The preview photo for my recent article on Christian Drosten and his links to viral research in Wuhan, and even Montana, comes from a remarkable June 2021 interview in the Swiss online magazine Republik. The full pic of Drosten in full protective gear and vaguely resembling the Michelin man can be seen below.
The interview is titled “Herr Drosten, Where Did This Virus Come From?” But it is less remarkable for what Drosten has to say on this topic than as a document of its times. For even though it was published not even three years ago, how times have changed!
Consider, for instance, Drosten’s response to the question of achieving so-called herd immunity through a combination of vaccination and infection. Drosten rejects the notion out of hand: in effect, pushing not just for 70% or 80% vaccination rates but for 100%.
“Everyone who does not get vaccinated, will get infected with SARS-2,” he says, thus clearly implying that those who do get vaccinated will not get infected or at least not as a rule. Those were the days when they still called them “breakthrough infections”, after all.
By just six months later, however, in January 2022, Drosten was claiming that everyone would have to get infected in order to achieve durable immunity – as if that had been the plan all along! In one of his regular “Corona Update” podcasts on German public radio, he would even “explain”:
The ideal immunisation is to have a full immunisation – with three doses – and then, on the basis of this immunisation, to get infected with the real virus for a first time and also a second and a third time.
Say what? In any case, Drosten appears to have taken his own advice, since, as reported on the Daily Sceptic here, in an interview last October he would note that he had “had three doses and been infected twice”.
Drosten would, of course, repeatedly insist that “hybrid” vaccine-induced and natural immunity is somehow superior to mere natural immunity or that vaccination was still worthwhile, since, he claimed, it reduced the severity of disease thus allowing people to get infected “safely”. But this was not the original claim, and, as the below screenshot from the European Medicines Agency summary document on the BioNTech-Pfizer “Comirnaty” vaccine reminds us, it is not what COVID-19 vaccines were authorised to do.
In short, when, in June 2021, Christian Drosten suggested that people who are vaccinated against COVID-19 would not get infected, he was wrong – and not just wrong, but wildly so. In the same interview, incidentally, he also claimed that COVID-19 vaccination prevents transmission of the disease: something which is now virtually universally recognised not to be the case and, furthermore, was not even claimed in the studies on which authorisation was based! (See, for instance, “Limitations and Remaining Questions” here.)
How can Germany’s Covid oracle be so wrong and continue to be treated as an oracle? How can he still be regarded as an authority on Covid not only in Germany, but indeed around the world? How can he be permitted to lecture others on spreading misinformation when objectively, by the standards of what we know today, he was himself spreading misinformation in June 2021 – and those who already suspected that vaccination was ineffective and said so were right.
Why does Christian Drosten benefit from such an odd sort of moving of the goalposts in reverse? If in the original version of the metaphor, the goalposts are moved further away, making it harder for the kicker to reach them, in the version of the metaphor applicable to Drosten – and the agenda of mass COVID-19 vaccination he championed – they are moved closer and closer to the kicker, so that somehow, some way his feeble kick is just enough to get the ball over the bar, thus converting error into wisdom.
In the same interview, Drosten also pushed for vaccinating children, by the way, insisting that there was not likely to be any risk and that getting Covid could have serious consequences for them. “From the perspective of a parent, my child would be vaccinated,” he said, “No question.” His use of the subjunctive is rather odd, since, though not much is known about Drosten’s private life, he is in fact reported to have a young son.
Robert Kogon is the pen name of a widely-published journalist covering European affairs. Subscribe to his Substack. Translations from the German by the author.
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.
We can’t even bankrupt ourselves trying – all in all, it’s best not to even try.
The debate in the UK is so mealy mouthed and cowardly. I really don’t trust her. Contrast Vivek Ramaswamy, say:
Quite right. First it is anti-science. Second it is about money and power. Third for the sheeple it is a religious cult. She apparently does not understand, 1-2-3. The Convict party is entirely useless on almost every single issue.
I’m reading his book right now!
But in 2019 when the Net Zero amendment to the climate change act was simply waved through Parliament with no questions asked whatsoever as to cost/benefit why did Badenoch not ask a question? eg “How much is this going to cost”? She is only asking this now because the absurdity of Net Zero is finally beginning to become apparent or she is concerned that the Conservatives are going to lose an election. Personally I hope that she is doing it for the first reason and not the second, because all of these politicians must know that nothing we do here in the UK will make the slightest difference to climate, with even Tony Blair, whose government gave us the climate change act saying that very same thing——–Net Zero is going to cost trillions and politicians are not even aware if the technologies required can even be invented. —–So is Badenoch, Sunak, Gove etc finally getting a sharp dose of reality injected into them or is it all just more politics.? It may be more politics, but at least some watering down of the absurdity will help a bit, with more watering down inevitable, but by that time our cars may be off the road, our central heating ripped out, and the smart meters rationing all the energy use.
