And since I already noticed in 2003, that was SARS-1 and in 2005 the bird flu, in 2009 the swine flu,
that we were deceived every time and always by the WHO.
You keep saying there are no horror viruses.
Yes, there is, in the laboratory. Yes. You can produce them in the lab. (...)
But if you then release them, they don't stand a chance in the wild. They have no chance of reproducing.
The viruses that kill people are stupid viruses.
The best viruses are the ones we don't even notice. They spread best.
But if we then fall over or lie in bed, we can't spread them any further. So that's ... in evolutionary terms, that's stupid.
That's why I'm not afraid of viruses that come from the lab.
For me, the WHO is an institution for preparing insider trading.
After everything I've seen and experienced with the WHO, I can't understand it any other way.
It is used by people who want to create fear, and those who use it - but who know this beforehand, who
then buy the shares - make their waves, waves of fear.
At the World Economic Forum, they also boast that they have already penetrated all the cabinets,
that they already have their people everywhere.
Not only in the ministries, but also in the administration. And also in the government.
And the heads of government are many young global leaders who are then practically already ...
it's like a cadre training course that's going on.
It's this sick world that thrives on people's suffering. When people are in need, they pay more.
And that's why they're being made to pay more. That's sick. And that's exactly what's happening.
Dear viewers, we are in the year 2020, at the beginning of the year.
The media are reporting that there is a dangerous virus that has now spread worldwide.
At some point, a pandemic was declared by the WHO and measures were taken that nobody could have imagined beforehand.
Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg was one of the first, if not the first, in the German-speaking world to see through the coronavirus
pandemic and to warn us about the gene injection later on.
He warned the public early on before all these things were even feasible for us.
We are delighted to welcome Dr. Wodarg here today for an interview.
Dr. Wodarg, welcome to Kla.TV!
Thank you for your interest.
Gladly. Dr. Wodarg, where did this insight come from in the early stages of all these events?
Well, that was always my job. I was a public health officer and had to protect the population from infections, and
I always looked at the data that was available worldwide.
I got the international data because I also had a travel medicine advice center and knew where
something was going on, where there were any outbreaks.
And then, of course, I always looked at the data from the Robert Koch Institute, which has done
a very good job of monitoring the flu epidemics.
And there was a discrepancy between what suddenly appeared in the media - this scaremongering - and the data from
the Robert Koch Institute, which was the same as always.
And then I looked in China, there's data there too, and there was nothing there either. It all didn't fit together.
And since I already realized in 2003, that was SARS-1 and 2005 the bird flu, 2009 the swine flu, each
time that we were deceived and always by the WHO.
Then I thought: not again. That was actually my reaction.
And I didn't actually want to take action at first, but when it became more and more urgent and more and
more ..., I spoke up and said: No, don't, it's a lie.
And people shouldn't be afraid. The most important thing for me is always that people remain level-headed and
that they are not afraid so that they can behave sensibly.
And that was then ..., yes, I was then switched off, let's put it that way. They wanted to scare people.
And that was the practical thing, you could see whether they were really scared. You could
tell whether they were wearing the mask or not.
It was an ingenious trick to see whether people were obedient or not.
And if you can see that people are obedient, then you can do anything with them.
Yes, you just mentioned that, these virus panics that have been spread before, what do I know, HIV, SARS and so on, bird flu ...
Obviously, it was not entirely successful in spreading this panic. How should this be assessed?
Yes, in the case of SARS it was only tested to see whether it would work with
coronaviruses, with the PCR test and all these things.
That was briefly canceled again. There were only 8,000 cases in a country of 120 million .
That was one and a half times as many people as in Germany.
They did a PCR test in the hospital wards and then they said: Oh, this is a very dangerous infection, so many people have died.
But if you do the tests in the intensive care unit: many people always die in the intensive care unit.
You always automatically have a higher lethality .
And that was clear to me, of course, and afterwards with the bird flu, nothing happened
at all, they sold "Tamiflu" to the states.
And then put pressure on the government to do so.
Mr. Rumsfeld made a lot of money back then. He was previously with Gilead Sciences, the owner -
the patent holder who sold the patent to La Roche.
