The Measles Protection Act will thus go down in the legal history of the 21st century.
And as an impressive example of how this law was intended to quietly establish a health and vaccination tyranny.
And this under the pretense of science and health protection, under unscrupulous abuse of the law with the blessing of the
Federal Constitutional Court and under shameless abuse of the trust of bona fide citizens, but
probably also of the health authorities and courts.
What is this really about? Certainly not about protecting patients, but at best about
protecting the revenues of the two vaccine manufacturers.
On November 15, 2025, the MWGFD held a press symposium near Passau, directly on the beautiful Danube, on
the topic of "Measles Protection Act under scrutiny".
According to the measles protection law working group, consisting of doctors, scientists and lawyers, the law
unconstitutionally encroaches on physical integrity and parental rights. They are calling for its immediate repeal.
Kla.TV was there live and supports the cause by broadcasting the individual presentations, which are well worth seeing.
Below the program you will find informative flyers on the topic and ways in which you too can support this cause.
Below you can see the article by lawyer Beate Bahner on the topic "10 legal reasons against the Measles Protection Act".
Yes, and with that I would like to move on to the power woman sitting next to me, I would say.
We saw it again yesterday in her sensational presentation, how she rocked this hall.
She is a specialist lawyer for medical law - Beate Bahner.
I almost don't need to introduce them anymore.
She has been working as a lawyer for more than 30 years.
She has represented doctors, therapists and clinics in medical and medical law matters and has written eight medical textbooks
to date, most recently on the coronavirus vaccination, the WHO pandemic treaty and, of course, this important
book "Measles Vaccination and Measles Protection Act".
I can only recommend it to everyone, an important book.
I said yesterday that I don't like reading whole books, but I was able to read this really easily as an
e-book while I was on vacation. It was really good.
So you are a dedicated educator on the dangers of vaccines.
I think it's great that you're part of our team.
And today you are going to give us your lecture entitled "10 reasons why the Measles
Protection Act is an unjust law". Beate, go ahead!
Yes, thank you very much, dear Ronny, especially for organizing this press conference, which I
think has been great so far, even as a participant!
And I know what an incredible amount of work goes into it. Thank you very much!
Of course, and the whole team back here too, the technology, amazing, they've been here
since yesterday and setting up - unbelievable.
Yes, I actually decided very spontaneously this year to write this book: "Measles Vaccination and Measles Protection Act".
It has been on the market for three months, and my title today based on these findings is: "10
reasons why the Measles Protection Act is an unjust law".
That was my conclusion at the end of 464 pages.
The Measles Protection Act will thus go down in the legal history of the 21st century.
And as an impressive example of how this law was intended to quietly establish a health and vaccination tyranny.
And this under the pretense of science and health protection, under unscrupulous abuse of the law with the blessing of the
Federal Constitutional Court and under shameless abuse of the trust of bona fide citizens, but
probably also of the health authorities and courts.
Why am I convinced that the Measles Protection Act is an unjust law?
Because the goals allegedly pursued by this law are either contradictory or unattainable or have
already been achieved and are therefore hypocritical.
The draft law justifies the mandatory vaccination as follows:
"Measles is one of the most contagious infectious diseases in humans.
They are severe and lead to complications and secondary diseases.
Contrary to popular belief, a measles infection is therefore not a harmless disease."
In fact, according to the definition of the EU and the Ministry of Health, measles is now not
just a rare disease, but an extremely rare disease.
When is a rare disease present?
If no more than 50 out of 100,000 (and that is 500 out of a million) are affected.
In Germany, with 83 million citizens, 41,500 patients still suffer from a rare disease.
In the last ten years, we have had an average of one percent of them, about 400 (sometimes it was 10, 20, sometimes it
was 500, 600, let's say 400) measles reports of the disease.
They are not deceased, they are not permanently ill, as Mr. Diemer so beautifully explained, but they are simply registered.
No fatal course, no permanent damage.
And across Europe, the figures from the WHO, the EU section of the WHO, say that five out
of every million people fall ill with measles.