The technology already exists in most cases, but whether it is affordable and scalable is the real problem. Energy storage and fusion power being the keys here. The science exists but they are denying the technology.
Fusion was 50 years away when I was at school 50 years ago – it’ll be 50 years away in 50 years. It’s a straw not worth grasping at.
You say what you think the “real problem” is, but that was never discussed in Parliament. Net Zero was simply waved through. If I recall only one Labour MP asked a question of cost/beneift. —-This is like me saying that by 2030 I am going to go on 10 world cruises and visit every capital city in the world without first checking how much would it actually cost and could I ever afford it, and then ofcourse what benefit would this be to me apart from an ego trip? ——-The other aspect of this is that even if the UK were to achieve this absurdity it would have no measurable effect on global temperatures or climate so why do it? ——And the answer to that is that is not and never was about climate in the first place. It is a political and economic decision that panders to the UN Sustainable Development agenda while ignoring the real needs of the citizens of the UK, who will not be better of with a heat pump, an electric car, or have their energy rationed by a smart meter. Their country will not be a better place when it is covered in thousands of huge Industrial Turbines when a few Nuclear plants tucked away in a corner would suffice. —-The excuse for all of this is “climate change”, which is contentious at best and at worst total eco socialist scam.
It was explained to me two decades ago that the political class continues to promote daft ideas out of habit. They were, perhaps, told by their party leaders some years before that a particular policy was good snd they accepted it without much research or thought. To get in they had to mouth support and after some years they cannot remember why they support it but they are neither brave enough nor principled enough to change their stance.
it was one explanation for supporting the EU.
at least a couple of politicians are raising some queries. Of course they should completely change policy in many areas but only a revolution in Westminster will achieve that.
remember the USSR survived 90 years on lies, failure and deceit. There is no reason why Net Zero cannot do the same.
And, as I have said before, two thousand years later people still believe in… yep.
Ok then. ——–Most politicians would have great difficulty explaining anything about climate change to a five year old. It is these same people that are making decisions about our future prosperity all based on something they know nothing about. —-Group think (The Madness of Crowds)
Kemi Baddenoch (K B) is fake opposition. She is still committed to net zero even while admitting that the UK is responsible for only 1% of the total of Co2 put in to the atmosphere by humanity. And humanity contributes – allegedly – just 3% of the total of planetary Co2. Total Co2 in our atmosphere – 0.04%.
She still admits to being committed to ‘climate change.’
I don’t believe this woman for a minute although for an MP I think she has a sprinkling of intelligence. So what game is she playing?
If she understands the real science behind all this bollox she would know that climate change is a constant, net zero is utterly pointless and the achievement of which can only lead to the destruction of our country and the deaths of millions.
She is thoroughly dishonest.
Really Badenough knows which side her bread is buttered on. She’s trying to sit on the fence in the hope that this will both keep the money flowing and the constituents she’s unfortunately dependent on in good humour. In this way, she’ll achieve neither or both. The taxpayer-fed Save the climate! gadzillionaires will not want lukewarm supporters if ther money can buy something better. And one would hope that Badenough’s constituents won’t be happy being fed to the climate moloch one by one instead of all in one go.
Fencesitters – if only it gave them piles! Politicians play the long game. They say just enough that vast swathes of the population will believe them but not enough that they can’t backtrack later. Honestly, I’m sick of the so-called ‘political class’ in this country. They are of a type that is thoroughly lacking in integrity, honesty, or conviction. One of the main feeding pools where the would-be MPs come from, the local councils, in no better. Having witnessed at first hand the types that inhabit our local governments, I would say that the attraction of power and the selection processes seems to filter out any decent human beings. We are left with shallow types, not all but largely, who follow the herd and say the right things when they need to. It’s appalling what is taken for democracy in this country. A shabby pantomime with ghastly actors posing as people of substance.
A democratic state is one where the citizens from the so-called popular assembly. All members of the popular assembly are eligible for all public offices. Public offices are staffed based on majority votes of the popular assembly. And policy decisions are made in the same way: Someone proposes something to the popular assembly which then votes on it. The constitution of the USA has a democratic element as the electorate votes for the head of government. The political system of the UK has no democratic elements. It’s a monarchy in name and a parliamentary republic in practice.
“It’s appalling what is taken for democracy in this country. A shabby pantomime with ghastly actors posing as people of substance.”
Very eloquently put.
Welcome to the club Aethelred.
In other words, she’s a politician, HP!
