at the time this was published, April 27, 2022.
One day later, on April 28, there was a graphic in the RKI weekly report that showed that vaccination effectiveness is zero.
And for people under 60, i.e. those who are affected by it. Zero.
In other words, if this wording is taken seriously, it would have become unconstitutional exactly one day later.
And my task now is to show that this was not the case.
They were deceived, although I leave it open whether they realized that they were deceived.
But some people must have known. And now I'm going to go through this whole corona complex.
So, let's start with the lockdown. It was in March, around the middle of March.
And at the end of April there was a publication from ETH Zurich , which contained a study, a sero-prevalence
study : "This thing is no worse than a medium flu."
Next point, risk assessment or assessment by the RKI - this is in the RKI files - has been upgraded from medium to high.
And not on the basis of any findings, but on instructions. That doesn't work at all!
And the incidences, the so-called incidences, went up, but not because there were significantly more and explosively -
it was said, exponential function, that's like an explosion - but simply because more tests were carried out.
And when the lockdown came into force, the so-called R-value was already going down.
So it was a total waste of time, if you look at it without judgment.
Former Health Minister Spahn must have known, because he is aware of the RKI files and has a
high duty to obtain all possible publications.
I can't expect him to understand medical literature very well, but he has enough employees.
And this was from ETH Zurich, so it was known at the end of April.
He also had to be aware that the incidence figure , which I then (said) when I was on the Health Committee, but only
in November 2020 or October 2020 - it is not a reasonably defined metric because it can be manipulated.
Why? If I test 10,000 people in a county, for example, I get 500 positive (values).
If I test double the number without cause, I get double the number.
So you always have to relate it to the number of people tested.
They didn't do it. I asked our district just for fun.
No, they have no idea how many tests there were. So house number, no more and no less.
The next item was masks.
Christian Drosten knew that they were no good and had no effect.
Why? He said in February that yes, with the masks, he doesn't see it as effective.
Even in September, he said the same thing again at a hearing of the Health Committee.
And yet in June - I think, or at least around that time - the general obligation to wear
masks was imposed against our better judgment.
And I'm an expert on that myself. What goes through the masks?
Because of my work in microelectronics in the clean room , you can measure that directly. It's nonsense.
And the full-body condom that I once wore in a cleanroom, including - of course only the eyes look out - this cleanroom
material, which is much better than such a ridiculous FFP2 mask - such glued-together
stuff with holes of ten micrometers or more...
It's quite clear that if I want to seal a bedroom against mosquitoes but open windows, then I certainly
wouldn't use a wire mesh fence. But that's about it.
I was also a member of this expert commission.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to convey this to my dear colleagues, although I have clearly told them that this is
nonsense and that for elementary reasons a mask is useless for viruses and also for very small suspended particles.
Rapid tests: the same story!
I was also here in the health committee: the error rate, the false positive rate - especially with the
regular tests - is exorbitantly high with a low incidence!
So in the summer of 2020, we still remember that all possible measures, including mandatory masks, were still in force.
90% false positives (tests) at least, maybe even more. And this madness - 45 cycles!
So wherever you look - it's all thin ice or no scientific evidence!
Now we come to the worst of all, the vaccinations.
When was it known that vaccinations do not protect against spread?
December 2020, as stated in the EMA papers.
So I would say that everyone in the government who was involved had a duty to take a very close
look at this and draw the appropriate conclusions.
They didn't do it. It went on like this.
The vaccination had... this was a press conference of the Paul Ehrlich Institute:
Mrs. Keller-Stanislavski had already testified at the end of January, ten dead so far.
Oh, now there's another dead body. This is testimony from the Corona Investigation Committee in Brandenburg.
But it's much worse. September 2021: RKI figures - the source.
I can back up everything I say.
Original database of the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, which was later shut down.
How many times more deaths? Not ten percent more deaths than with normal vaccinations, not 20 percent - a factor of 50!
They should have stopped immediately, immediately!
But that was somehow swept under the table - or under the carpet - as you like.
Severe side effects! Various publications as a source, peer-reviewed , around five percent of those affected!
Let's work out how many there are in Germany.
We are talking about 1 - 2 - 3 million - depending on how you calculate - whether you calculate per dose or per person.
Now it goes on. Can you see that in anything?
Disability: There is no proper data in Germany. But there is in England.
The number of approved disability applications increased in an absolutely wonderful correlation with the time of vaccination
or the start of vaccination - if you call it vaccination.
A perfect correlation . And a considerable one at that. And the same is of course the case in Germany.
Next indication: There has recently been a request to the government from a Ms. Tatti from BSW or the Left Party:
How many more side effects have been reported compared to normal vaccinations?
Factor 20, 21 to be precise. Factor 21.
I had already published the same thing publicly in September 2021.
So the people in charge must have known all this.
And the tip of the matter, of course, is now a personal experience.
I also had the honor of being an expert witness in the so-called soldiers' trial in June, July 2022
in Leipzig before the Federal Administrative Court.
Among other things, we asked the person responsible for approving the vaccinations, i.e. quality control so to
speak, the question: "You can see any objects under the microscope - have you ever looked at that?"
The answer was: "If it's not a peer-reviewed publication, then I'm not interested."
And I say that is a refusal to work.
This man would have been obliged to follow up such tips. As well as all other clues.
They failed to follow up on this - which was then also published, that there was some waste, organic waste, as my
colleague has just described - where it came from. "Nope, we're not interested in any of that."
I asked him various questions, which you would always do with a problem like this.
They refused everything. "Nope, we don't have to do it, we're not allowed to do it, we're not responsible."
So my conclusion is that the RKI, and I also said this publicly afterwards, my conclusion from this experience, thank God I am a
contemporary witness, the Paul Ehrlich Institute was not even remotely, not even remotely in a position to
assess the danger or safety of these injections, because they... that was a refusal to work.
Absolutely, it has to be said that harshly.
And everyone knew that, everyone who was responsible. And there were also violations of the law.
If you want to read up on it, it is not my conclusion, but the conclusion of this expert commission in accordance with Section 5
(9) of the Infection Protection Act - Professor Kingreen from Regensburg, for example, was on it - came to
the conclusion: Massive violations of the Basic Law:
Not covered, for example, that this federal emergency brake; for example, that this
unspeakable... the Chancellor's Round... doesn't work!
And just - the worst thing, so to speak - that Mr. Spahn, and later Mr. Lauterbach, and they all knew this, and that
is also my conclusion, that the Basic Laws could be overridden, bypassing Parliament - is not possible at all!
So let me summarize: All those responsible in higher positions, and this is all verifiable, knew
from the beginning that it was all completely wrong.
And that's what Rainer Füllmich used to call it: Intentional, immoral damage.
That's it. And of course this also needs to be dealt with legally.
And I'm sure my dear colleague next to me will have something to say about that.
It's certainly not as easy as it sounds now.
But there is any amount of evidence that the dear people who were in charge there all failed criminally.
And I say they will even be able to prove intent.
Thank you!