We welcome Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen to the Kla.TV interview.
We are pleased to be able to give you a platform today to present your views on the current reports from
ARD and Tagesschau on compulsory measles vaccination.
First, we would like to briefly introduce you: You were born and raised in Germany, studied medicine in the USA and Munich
and, after completing your specialist training, worked as a general internist in your own practice from 1997 to 2012.
At the same time, you began scientific work on evidence-based medicine, patient safety and medication safety.
In 2006 you were appointed Professor of General Medicine at the Paracelsus University of Salzburg.
This was followed by further professorships at the University of Witten-Herdecke and at the Medical University of Vienna.
In 2013, you received the David Sackett Prize for evidence-based medicine and were also the Chair of the German
Network for Evidence-based Medicine from 2019 to 2021.
You are also the author of the textbook "Wissenschaftskompetenz in der Medizin" and the book "Die Angst- und
Lügen-Pandemie" on dealing with the coronavirus crisis.
You also have 100 internationally listed specialist publications.
For years, you have denounced the conflicts of interest of doctors and scientists that contribute to a
whitewashing of the effectiveness of medical interventions.
You were repeatedly criticized for this, but your criticism was nevertheless appreciated.
You report in your book that scientific discourse has only been impossible since the coronavirus.
During the coronavirus pandemic, you dared to publicly question the coronavirus measures and warn of their fatal consequences.
They risked and lost their professorship at the University of Vienna and shortly afterwards also their
chairmanship of the German Network for Evidence-Based Medicine.
But you were not dissuaded.
You were also active again after Corona and have expressed criticism of compulsory measles vaccination.
For example, with a presentation at a press symposium on the "Measles Protection Act".
Your conclusion to the question: "Is the measles vaccination harmful?" was: "The benefit-harm ratio from
the perspective of the individual child, and that is the issue, is definitely negative."
Recently you wrote an open letter to the German Minister of Health Nina Warken.
On February 26, 2026, you were the topic of discussion in the ARD program "Panorama" on the subject: "Measles: How
opponents of vaccination are sabotaging compulsory vaccination". Dr. Sönnichsen, how did this come about?
Yes, how did that come about?
I was called by a journalist from Norddeutscher Rundfunk and was told that we wanted to make a balanced report
on the pros and cons of compulsory measles vaccination.
Would you be prepared to take part and appear for an interview?
And then I said, yes, in principle I am of course happy to contribute.
And I am pleased that there is obviously a plan here to actually initiate a debate on this compulsory
vaccination, which is quite controversial after all - and not just among anti-vaccinationists, by the way.
And I'm not an anti-vaccinationist myself, I'm a critic of vaccination, and above all
I'm a supporter of evidence-based medicine.
And with every vaccination, including of course the measles vaccination, you have to take
a close look at what the pros and cons are.
What is the study situation? What is the epidemic situation? And is vaccination justified?
Does it make any sense at all? How effective is it? What side effects are associated with it?
And is it proportionate to the potential harm caused by measles? This debate must be held.
Yes, the program itself was far from balanced.
I quote from the program, they then talk about: "Not to forget the measles.
Just 50 years ago, children in Germany were regularly dying from it."
And then it continues: "Measles can have serious consequences or even be fatal."
And then a Dr. Hartig is quoted: "We in Germany no longer know this - because we vaccinate the children.
Worldwide, we have several thousand deaths from measles every year."
What can you tell us about the dangers of measles?
Well, measles is of course not a completely harmless disease, that has to be said quite clearly.
However, and here we have very good data from the USA, because in the USA the measles notification requirement, i.e. measles
as a notifiable disease, was introduced as early as 1912.
In contrast to Germany, where measles notification has only been mandatory since 2001.
In other words, it was introduced at a time when more or less the entire population had already been vaccinated.
The US figures show that measles mortality had fallen to almost zero by the early 1960s.
In any case, even if you follow the figures further into the vaccination period, you don't see any further drop in
the number of deaths, but they simply continue to fall gradually, just as they have already fallen before.
So we don't see any influence at all from the introduction of the vaccination.
It has to be said that when people today talk about children dying of measles 50 years ago, as they did in the
Panorama program, that is not a legitimate comparison.