That’s about it – dishonest, two-faced, scripted, wholly untrustworthy and unbelievable.
The ‘environmentalists’ are the exact same people who were lockdown zealots two years ago and they use the exact same tactics: Do something reasonably harmless to get a foot in the door. And then force it upon until physical resistance is met. The only sensible way to deal with these people is to kick them hard before they manage to get a foot in the door. No amount of whatever-zeroing done in the UK is going to have a meaningful influence on global CO₂ emissions. The people who push for this know this themselves. Hence, whatever they really want to accomplish, it’s certainly not preventing a global catastrophe. This should be amply sufficient to shelve the whole project.
Three years ago, RW. Let’s not lose all sense of time, eh?!
I mean two years ago: 2021, where 15 million jabs to freedom turned into a Vaccinate! Vaccinate! Vaccinate!-frenzy and when the Boris invertebrate got talked into reintroducing a mask mandate in November and another Christmas-lockdown was supposed to follow.
The only sensible way… is to kick them hard before they manage to get a foot in the door
Quite
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
Solzhenitzyn – Gulag Archepelago
That’s sort-of a nice quote. But assuming this could have been coordinated at all without being immediately reported to the authorities in exchange for promises of favourable treatment, at most, one such ambush might have worked for a time. The inevitable outcome would have been that the arrests would be made by platoons of soliders armed with MPs and ordered to shoot first and ask questions later and instead of grinding the machine to a halt, the resident would only have had the choice between certain death and an uncertain and probably unpleasant future.
A real environmentalist concerns themself with endangered species (genuine ones). They worry about loss of habitat. They are concerned about overfishing, sewage in rivers etc etc etc. The phony environmentalist hijacks environmentalism to achieve political goals. They have seized upon global warming as a means to an end. They are not interested in facts or reason, only faith and emotion and they are insistent that they are following science. –Nope. They are not. In science you question everything. Especially when the facts don’t fit the theory, like in almost every aspect of climate change claims.——–So having established that this is nothing really to do with the environment we realise what is really going on, especially by listening to the political aims of the WEF and UN from where all of this stuff emanates, and it is all there in black and white. They make no attempt to hide their goals, or as Mark Steyn used to point out. “megalomaniacs hiding in plain sight”
I suggest we go back to basics.
What is net Zero and is it a good idea in the first place?
No point in trying to achieve this ever if it does not make sense.
People tend to conflate climate, pollution, limited natural resources.
It makes no sense if it is to do with the climate. But it has nothing to do with the climate.
Quick DS poll.
Who thinks climate change is a problem that needs addressing?
Up vote: yes it’s a problem that needs addressing.
Down vote: no, it’s not a problem we need to bother with.
I like your style, Stewart, you’ll get all the usual downtickers, upvoting you!
Very gratifying result which has shed light on two things.
One, practically no one on here believe the climate bollox Not too surprising I suppose.
Two, the system automatically sends posts for moderation when they reach a certain number of down votes. Very nannyish.
Not only is it not a problem we need to bother with, but it is not even a problem to begin with!
“Kemi Badenoch, emphasises the need to reach Net Zero by 2050”. Why? It’s a hoax.
Secretary of State for Business and Trade, Kemi Badenoch supported EVERY lockdown measure that destroyed so many businesses.
She also said that the Covid Jab programme was a great success. She also supported the terrible trade deal that put a border between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
There is no ‘sustainable way to reach Net Zero. By definition Net Zero means removing the very apparatus – free market capitalist economy made possible by fossil fuels which not only provide energy but a whole array of essential materials – and thereby returning us to poverty, hunger, disease, misery, high infant mortality and low life expectancy.
What is difficult to understand about life before using fossil fuels; life after using fossil fuels?
“What is difficult to understand about life before using fossil fuels; life after using fossil fuels?”
The most succinct phrase with which to understand the net zero bollox. It’s beauty is its simplicity.
In a nutshell. I am purloining this one.
I’ll just park this here. Relevant to Net Zero goals in the West, whilst showing blatant disregard for those same goals with actions taken in other countries. Basically – kill the ICE in the West but let other countries have access to this tecnology.
https://www.businessonlybusiness.com/index.php/2019/04/08/reciprocating-engine-market-piston-engine-market-market-analysis-report-2019-2024/
Yes, it’s to punish us you see – evil white westerners who invented carbon emissions and have made the world uninhabitable for everyone else, but we must let everyone else achieve the same standard of living or it’s racist.
As usual the sheeple will be suckered into voting for the Communservative party, this is just a pathetic attempt to curry favour until the election, the moment either Labor get in, or the Cons stay in place, suddenly the whole show is back on, even in this very publication only a couple days ago it was pointed out the Soviet production mandates are baked into law so saying you can still make a product, but only 1/5th of the demand, is the same as saying you cannot make it at all.