Measles is therefore not just a rare, not just a very rare, but an extremely rare disease.
The claim of a serious, dangerous disease (Prof. Sönnichsen also said this earlier today) is therefore incorrect.
I call it a bold and shameless lie.
The legislator defines the "elimination of measles" as a further objective.
To this end, all WHO countries should set up a national verification commission, which has also been
done in Germany. The NAVCO. And what does NAVCO say?
Measles was eliminated in Germany in 2020, in '21, in '22 and in '23.
They no longer existed, according to WHO criteria.
So why make vaccination compulsory if the disease has already been eliminated anyway?
This is an abuse of the law under the guise of alleged health protection, which is deeply unworthy of a constitutional state.
Another goal of the Measles Protection Act is to achieve a vaccination rate of 95 percent.
But even this vaccination quota, whether it makes sense or not - we've already talked about it - has already been reached.
We have an immunization rate of 97 percent for school entry examinations for schoolchildren.
So why is vaccination compulsory? What is this really about?
Certainly not to protect patients, but at best to "safely protect" the revenues of the two vaccine manufacturers.
And at the same time - Hans Tolzin takes a dim view of this and unfortunately I can't disagree with him - it's about the
goal of the vaccinated citizen at the command of the state.
And this also confirms the legal requirement for two measles vaccinations with a vaccination rate of 95 percent
for the second vaccination, which has reached around 92 percent. Why a second vaccination, please?
Both the Federal Ministry of Health itself and international studies show that the so-called measles antibody and the measles
protection assumed with it is already achieved in at least 92 percent, according to studies
even up to 98 percent, by a first vaccination.
The claimed necessity of a second vaccination for all children is therefore simply a lie.
This second vaccination rate must not actually exceed two to eight percent.
The second vaccination is not a basic immunization, but only intended for the case that the first vaccination has
not yet produced this measles titer. It is unbelievable!
So here too, a blatant misleading of people and thus also for those, at least here definitely, for the second
vaccination, an unnecessary and risky bodily injury and thus for me a criminal demand of the legislator.
Maybe we should just say it like it is.
After all, legislators claim that compulsory vaccination protects vulnerable patients who allegedly cannot be vaccinated.
We do not find out who these vulnerable groups are in the draft law, but we do find them in a marginal number in the Federal
Constitutional Court's incomprehensible decision on daycare centers: Infants, pregnant women and immunocompromised patients.
First of all, there is not a single study that shows that vulnerable patients - and here in particular the
three groups - are somehow actually particularly at risk from measles and have severe illnesses.
As far as babies are concerned, as you have already said, dear Ronny, the protection they actually get when their mothers go
through measles naturally is reduced by the vaccination and so the legislator produces
the vulnerability of the babies themselves.
Pregnant women: Here too, there is not a single study according to which pregnant mothers are particularly at risk from measles.
On the one hand, most mothers between the ages of 20 and 40 are probably already vaccinated
against measles at a rate of 90 to 95 percent.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that unvaccinated pregnant women are exposed to any particular risks, either for the mothers
or for the unborn babies, simply because they are pregnant.
Let's take a little detour to the supposedly dangerous coronavirus disease for pregnant women, which is why - I don't
know if it's prioritized, but in any case - they should definitely be vaccinated as one of the risk groups to this
day - vaccination recommendations actually still exist today.
This really is also unbelievably cheeky and unscrupulous.
You all still don't know about it, but that's why I'm talking about it here today, in this book
and in my previous book on coronavirus vaccination.
The Chronos study - 98 clinics in Germany with more than 185,000 births and pregnant women took part between
April and September 2020 in order to record the risk of coronavirus for pregnant women.
Of 185,000 pregnant women, 247 had a positive test, 14 had a severe course, five of whom were high-risk
patients, none died of corona, not even the babies.
There could not be a rarer and more harmless disease than corona for pregnant women, and I
wonder why it should be any different with measles.
That pregnant women are supposed to be a vulnerable patient group is a fictitious fairy tale.
In the case of immunocompromised patients, it is easy to imagine that they should not be
vaccinated, as is also stated in the specialist information.
