Does anyone still remember the days when COVID-19 vaccines were reputed to do what other vaccines do – namely, prevent people from getting infected – and hence we were all taught to speak of exceptional ‘breakthrough infections’ when the unexpected, nonetheless, came to pass?
Well, Germany’s ‘state virologist’ Christian Drosten apparently does not remember them either. Drosten is a member of the German Government’s ‘Corona Expert Council’ and is treated as the absolute authority in Germany for all things COVID-19-related. He also, purely coincidentally, developed the notoriously hyper-sensitive COVID-19 PCR testing protocol, which would go a long way to create the COVID-19 pandemic based on the innumerable ‘asymptomatic cases’ it would go on to detect.
Drosten has given a new interview to the German weekly paper Die Zeit on the solemn occasion of the awarding of this year’s Nobel Prize in Medicine to Drew Weissman and Katalin Kariko, two scientists who contributed to developing the mRNA technology underlying the most widely-used COVID-19 vaccines in the West. Drosten praises the decision to award the prize to the mRNA pioneers – “the technology has proven its significance thanks to the authorisation for COVID-19” – and goes on to note that “I’ve had three doses of the vaccine and been infected twice”.
Three doses and he still got infected twice? Well, why does he agree with the Nobel Committee awarding the prize to Weissman and Kariko then?
Drosten’s remark is apparently supposed to help explain why he will not be getting the new ‘variant-adapted’ COVID-19 jab this autumn or donning a facemask when out and about: since, namely, he already has adequate immunity to fend off the virus – not, it seems, thanks to his previous vaccine doses but due to having caught the bug despite them!
Further on in the interview, Drosten makes this assumption explicit. Thus, asked whether the public has to be concerned about new, more highly transmissible Covid variants, Drosten replies:
Two years ago, higher transmissibility due to new mutations always also meant that more people got seriously ill. Simply because immunity against serious outcomes was not yet complete. By now, the overwhelming majority have built up immune defences by way of infections which are directed against the whole virus, not only against the spike protein from the vaccine. Infections were required for this.
So, Drosten now speaks (and it is not the first time) as if the idea all along was for people to get the vaccine and the virus. He adds, however, that vaccination was still worthwhile, since, he claims, it reduced the severity of the illness when people got infected. Mind you, he has just said that “complete immunity” even against severe disease is only achieved via infection.
The somewhat bewildering position adopted by Drosten is, by the way and not surprisingly – he is not referred to as Germany’s ‘state virologist’ for nothing – also the official German Government position. The official recommendation of the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) of the German public health authority is that everyone over 18 years of age should have acquired a “basic immunity” by way of at least three “antigen contacts”, either in the form of vaccine doses or infections. The STIKO, however, insists that at least two of these “contacts” should have taken place by way of vaccination, thus suggesting that vaccine-induced immunity is somehow superior to natural immunity, whereas Drosten’s remarks clearly suggest the contrary.
In its latest recommendation on the new ‘variant-adapted’ jab, moreover, the STIKO notes that “the majority of the population has already been vaccinated multiple times and has acquired good basic immunity thanks to having had SARS-CoV-2 infections in addition”. This is why, incidentally, the STIKO only recommends the adapted jab for persons over 60 and members of other ostensibly high-risk groups, but not for anyone else. But the tenor is exactly the same as in Drosten’s remarks, as if getting vaccinated and then getting sick had been the plan all along.
Well, for Drosten’s and the STIKO’s benefit, the below comes directly from the European Medicines Agency summary document on what is by far the most-widely used COVID-19 vaccine in the EU: BioNTech’s mRNA-based ‘Comirnaty’.

Comirnaty was authorised to prevent COVID-19, not to prevent severe outcomes. If it does not prevent COVID-19, it failed.
Robert Kogon is the pen name of a widely-published journalist covering European affairs. Subscribe to his Substack and follow him on X.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“Techno-con”. Neat phrase. I’m going to use that. It will take off.
Because Clown World logic dictates that the likes of a total non-expert ( and extremely bloody irritating, while I’m at it ) called Greta gets to have all the limelight and spout all the blatant lies but on her elitist platform she will remain, because she’s talking complete garbage but is pro-narrative.