He had a lot of shares and yes, that was insider trading.
And the swine flu, that was even clearer.
That was the difference with swine flu: there were still different opinions in the media.
There were journalists who were critical and journalists who believed it, even back then. There was a dispute.
And that's why only 4 million of these syringes that were bought by the state in Germany - that was 50 million, only 4
million were injected. So the doctors were also skeptical.
Yes. That has been ..., that has been learned from.
They tried it again and again, they were like exercises, like drills.
There were also preparations in the media, where they met in London at the BBC in summer 2019 and
agreed to work together to prevent misinformation.
In other words, the media have agreed that they all say the same thing.
And the media have now been bought by the same people who made money from what happened.
That didn't quite work with the virus panics before.
That wasn't so perfect, no.
Okay. I mean, you keep saying there are no horror viruses.
Yes, there is in the laboratory. Yes. You can produce them in the lab.
You can also assemble a giraffe and a lion and a hyena and all, you can assemble wild animals in the
laboratory. And you can do the same with viruses.
But if you then release them, they don't stand a chance in the wild. They have no chance of reproducing.
The viruses that kill people are stupid viruses.
The best viruses are the ones we don't even notice. They spread best.
But if we then fall over or lie in bed, we can't spread them any further. So that's evolutionarily stupid.
That's why I'm not afraid of viruses that come from the lab.
There are also papers - in the Lancet there is a paper from 20 ..., from 2000 to 2021, where they counted laboratory accidents.
And I think that's 16 or 18 that have spread from the laboratory. But these were always only
small outbreaks, limited, and mostly bacteria.
And then those in the laboratory, there are about 200 such cases where someone has come to harm.
Incorrect pipetting or some kind of accident in the laboratory. That does happen, but these real outbreaks, which then originate
in the laboratory and spread far and wide, have not occurred.
So the further transmission did not take place in these cases?
No, no, I don't think that's possible either.
So these artificial products have no chance in nature.
Dr. Wodarg, how did you know that corona is not really dangerous?
Yes, it was already 2003, it was already SARS. Those were coronaviruses.
They were supposedly very dangerous, but then quickly disappeared again.
Why is that? Where have they been all this time?
They were beta coronaviruses. Don't they have variants?
Aren't they spreading all over the world? Ten million passengers every day, all around the world.
In other words, it was absolutely clear that beta coronaviruses are always there, all the time.
And can also always be found with the PCR test.
They have something in common and if you do a PCR test that finds what they all have in common, then it's
positive. At any time, always. From 2003 until today, always.
They just didn't do it, strangely enough, even though everyone knew that these viruses were so dangerous back then in Guangdong.
A mortality rate of nine percent was found because tests were carried out in the intensive
care unit. You always die there - more often.
But then the Robert Koch Institute, all the medical institutions that are supposed to protect us from such
infections, should have focused on this dangerous coronavirus.
That wasn't measured at all. Not for years. It was ignored for 20 years.
And suddenly it was there, it came out. It was there the whole time.
And we were surprised by this test.
We were shown that where the test is positive, there is this very dangerous virus, which is said to have just
come off the market in Wuhan. We then argued about it.
And then it comes out of the lab. And then people argued for a year about what was right.
That was a diversionary discussion, nothing more.
You can use these gain-of-function laboratories - they provide ..., they are weapons
laboratories. And they get money from the defense budget.
And as is the case in the arms industry, the more dangerous weapons you claim to produce, the more money you get.
You have to have more dangerous weapons than the enemy.
And they acquire (= recruit, win) money for dangerous laboratory constructs.
And that was banned in the USA, but was probably arranged by the USA to continue abroad.
We have them in Georgia, we have them in Ukraine, we also have them in Wuhan.
And we have these ..., there are also some in Africa.
Ebola, for example, was most likely created in such a gain-of-function laboratory.
It was also such a construct that Ebola suddenly broke out in Guinea.
A type, the Ebola type, that actually only exists 3,000 kilometers away in the Congo.
But 100 kilometers away from this outbreak in Guinea, there was a laboratory in Sierra Leone, a gain-of-function laboratory,
which specialized in haemorrhagic fever. An American company.