A case from my practice, an employee of a subcontractor of Münster University Hospital, requires
dialysis and is therefore definitely immunosuppressed.
He was forced to be vaccinated by Münster University Hospital, although the titer was already
very borderline and has even been proven today.
The man is in his early 50s, so he still belongs to the group that probably had the measles.
He was forced to be vaccinated, he was fined and banned from entering the premises.
So much for the group of immunosuppressed patients who are supposedly to be protected, that they have to be vaccinated
in order to protect this patient, who in turn is forced to be vaccinated. Münster University Hospital, it's a shame!
A particularly disgusting lie is the claim of fatal consequences due to SSPE caused by measles - subacute
sclerosing panencephalitis, a severe inflammation of the brain - due to measles.
While the temporal causality between damage to health or even death due to the Covid vaccination is denied if the vaccination
was given more than one to two weeks ago, the measles disease is allegedly still the cause of this SSPE
disease six to eight or ten or twelve years later.
That makes us wonder, doesn't it? But this is also a free invention, as two publications show.
A ten-year American study from the 1960s - and they all still had measles at the time, so hundreds of millions are
basically covered - revealed an SSPE figure of one in a million.
One in a million has contracted SSPE. And this study also points to an accumulation in a certain
area, so there could be completely different reasons.
And the RKI claims that the risk of SSPE is a hundred times higher.
Not one in a million, but one in a thousand to one in ten thousand.
Which would still be low, because we no longer have measles.
So you probably have to wait 500 years before these figures are even reached.
But above all, we have another publication , which I have also dedicated a separate chapter to SSPE.
With the support of our highly esteemed Professor Andreas Sönnichsen, who practices evidence-based
medicine, is one of the experts in this field and analyzed this Schöneberger study together with me.
Ms. Schöneberger examined medical records of only 31 SSPE cases that were reported within
seven years. That is five SSPE cases per year.
For comparison: we have 700 million outpatient treatments every year and 17 million inpatient treatments.
SSPE accounts for five of them, so it can't be that dangerous now.
And now comes the scoop on these dubious - Professor Sönnichsen calls them nonsense, I call them really dubious.
Because she introduces this study and says: "SSPE is a serious consequence of measles.
We have 31 cases, 17 of these 31 cases were vaccinated and the vaccination status of 14 (that's the rest) was unclear."
And yet this woman is not ashamed to claim and at the same time warn at the end: For vaccination
education, they have to point out how terrible SSPE is.
Not a single unvaccinated case has been proven to have SSPE disease, which is actually rare enough to
perhaps really be able to say for sure what the cause is.
And this study is adopted by the RKI and the Federal Constitutional Court with the
figures, because I have not found another one.
This is abuse of science and law in its purest form.
Then there is not a single other reason for the injustice law.
There is not a single evidence-based comparative study between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, as we already
had here, in which the necessity, efficacy and safety of the measles vaccination was proven. What is there?
There are manufacturer studies that compare their old vaccine with the newer variant and - and we have also published
them here - the manufacturers who compare their vaccines.
GlaxoSmithKline compared its vaccine with Merck's and there wasn't much difference, because if I do that
and already accept these side effects that the first vaccine has, then that's window dressing.
That is unbelievable! After all, the German Medical Journal has now criticized the current weight loss pill, saying that
these are only manufacturer studies and not independent studies.
Figures and statistics show a much higher mortality rate after the measles vaccination than after the measles disease!
According to statistical figures from the USA - which I have published here - it is assumed that the measles vaccination causes
at least 16 times more deaths than the measles disease itself.
I've also tried to calculate these figures for Germany and, taking into account a reporting rate - which has been proven by
a long-term American study - which is not five percent, but only one percent for vaccinations, we have to take a factor of 100.
And Hans Tolzin once confirmed this in his own survey, even among alternative doctors and alternative practitioners.
They also only report one percent of vaccine injuries.
So this is really such a low rate that when we make extrapolations here - we have the report to the PEI and then we
have the extrapolation - I come up with 1,400 children who are seriously affected by the measles vaccination every
year and between - it is difficult to say - 50 to 200 deaths.