And speaking of the Peta Pan of the Garbage Pail Kid world and bloody annoying people, does anybody have photo evidence of her or her eco nutter acolytes ever getting their hands dirty? Because if any of them ever did anything useful to help the environment, as opposed to gluing themselves to things, walking like zombies in the road or chucking orange stuff everywhere, I might be a tad less scathing. People should be judged by their actions, after all;
https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1685046948833673216
Hello, Westminster….Mr Sunak…..Parliament…….Uncle Tom Cobley……
‘I can confidently say there is no real climate crisis and that climate change does not cause extreme weather events.’
Dr J. F. Clauser
‘Dr. John F. Clauser, born 1942, is an American theoretical and experimental physicist known for contributions to the foundations of quantum mechanics. Clauser was awarded the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics, jointly with Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger, “for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science”.
Oh!
‘In conclusion on the basis of observational data, the climate crisis that, according to many sources, we are experiencing today, is not evident yet.’
‘A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming’ The European Physical Journal +, Jan 2022
Off-topic due to there being no articles about jabs today:
This new peer-reviewed study is significant because it demonstrates increased mortality in children <5yrs the more vaccinations they have. Conclusion;
”There are statistically significant positive correlations between neonatal, infant, and under age five mortality rates of developed nations and the number of early childhood vaccine doses that are routinely given. When developed nations require two versus zero neonatal vaccine doses, or many versus fewer infant vaccine doses, our study suggests there may be unintended consequences that increase all-cause mortality. Further investigations of the hypotheses generated by this study are recommended to confirm that current vaccination schedules are achieving their intended objectives.”
https://www.cureus.com/articles/164423-neonatal-infant-and-under-age-five-vaccine-doses-routinely-given-in-developed-nations-and-their-association-with-mortality-rates#!/
Jikky has a good thread about it here with some additional information;
https://twitter.com/Jikkyleaks/status/1685468279077244930
Thanks for the information.
Neil Z. Miller, referred to in the links also has a very interesting book – “Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies”.
Well worth a read.
Of course Obama live by the ocean, (or should that be oceans?) despite his warnings of the sea rising
Cancelled by the IMF.. now there’s a surprise.. another nasty little cabal of bankers who are responsible for sucking the life blood out of so many third world countries with their unpayable debt, and plunging them into despicable levels of poverty..
Anybody who believes the IMF are the slightest bit interested in ‘saving’ the planet needs a size 10 boot five lace-holes up their jacksy..
LOL! What the hell does he know? Is he famous? Is he on the telly?
Well then…proof positive, the ‘science is settled’ according to the omniscient BBC…
we have our true, bona fide Commander in Chief Greta, who absolutely knows better and we need to be listening to her!
If Clauser is cancelled then all of science needs cancelling as well because a “climate crisis” is NOT supported by any science.—— In matters of science you question EVERYTHING. But the thing that is different about climate science is that there is no way to conduct experiments. There maybe agreement about some basic facts, such as the earth has warmed in the last 150 years, and that CO2 has contributed in some way to that. But there are also serious doubts and uncertainties. (1) How much can the climate expect to change as a result of us adding CO2 to the atmosphere and (2) Is this dangerous? There is also the question over the role of natural variability of the climate compared to assumed changes caused by CO2. But assumptions are NOT science. Speculations about the effect CO2 will have on temperature and climate should be discussed and debated, and when there is this determination to halt any discussion and silence those asking pertinent questions then we are no longer dealing with science. But many on this website will know that already. Science is all the time sold to the public on this issue as FACT. No it isn’t. It is a PROCESS. ———- Yesterday on GB News we had the usual little debate with invited guests. One of those guests in a discussion about ULEZ was the Meteorologist Jim Dale. I found it astonishing that he could still be harping on about the manufactured consensus, the so called 97% of scientists all apparently agree on something. But in this so called consensus, what were the scientists asked, and what were there replies? 97% consensus of scientists is ABSURD. As Judith Curry has pointed out Consensus is NOT a proxy for truth. Consensus stops questions from being asked and investigations taking place. Consensus is also just an appeal to authority, but science is not a dictatorship where people with views not consistent with the political consensus masquerading as scientific truth are outlawed, ostracised and silenced, and those who question dogma are delegitimised. Is this what science has become? Clauser is certainly finding that out, and so are everyone else who challenges climate tyranny.
If they cancel an opposing or different point-of-view it means they don’t have the data to defend their own viewpoint.
They know their opinion will not stand up to scrutiny.