It's also outsourced, things like that. It's not done by the military itself.
Instead, people are applying who can do it, who can tinker with the microbes.
They apply and then they get money from the Ministry of Defense.
And things like this happen all over the world.
And this ..., what happened in Wuhan, they certainly had a bit of HIV, a bit of SV40 and put all kinds of
things together in such a way that it sounded very dangerous.
The furin cleavage site and all that stuff. There were already patents, several years earlier.
And then we were shown the people who were supposed to have died from such a virus, who were supposed to have fallen ill.
And then did PCR tests, which were positive.
In other words, on the one hand, people have been killed through wrong treatment.
The PCR test was used to simulate the spread of a virus that was already present everywhere and at all times.
The virus was only found where the tests were carried out. And of course people still had the flu.
But the three definitions that the WHO has made of Covid-19: - This is first of all, someone has the
flu and the PCR test was positive for coronavirus.
- The second was that someone didn't have the flu and was perfectly healthy, but the PCR test was positive.
- The third was that someone had the flu and the PCR test was negative.
But he had contact with someone who had a positive PCR test.
This means that all three versions, all three notifiable cases of Covid were linked to the PCR test.
And if the PCR test, as the inventor of the PCR test says, is not meaningful in terms of
detecting any disease, it only finds molecules.
And if it is designed in such a way that it finds molecules that have always been there,
then you can fake as many diseases as you like.
And the people who have the flu, as always, people have had severe flu of course.
Some have also died of the flu, and as in every season, no more.
If you did the PCR test on them and it was positive, they said: "I had Covid!".
That means nothing more than for me ..., I had the flu and my PCR test was positive for these corona viruses.
And the flu, that was possibly from influenza or was from other, parainfluenza, .... Yes, there
are over 100 viruses that make the same symptoms.
But there was no longer a differential diagnosis. "I had Covid, I couldn't smell it."
It's clear that if you have the flu, which destroys the nasal mucosa, you can't smell. It's in every textbook.
The most common cause of anosmia, i.e. not being able to smell, is the flu. This is an inflammation of the upper airways.
And it was all presented in such a way that everything was focused on something that should scare us.
Which should make us take the injection in solidarity.
And with the syringe, you took something that was also produced in the laboratory. And it was poisonous, highly poisonous.
And that was brought directly to the people.
It wasn't a virus that spread, it was the diseases that came from the injection.
And then Long-Covid was invented. And there's a lot of money in researching it.
And all this research on Long-Covid doesn't ask whether people have had the injection, how long afterward the symptoms appeared.
All these things are then pushed aside. And someone who would ask that question would not get any research funding.
So it is so clear that we have been lied to and deceived, that a huge experiment has been carried out here, a
genetic engineering experiment on the entire population.
And you have the data. We know who got which batch. It was distributed by the military.
From the beginning of May 21 to May 22 in Germany, the Bundeswehr distributed it under the
pretext that it had to be kept at minus 80 degrees.
And then, now you know, now you're making the electronic patient file.
This means that doctors have to digitize everything they have to document about you.
When you go to the doctor, the doctor has to write everything down.
Your findings, lab results, discharge report from the hospital, all these things are digitized and
stored. Even what you are prescribed, everything.
And this is processed by private companies, pseudonymized, they say, but that doesn't work.
You can take this data, when there are so many different factors ..., then, if you can match them ..., if you - with
artificial intelligence you can first determine the doctor and, of course, the patient. So you can't anonymize that.
And that means they know exactly, the people who organized it with these lethal injections, they know who got which injection.
And they will now find out whether the injection worked and how it worked.
That's the RNA technology. They want to use it for all kinds of infections, i.e. for all kinds of injections
and vaccinations against childhood diseases. And that is something that I find extremely risky.
That's why I wouldn't have my children vaccinated these days, because I don't trust this industry.
It used to be the same, there were also scams in the industry.
But nowadays I can't even trust the Paul Ehrlich Institute, which is supposed to watch out, which is supposed to test,
which is supposed to protect the population from such things.