We also have sudden infant death syndrome, more than 70 percent of which - as proven by a recent American study - is linked
to vaccination. A vaccination had been given ten days earlier.
The state is forcing its own citizens to risk life and limb with a completely unnecessary and
pointless measles vaccination. I'll come to the end.
Human dignity is absolutely inviolable and is even guaranteed forever in the Basic Law.
Nevertheless, this principle was trampled underfoot by the unspeakable daycare decision
of the Federal Constitutional Court in 2022.
In particular, the exclusion of healthy children from daycare centers simply because they do not have a measles vaccination is
unbelievable discrimination, an inexcusable violation of the human dignity of these children and at the same
time a violation of the parental right to education and care and thus to medical self-determination.
Nothing can justify this violation.
If the Federal Constitutional Court nevertheless considers compulsory measles vaccination to be constitutional, then it is
clearly no longer protecting the rights of children and citizens, but only the greed for profit of the pharmaceutical companies.
Such a court distorts our fundamental rights into a ridiculous farce.
Ladies and gentlemen, after many months of working on my latest book and summarizing my meticulous medical
legal research on 464 pages with more than 700 references, I have come to the conclusion that:
Due to the intolerable contradictions to truth and justice and the violation of human dignity, the Measles
Protection Act is an unjust law - and therefore null and void.
I have explained this briefly by way of example, but by no means conclusively, using these arguments.
Once again, the ban on entering and the exclusion of healthy daycare center children simply because they have not
been vaccinated is a particularly intolerable injustice.
I, Beate Bahner, describe this in my book as another German disgrace.
I call on the Bundestag to repeal this unjust law today rather than tomorrow, just as quickly and quietly as it quietly
passed this law in the shadow of the coronavirus pandemic.
Until then, until this law is repealed, the health authorities, school administrators and day-care center directors,
especially the courts, must refuse to obey this unjust law.
Do not tolerate any more obvious inconsistencies and human rights violations!
Don't let dubious interests pull the wool over your eyes and actively contribute to the restoration of law and order,
science, clean medicine and real health protection! Thank you!
A very exciting symposium is coming to an end here near Passau on the subject of "Putting the Measles Protection Act to the test"
and we have now briefly had Beate Bahner in front of the microphone again at the end and I would like to thank her
for her presentation today and, above all, for her work.
What they are doing is incredibly valuable and we are delighted that there are people who are so committed to their work.
And I would like to talk briefly about the book that has now been published.
Some time ago, we were able to have an interview with each other when this book was not yet available, and now it
is here, "Measles Vaccination and Measles Protection Act".
Yes, we've already touched on this topic. Now the book is here and I think it's worth reading this book, on the one hand, and
that those affected really pass it on, that those affected pass it on to the people who are now responsible somewhere,
especially when they are in the middle of difficulties with some offices or with the daycare centers and so on.
Yes, what experience have you had so far?
So the feedback on the book is excellent.
It is well written, it is incredibly well structured, but of course it is also practical, with tips for those
who are affected by fines, especially childcare bans.
It points to the inconceivable contradictions of this law, which I also described today at the press symposium
as an unjust law and for which I gave ten reasons as examples, all the others are in there.
It is an unjust law that must not be applied. So thank you very much for the tip.
Really, anyone who is affected should send it to their local health authority, which requires proof of
measles protection and threatens to impose a fine, should send it to the local court and say:
Here, this results in the contraindication, a definitive one.
This measles vaccination has a fatal risk-benefit ratio.
It does not help because measles is eliminated, and it does much more harm.
We have discussed this in detail today from all angles and with many speakers.
Thank you very much, Ms. Bahner.
And good luck with the dissemination of the book and with our joint fight to abolish the measles protection law.
And many thanks also to Kla.TV for their incredible commitment and unbelievably good, profound and unwavering work.
So all of us together, we'll manage.
It is hard work, but we will manage to wake people up even without the billions and bribes from industry. Thank you very much!
Thank you very much!