Compared to 50 years ago, i.e. the 1950s, 1960s or even earlier, before the introduction of
vaccination, the situation in Germany was completely different.
That was still the post-war period, we didn't have the medical care we have today, we
didn't have the hygiene conditions we have today.
I still remember when we visited my grandmother in Mainz, the water came out of the tap brown.
So we simply have a completely different situation today.
And to cite the measles death figures from the 1950s and 1960s now to justify compulsory measles vaccination is simply absurd.
We actually have to look at the data that is currently available. And we have virtually no measles cases.
On a long-term average, i.e. if you look at the last ten years, we have an average of 330 measles
cases per year. Out of a population of 83 million.
In other words, this disease doesn't play any role at all at the moment.
Vaccination advocates always say, yes, that's because everyone has been vaccinated. But that's not true.
So over 50 percent of the so-called herd immunity that we uphold today still comes from the population that
experienced measles, namely all those born before 1973.
And that is still 50 percent of the population.
This means that 50 percent of the population still has natural measles protection, which
is much better than vaccination protection.
Someone who has had measles once in their life is immune to it for the rest of their life.
The vaccination only has an effectiveness, a real effectiveness of 80 to 85 percent.
There is a Cochrane review on this.
So it's not as if I'm making these figures up as I go along, but these are observational studies that
have been very meticulously scientifically evaluated.
The RKI and the vaccination propagandists in Germany always claim that vaccination effectiveness is 98 percent.
Unfortunately, this is not true. The seroconversion rate is 98 percent.
Can you explain that again? What is seroconversion?
Seroconversion, that is, if you vaccinate someone and then measure the antibodies, they rise.
However, they naturally increase much less than if someone has been through the disease.
And this increase in antibodies is not a reliable protection either.
This means that it is wrong to use seroconversion rates for vaccine effectiveness. You have
to measure the real vaccination effectiveness.
But if you look at measles cases versus measles complications and effectiveness of vaccination in preventing fatal
events or preventing complications, then of course you have to look at both sides of the coin.
And that means you also have to look at the side effects of these vaccinations. And this is being handled completely wrong.
RKI and also, this did not come out very clearly in the Panorama program, but this is how it is usually done.
If 10,000 people fall ill with measles, there are so and so many complications.
Which is not true, because the figures are based on the 1960s.
We don't have any current figures from Germany.
But 10,000 measles cases are compared with 10,000 vaccinated people.
But that is a milquetoast calculation, because there are not 10,000 measles cases, there are
only 230 measles cases per year, last year now.
On the other hand, there were 1.2 million vaccinations last year.
This means that far more vaccinations are given than there are measles cases.
And therefore, even if the complication rate of measles is higher than the complication rate of vaccination,
in absolute terms there are many more complications after vaccination than after measles.
Yes, the Panorama program says that there are no frequent and severe vaccination side effects . What do you say to that?
Yes, that's wrong. That's an outright lie.
So every year around 100 to 150 serious adverse reactions to vaccines are reported to the Paul Ehrlich Institute.
So, the Paul Ehrlich Institute analyzes these cases and there is an analysis of the decade from 2001 to 2012.
And in the cases that have been reported, an average of around 120 serious cases per year, not the minor
cases, which are not even counted, yes, serious cases.
Even the Paul Ehrlich Institute says that a causal link with the vaccination is possible or probable in about half of the cases.
So then we are, let's say of the 120, let's assume the Paul Ehrlich Institute is right, yes.
However, we know that the Paul Ehrlich Institute always plays down its claims.
In other words, there is a tendency to trivialize vaccination and deny vaccine damage.
But let's assume that there are really only 60 that are actually causally linked to the vaccination.
So, on top of that, we have an underreporting of about 10 to 20 to 1.
And this is also the case, as the Paul Ehrlich Institute itself admits in its publications...
Underreporting means what then?
Every tenth to every twentieth case of vaccination side effects is only reported.
Yes, so now we can take the 600 times 20, then we are at 1,200, at 1,200 side effects.
And what also suggests that these side effects are not so rare are studies such as the
Henry Ford study, which was recently published.
This has shown that vaccinated children have a significantly higher risk of chronic diseases than unvaccinated children.