The premise of Net Zero is false, ergo the whole thing is absurd.
Come on, Kemi, say it how it is, you know you want to.
Local authorities seem to have no problem bankrupting themselves – the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead being the latest example. It would be interesting to have a FOI request to local councils to see how much they are spending on their ‘Climate Emergency Action Plans’! My local council has a budget of £15 million to spend on theirs for 2023-2024, not sure if this is directly funded by the government or if it’s taken from council tax receipts.
We’re dealing with a utopian cult that is supported by people representing trillions of pounds of funding. This cult has declared war on the majority of the human race. Throughout human history, every new technology has thrown up new challenges. Never before has the successful solution been to turn us to a new Dark Age, to go ‘Luddite’ and impoverish and condemn large swathes of the human race to death: in effect, a cull, which we are seeing starting now. We’re entering an age of techno-feudalism where the Bill Gateses of this world are telling governments what to do.
It’s billionaires and governments versus the people, using The Science (TM) to frighten people. Compare the world now with 1999. Little has changed in the physical world, but in society the internet has become an all-purpose method of spying on the public and spreading state lies to divide and control us.
Put simply, the world is fine, the same as ever it was. The governments of the world and their supranational organisations are what has changed as they’ve formed a global technocratic dictatorship. Perhaps this was the ultimate cost of the communications revolution. It has to be fought.
Top class Dom.
Good comment. But the Internet is also a place where you and I can challenge the state lies and the technocratic elite. It is unlikely that will be enough though as the power of propaganda from government and bought and paid for media is successfully brainwashing an unsuspecting public, who assume media is doing Investigative Journalism on their behalf. Nothing could be further from the truth, and we see now when a Channel like GB News sticks its head above the parapet that it is quickly slapped down by moderators till it backs down and simply turns into SKY NEWS Lite.
“We Can’t Bankrupt Ourselves Getting to Net Zero”
But we are going to anyway!!!!!!
Its all an election con trick. We will do the pocket cleansing more professionally then the woodentop brigade. They are all the same, signed up to the Globalist doctrine. So the only way is an alternative Gov., away from these two communists, or a revolution, which will never happen. We all know net zero is a con trick as well but its going to happen one way or another. Too much money at stake to let it fail. Our money by the way!!!!!
We will own nothing and be miserable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They don’t care about us, only when they want us to vote for them. Then back on the shelf & do as you are told. I wish people would waken up!
Kemi is one of the guys (or gals), but why attempt to reach this absurd target at all, given the relative harmlessness of CO2? I don’t get it – why do these people think it’s poisonous?
I want to understand, courtesy of a proper piece of research, why Net Zero is necessary. I have read all the hypotheses and prophecies and am no further forward.
All we are doing is exporting “our” CO2 to China, India and others ….. as we destroy what remains of our manufacturing base, hundreds of thousands of decent jobs, and the savings/finances of every family in the UK.
I do not consent. Not now; not ever.
CO2 = wealth, not climate. Climate Change politics is therefore wealth redistribution and the IPCC admit as much.
I had hoped Kemi would see through the whole Net Zero malarkey, and reject it. Is there any senior politician that will stand up and say we must not do it?
Covid Hoax
Climate Hoax
Wokey Wokes
and Silly Folks
I’m wondering whether anyone in Parliament actually has a brain. Why is CO2 bad the trees don’t think so and we receive O2 for us to breathe? Is that bad? This is absolutely nothing to do with science and ALL to do with politics. Surely for goodness sake this woman must see this nonsense for what it is?
Despair doesn’t even get anywhere near how I feel right now. Utter utter madness.
Badenoch, like Redwood, Davis, Davies, McVey, Baker, Patel, Braverman, Mogg and others talk the talk but they haven’t had the slightest effect in halting the leftwards drift of the Party for going on thirty years. But they are useful to the Party in that they appeal to credulous centre right voters at election time. At heart, these actors are no less Party grifters than the rest of them. When push comes to shove they follow the Party line.
She has to balance to conflicting interests: In order to win an election, the party needs both votes from the electorate and generous donations from rich people. The COPers are rich people and willing to be generous when it suits their political agenda. And this money can be used for a propaganda campaign which will hopefully fool voters. This has worked so far — there are still students running around with facemasks — and hence, it’ll likely continue to work on future. For as long as electioneering in its present form continues to be central to achieving political power, there’s little hope of improvement in this area.
An utterly pointless exercise, unless of course, you’re trying to destroy the livelihoods and economy of the British people.