I can't even do that. How am I supposed to expose my children to such injections?
You just briefly mentioned the media, which didn't really work before Corona, in quotation marks.
What were your experiences with the media after you started, let's say, making critical comments about corona?
Yes, I was surprised. I have always had good contacts with many journalists through my previous work.
And of course I also made an effort, now, I had just written an essay, a critical essay,
full-page, such a big one, where I put it all together.
I did that in February , I had it at work at the beginning of February and it was finished by mid-February.
Then I tried to sell it or pass it on.
The "Süddeutsche", the "taz", "CORRECTIV" or ..., in other words a lot of people I've always been in contact with.
And they only ... - the "Berliner Tagesspiegel", they said to me: "Oh, interesting article", the journalists I knew.
And then they took it away and called a day later and said, I'm sorry, but the house doesn't want it.
Without any explanation. And that really surprised me.
And then I was accidentally invited again by "frontal21", from ZDF.
On March 10 or so, it must have been then, I was on air again and said what I ..., that I don't think it's that
dangerous, that it's the flu and that people are obviously panicking. And panicking again.
And that was then also broadcast, with ..., that was probably quite. Many people saw it too.
Afterwards I had another chat in the rooms of the ZDF:
"Consultation hour". People could ask questions and then I answered them. And it was all on
the Internet afterwards, on the ZDF channel.
However, this was soon switched off and taken away again.
And I think the journalist who invited me got into quite a bit of trouble.
In any case, I could see that she was very distressed. It was accidental.
Okay, that was the start of the whole story, yes.
Other question: In your presentation, you describe these global structures as parasitic.
And you once said that there are six or seven tricks used by these parasites.
How does it all work? Who initiated these stories and who, shall I say, also benefits from all these things now?
So I don't want these hackneyed terms like capitalists and all that stuff.
The systemic is important to me. And the Greeks actually defined that very well.
The Greeks have already experienced that there are people, as there always are, who try to live at the expense of others.
They try to exploit other people, to rob them.
And then they have even more money and then they can hire mercenaries and then they can really rake in a lot.
They build castles. In the Middle Ages, this happened again and again.
The one who had the most mercenaries was the richest and could take everything away from the others.
And the Greeks called such people parasites.
And they then invented the antiparasitic called democracy.
They then tried to create rules and laws in the areas where they organized themselves, in cities, in small-scale
communities, where everyone was involved in setting the rules.
And there was no king or person who now had more rights than the others, but they voted on it, democratically.
Those were the rules they lived by. And if someone stepped out of line, they tried to
get rid of them. So they didn't tolerate that.
And that's something you can only do in well-organized spaces.
You can only do that if you have an overview of who is there. And that means in the state, in the community, in the municipality.
Today, it's possible on a slightly larger scale because we have completely different means of communication.
Only if we don't see through the means of communication that abuse us, i.e. if they are also
misused to misinform us, then they are of no use to us.
So we have to be able to trust rightly.
And the prerequisite is that it is transparent to us what is being done with our power - power from
below - what is happening. That is the prerequisite.
These people, I say, who you call parasites. Who are they?
Who is that in the background? Where are you looking?
I would never call a person a parasite.
The Greeks call such people - have called such people that. And I find this picture very impressive.
And I mean, there is a lot of talk today about antiparasitics.
But then people always think about ivermectin and not about democracy. And that's why I provoke it a bit.
But of course there are people who benefit from the whole thing.
Kennedy once gave a nice speech where he used the Ukraine war.
And then he explained that Cargill and Monsanto and DuPont, the big agricultural companies, are
everywhere when it comes to buying land. And who owns them?
The investors. This is BlackRock and these are the large investment companies that also play with
distributed roles, so that there is not just one, but several. But they swap. They make appointments.
You can buy power with money these days. You can found parties.
Today, for example, if you have a lot of money, just like that, you make a new party.
A lot of money. Buy the media. Then they have a fast candidate, a good-looking boy.
A woman - they haven't done that often, but mostly men who make such a good impression, are
very eloquent and are then pushed up as candidates.