Yes, almost 60 percent of vaccinated children had at least one chronic illness, compared
to only 18 percent of unvaccinated children.
So these vaccination side effects are not that rare.
And if we do the math again, yes, we have 1,200 serious vaccine side effects, of which about 5 to 10 percent are only reported.
And we have 1.2 million vaccinations that are carried out every year, approximately.
So one birth cohort is vaccinated and then vaccinated again.
This means that one birth cohort in Germany is around 650-700,000 children.
If they were all vaccinated twice, we would have 1.4 million vaccinations.
No, but we haven't. There are a certain number of people who refuse the vaccination and then find ways to get around it.
So let's say 1.2 million vaccinations - 1,200 vaccine injuries.
This means that every thousandth child is affected by a vaccine injury.
That's quite a lot. So that would...
And that's quite a lot.
I mean, of course there's a very good chance that my child will be one of the 999 where nothing happens.
But I think you have to look at it in relation to the benefits of the vaccination.
And the benefit, i.e. the individual benefit of the vaccination, is currently zero.
Because there are no measles cases, yes, but it's a different story when parents decide that they want to
move to Nigeria with their baby and work in the bush.
You can still discuss it, yes, measles is still endemic there, whether it makes sense to vaccinate the child.
But for a German child, the benefit-harm ratio is clearly negative.
So that's my reasoning. I now issue vaccination exemptions.
My argument is a relative contraindication.
In medicine, this is defined as a high probability that the harm of the medical intervention is greater than the benefit.
And the figures for Germany are perfectly clear.
So the vaccination has a higher potential for harm than benefit for a healthy German
child in the current epidemiological situation.
If, so now we can discuss it.
Yes, of course, yes, that's only because everyone has been vaccinated. Yes, maybe.
But for me, it's the individual child sitting in front of me that counts.
Yes, you vaccination advocates don't accept that.
They say it's a collective risk. We need herd immunity. How would you deal with that?
And 50 percent of herd immunity is still due to people who have had measles.
So it's a milquetoast calculation that this is a merit of the vaccination.
There are also other authors who say that herd immunity only exists through the naturally contracted disease
and not through vaccination. Would you subscribe to that?
I would agree with that, yes, because vaccine effectiveness is not 100 percent.
So our immunity situation in the population is getting worse every year due to the vaccination, because of the
50 percent of the population who still have natural measles protection, one million die every year.
And people who are vaccinated to 80, 85, 90 percent or even 95 percent and those who then only
have 80 to 85 percent protection will move up.
And can we then assume that measles cases will skyrocket again in the future?
That is quite conceivable.
Because as a rule, when the infections go up, as we have seen with corona, it is blamed on the
unvaccinated. That would be a reversal of blame.
Exactly, that's how it is. Yes, so of course the unvaccinated also contribute, but the vaccinated also contribute.
Yes. Now you are certifying that the children are fit for vaccination as far as the measles vaccination is concerned.
You also advertise it openly on your website. What prompted you to take this step?
Well, I don't advertise it, I give people balanced information.
And I also discuss the pros and cons of vaccination with people who come to me because they are critical of
vaccination or because they are wondering whether they should comply with this vaccination obligation.
So I'm not against vaccination in principle. I have to emphasize that very clearly at this point.
But you have to look at the individual situation of each person and then you have to
decide, do I want this or do I not want this.
And the patient must have the last word.
That's why I wrote to Ms. Warken, because in response to Kennedy's criticism, she announced on the website of the
Federal Ministry of Health: "In Germany, patient autonomy and freedom of therapy are guaranteed by the Basic Law.
And then I ask myself, how can it be that measles vaccination is compulsory?
That's not patient autonomy, that's state coercion.
And at the moment, this governmental control is definitely not justified.
So if the majority of parents actually decide that we will no longer vaccinate our children and then there is a dramatic
increase in measles cases, then we need to think about it again.
But I don't see that situation. It won't happen either.
And the scaremongering that is now being spread about measles is definitely not justified.
So please don't misunderstand me. Measles can be a serious, severe illness. That is quite possible.
But you have to weigh up the risks.