And that's how France got a president. Nobody knew the party, nobody knew the candidate, and suddenly he was head of
state. You can do that with money today, that sort of thing.
At the World Economic Forum, they also boast that they have already penetrated all the cabinets,
that they already have their people everywhere.
Not only in the ministries, but also in the administration. And also in the government.
And the heads of government are many young global leaders who are practically already ...
it's like a cadre training course that's going on.
That is very clever. Because if I want to bribe, if I want to use money to influence society and the institutions
of society, then the cheapest way is to bribe the top.
If I buy the lace, then I no longer need to bribe the officials.
If I have the Prime Minister, the head of government, who decides which ministers he appoints and who he dismisses,
then I practically have the whole structure in my hands.
Of course, this must not be noticed. That's why I have to buy the media.
This leads me to the next question.
Who benefits from this and in what form is it all feasible?
If you think now, the whole corona reprocessing that is supposed to take place.
As you say, the politicians, who are in principle already involved in the whole thing. It's
the same with the judiciary and everything else.
How strongly are these people all connected?
And what questions do you think we need to keep asking in order to get to the bottom of these things?
Yes, this reappraisal that is now being presented to us reminds me a little of the reappraisal after these
crimes in Germany before the end of the Second World War.
That's when the Nuremberg trials were held. And human experiments were carried out and terrible things
were done to people, millions of people were killed.
And then people were hanged. And those were the trials, it was like a show, where they said they had now come to terms.
But the Nazis who were there were later President of the Medical Association, they were Dean of the Medical Faculty.
They were my teachers at school. They were all still there. So much for reappraisal.
A show like this doesn't help to come to terms with this crime.
Perhaps some people then become thoughtful and no longer dare to continue thinking like this or learn something new. Maybe.
But the reappraisal must actually take place where the injustice took place.
In other words, if doctors have become rich because they have poisoned people with this syringe, which they should
have known was toxic, that it is a genetic engineering intervention that we don't even know how it works.
And if they inject their patients hundreds of times, then that is not really compatible with a doctor's conscience.
And the doctors who protected their patients, who tried to avoid this and did not take part in it, are now on trial.
But not the people who harmed their patients with the injection. They are not on trial. That's problematic, of course.
And then you have to ask yourself, what are the courts' standards? What are they guided by?
And there is indeed knowledge that can be used.
There are warnings. A senior Pentagon official, who is also responsible for health protection and the health of
soldiers, has said, no, this is a very dangerous thing.
That is published. So actually everyone knows that, you can know that.
And yes, the processing has to take place there, where it happened, which means that patients
have to get together and go to their doctors.
Not as an individual. The doctor says, come on, get out, I don't have time.
You have to be able to confront them. Where you live.
And so did the health department. Why did you do that? Explain that to us.
Then they can apologize, if they're lucky, if you want to continue to live well together.
If they only did it because they themselves were seduced, that's different from getting rich from it and
actually knowing that they were doing something bad.
That is completely different. I would also judge it completely differently.
Some have to go to court and others have to apologize and try to help ensure that this never happens again.
Yes, I think the problem with the story is that everyone is simply part of the system.
I say everyone has benefited from it, somewhere. The things have been well paid for.
Many. And that's why the approach of going back in where the injustice happened, so to speak, is an approach, yes.
Yes, the many old people who suffered from this PCR scam, the nursing staff had to be tested and if they were
positive, they were quarantined and then they were absent.
The old people were alone and they were referred to hospital because there was not enough
staff and they were treated wrongly in hospital.
And so many old people died from October 1, 2020 in Germany, has up to 30 percent excess mortality among the elderly.
And that was... grandma was killed. Yes, to scare us too.
And they all wore the mask and showed their obedience by doing so.
That was very depressing. It was unbearable for me.
How do you see the role of the WHO and, above all, Big Pharma in this whole scenario?
The WHO was taken over at the beginning of this century or shortly before.
She was a bit ailing beforehand, had no money. And then they decided in Davos to put Gro Harlem Brundtland there.
As Secretary-General, Prime Minister of Norway. And then in Davos, she came back to Davos as head, and then invited the
industry to do more for health and to give money to the WHO.