And then, what is most important to me, the decision as to whether I want to expose my child to the measles
risk or the vaccination risk must lie with the parents.
It cannot be that the state takes over.
Yes. This ARD program also reports that you earn money from these vaccination certificates.
For the audience's benefit: What does a doctor earn in return for a vaccination?
Well, I make a fair amount of money from the measles certificates I issue compared to the time I spend.
Well, I don't issue standard certificates, but each certificate is issued by me individually
after about an hour's consultation with the parents.
This means that the pros and cons of the vaccination are discussed during the
consultation and the risks of measles are discussed.
And not only in Germany, but also when traveling to endemic areas, for example.
Then I take a very detailed medical history from the family.
I determine the possible existing risk factors for vaccine damage.
And from this overall consultation, the question is then answered at the end: do we as parents want to have our
child vaccinated or do we want to be exempt from vaccination?
And then I write a corresponding expert opinion.
And this report is individually tailored to the child and the family history, the risk factors.
That means I spend about an hour and a half on each measles test. And I get paid appropriately for that.
So I would get rich from other things. Yes, if I wanted to get rich, I would have vaccinated against coronavirus.
That's where you get really rich as a doctor. I had colleagues who opened up their practice again on Saturday and did
300 coronavirus vaccinations and collected 7,500 euros for it.
Yes, in one morning, just quickly. And they probably kindly gave 200 euros of it to their helper.
So I don't think there's any need to discuss it.
Being a doctor is my profession, it's my work, it's my working time. And it is adequately remunerated.
I'm not asking for huge sums of money for this certificate. Lawyers earn more.
And pediatricians earn most of their money, or many pediatricians earn most of their money, from vaccinations and U-tests.
Yes, for both measures there is very, very little evidence that they really do children any good.
So it's not just about measles... The other childhood vaccinations...
We could extend the conversation for a while, we could also discuss it.
Yes, we're already coming to the end. One last question.
It's basically only five percent who don't want the vaccination. Maybe it's ten.
Why are we chasing after this small percentage?
I believe that there is a certain principle behind this.
That's the principle behind it: The state creates, the citizen must obey.
So that is certainly a point. Then, of course, it's about business.
The aim is to prevent so-called vaccination fatigue through state coercion.
I believe that compulsory vaccination will ultimately have the opposite effect.
I believe that the pressure to vaccinate, especially in the coronavirus era, but also the measles vaccination
requirement, which was already in place before coronavirus.
The Measles Protection Act was passed by Spahn in 2019.
I believe that this achieves the opposite.
People become sensitive when they are forced to do something.
Then they ask themselves: Why? Why is this necessary?
Above all, most people can see that there is no measles. So nobody experiences measles.
Every now and then, some small outbursts are reported in the media.
But most of our 83 million inhabitants are experiencing this first-hand: there is no measles.
That's what you actually observe.
And that also corresponds to reality, yes, there are no measles except for individual cases, which are probably primarily
imported from countries where measles is still very common.
Which, of course, is also a very important argument against compulsory vaccination in Germany.
So it is said, so to speak, that we want to make Germany measles-free.
Yes, we won't get Germany free of measles if we are also a country of migration and all people from all over the world are
allowed to come to us - which I have nothing against, so I don't want to get into that discussion now - so compulsory
vaccination in Germany won't eradicate measles in the world.
So that's another German arrogance that can hardly be surpassed.
Yes, so how can you imagine that you want to eradicate measles by making vaccination compulsory in Germany?
That's just ridiculous. Measles cannot be eradicated with this vaccination.
It was... in the Panorama program, the first example cited was the smallpox vaccination as the
savior that led to the eradication of smallpox.
That, too, can certainly be questioned. But I don't want to go into that in detail now.
In any case, it is safe to say that measles is highly unlikely to be eradicated by the measles vaccine because the reservoirs
in the world are far too large to achieve eradication.
Yes, Dr. Sönnichsen. Thank you very much for this assessment and your answers to this Panorama program, so that people can create
a more balanced picture for themselves, if the program has not managed to report in a
balanced way. Thank you very much and all the best!
Yes, with pleasure, with pleasure! Thank you too!
Kla.TV: Free. Independent. Uncensored.