And that's what they did. 86% of the funds that the WHO now has are earmarked funds.
Someone who gives money voluntarily also says what for? They are not indifferent.
So if they give money, they can say, I would like you to carry out the project.
And he can also send his experts to the committees.
In other words, this organization, the WHO, is a corrupt organization. It is determined by outside interests.
And we have seen what a circus they have made, how they have deceived us with the bird flu, that we are buying this Tamiflu.
Mr. Stöhr , who was the boss there, later went straight to Novartis, the vaccine manufacturer.
And now he's supposedly on the opposite side. Now he is critical.
But I visited him in Geneva at the time of the bird flu. And he simply gave me a CD from
Roche and said that Tamiflu helps. Against what?
There was hardly anyone there, there was nothing about bird flu. There wasn't any.
And swine flu was exactly the same. It was even worse then.
A hundred countries ordered vaccines. And when the WHO says there's a pandemic, the contracts
come into force and they have to accept them.
The WHO was practically the trigger. And that is of course very practical when you have the WHO in your hand.
And there was nothing at all to see with the swine flu, which was the mildest flu in decades.
And the WHO simply changed the definition, because they had now all invested. And that had to be worth it.
The WHO simply canceled the . A pandemic is also when nobody dies. And even if people don't get seriously ill.
There is always a pandemic when a new virus goes around the world, suddenly, in several countries.
And that happens all the time. They carry 10 million passengers.
We now know all the viruses that exist in the world.
That mixed up nicely. And then, of course, we also have immunity against it.
And we only notice it when we are weakened.
So this is a huge fraud machine. And the WHO, if you pay them, it pays off. It gives a good return.
Because you can always see that in the stock market journal. They make you afraid of falling ill.
And before they become afraid of the disease, people buy up the shares of the company they know
has something in the pipeline against this disease.
In other words, the WHO can decide on command - they then have a selection - which pathogens are already being
treated, or where the industry is already offering something.
And then you have to pay something. And then it scares you. And then you can buy the shares first.
For me, the WHO is an institution for preparing insider trading.
After everything I've seen and experienced with the WHO, I can't understand it any other way.
It is used by people who want to create fear and who use it - but who know this beforehand, who
then buy the shares - to make waves, waves of fear.
And you can see that, you can always see the ripples in the Börsenblatt.
If I want to know something about the epidemiological situation or what's threatening us, I just look in the Börsenblatt.
That says more than the WHO bulletin. Sad, but true.
But when we know that she has cheated us so often, you have to leave the store.
It is completely unimportant for us. It doesn't protect us in the slightest.
We know that in Switzerland, in Austria or in a German country, we know very well that the health
service knows whether something is coming or not.
They can call the hospital. Are there more or are there fewer? They easily have an overview.
They don't have to wait for someone in the WHO to say something is coming.
They have no idea what's coming. From where?
But they only know what you tell them.
And that's what they're doing now, now they're collecting data all over the world.
And that is, if you have data, you know how to deceive people, you know where you can cause fear, where you
can still do business. Data is power. It's hard cash.
And they are now collecting our data under the pretext of health protection. Who we were with.
This is called contact tracing.
All these things. Now they also have One Health. That means the weather, food, everything has to
do with health. They have to have all the data.
You are no longer allowed to keep chickens privately. That could be dangerous.
I've already tied a scarf around my chickens so they don't get bird flu.
And? Did it help? Yes.
And then this whole bird flu story, where they suddenly found bird flu viruses on the cow's udder with the PCR test.
For me, this is now the bird, cow, cat, mouse milking flu.
Because these viruses have been found everywhere using the PCR test.
I just make a fool of myself. I make fun of these things. It's ridiculous what they do.
And I think that's why they have the WHO, which is no longer such a big hit. Trump has also resigned.
Now they have new things to scare us with. Being overweight is very dangerous.
There are these syringes. The state absolutely has to buy them, you can't let people burst.
The state has to buy them up, make them available to people and the shares rise. That was Novo Nordisk.
Or now the cancer story, where Allison then spoke and said: "We are now finding the cancer cells in the blood with the PCR test.
And then we sequence them and then we produce a vaccine within 48 hours.
In other words, we don't produce it, but we sequence your cell and give you an RNA injection and then you
produce the vaccine against your own cancer cells yourself.
And then they get cancer when they have had the RNA injection.
But it's so absurd, because each of us forms thousands of cancer cells every day, but our immune system
recognizes them and wipes them away. And now they're scaring us.
And if they give the doctors a lot of money to do this test on us, to talk us into it, then every doctor who wants to make
money from it will be afraid: "I've got this test for cancer.
I could do that, it's a bit expensive, but it's tailor-made, then I have a vaccination against it."
And then they give him 300 dollars. And then everyone is happy.
Then you've made money with fear again and the only thing we have to do is educate people in good
time so that they don't go along with such nonsense.
And Trump said: "Yes, that's a great thing, I'll give 100 billion. That's for development."
I wonder why Kennedy didn't say anything about it? No comment.
Yes. The title of your lecture is "The world is sick. How can you be healthy?"
Perhaps you could briefly outline some solutions in two or three sentences.
The world is also sick because the entire medical industry lives from being able to treat as many diseases as possible.
This means that doctors are happy when their practice is full.
The pharmaceutical industry is happy when it can sell lots of expensive drugs.
Hospitals are happy when they are well occupied and can bill a lot of diagnoses.
In other words, there is a whole industry that lives from people getting ill.
And they're happy that they can earn money. That's sick.
Doctors should actually be paid so that patients don't fall ill.
Yes. And that is possible. You can do that.
At the health department - that's why I went there - I get my salary and I make sure that people don't get sick.
In state healthcare systems, such as in Sweden, for example, there is a regional budget in the region and if they do prevention,
they save money if people don't have to go to hospital.
They ensure that they provide good outpatient treatment and that the nursing services and
doctors work together cooperatively as a team.
They know where to go in good time so that nothing happens and then they avoid hospitalization.
They only have half as many hospital beds as we do and don't need as many.
They can look after people better at home. And that saves money.
And that is also healthier. And it's not nice for people to be in hospital, especially not as an old person.
And even in intensive care, it's a misery when you see it.
The fear in the eyes of the patients, in this foreign environment, they would rather be at home and well treated.
And I think we owe them that too. And that's why we have to make an effort.
It's this sick world that thrives on people's suffering. When people are in need, they pay more.
And that's why they're being made to pay more. That's just sick.
And that's exactly what happens. And the question is, how can you be healthy?
By organizing the things that we can organize ourselves collectively, by organizing them ourselves, so
that these parasites have no chance to take advantage of our need, but we take care of each other.
It's not always easy. You have to make an effort and sometimes it's difficult. You don't always like your neighbors either.
But nevertheless, it's a good feeling when you realize that you're living in a community that is willing to help each other.
And that can be organized. It can be organized when caring for the elderly.
You can organize this when raising children, at least until puberty. That is possible.
And we don't need these teaching institutions, these schools where state-certified teachers enforce state-prescribed curricula.
And practically educate people to become obedient fellow citizens so that they do everything the government says afterwards.
They should be cheeky, the children, they should be creative.
They should come up with something. Let them explore the world themselves.
We have to give them the freedom to stay curious and learn something.
We need people who can find new ways of doing things and who don't follow the tracks laid out for them by teaching programs.
And woe betide them if they deviate from the track, then they get a bad censorship, then they have no
chance in life and that is simply a misconception.
This is a way of forcing people to obey.
And when I heard that, when I heard that the ministers were calling for solidarity now, when people were
calling for social distancing rules, masks and all that..., they were calling for solidarity.
Solidarity is something that comes from the heart, something that has to do with love, but not with obedience.
They have misused solidarity, the word, for obedience.
And could see from the mask who was obeying and who was not.
That was quite frightening.
Yes. That brings us back to the subject of fear, which you mentioned earlier.
Yes, they were frightened. And you could see that it was successful.
Dr. Wodarg, thank you very much for being here. Yes, with pleasure. Thank you very much for the interview.
Thank you for your interest. And I wish you all the best for the future. Thank you.