In the first two days, the article by Prof. Dr. med. HC Paul Robert Vogt from Switzerland hasbeen read over 350,000 times and shared a thousand times. Professor Vogt is a Cardiac and thoracic Vascular Surgery Specialist and demontstates the failures in looking at the virus. He will be replacing ignorance and arrogance with facts in this article. The article was translated in German by Dr. Peter Tarlow, the eTN Safety and Security Expert www.safertourism.com . Dr Tarlow states: I corrected the Google Translation in English to make it more intelligible for an English speaking reader. The thoughts are his; the translation corrections are mine
Professor Vogt: Why am I taking a position?
For 5 reasons:
1. I have been working with EurAsia Heart – A Swiss Medical Foundation in EurAsia for more than 20 years, have worked in China for almost a year and have had a continuous connection to the Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College / Huazhong University for 20 years of Science and Technology »in Wuhan, where I have one of my four visiting professorships in China. I have been able to maintain the 20-year connection to Wuhan constantly in the current times.
- COVID-19 is not only a mechanical ventilation problem; it affects the heart in a similar way. Some 30% of all patients who do not survive the intensive care unit die for cardiac reasons.
- The last possible therapy for lung failure is invasive cardiological or cardio surgical one: the use of an «ECMO», the method of «extracorporeal membrane oxygenation», ie the connection of the patient to an external, artificial lung, which is used in this clinical picture can take over the function of the patient’s lungs until it works again.
- I was asked – quite simply – for my opinion.
- Both the level of media coverage and a large number of readers’ comments are not to be accepted without contradiction in terms of facts, morality, racism, and eugenics. We urgently need an objection based on reliable data and information.
The facts presented come from peer reviewed scientific papers and have been published in the best medical journals. Many of these facts were known by the end of February. If you (speaking to Switzerland’s medical profession) had taken note of these medical facts and had been able to separate ideology, politics and medicine, Switzerland would very likely be in a better position today: we would not have the second most COVID-19-positive people worldwide and per capita significantly smaller number of people who lost their lives in the context of this pandemic. In addition, it is very likely that we would not have had a partial, incomplete lockdown of our economy and no controversial discussions about how we can “get out of here”.
I would also like to note that all of the scientific works I mention are available from me in their original form.
1. The numbers in the media
It is understandable that everyone wants to understand the extent of this pandemic in one way or another. However, the daily arithmetic does not help us, because we do not know how many people have had contact with the virus without consequences and how many people have actually gotten sick.
The number of asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers is important in order to make assumptions about the spread of the pandemic. To have usable data, however, one would have had to carry out broad mass tests at the beginning of the pandemic. Today one can only guess how many Swiss had contact with COVID-19. A paper with an American-Chinese authorship already published on March 16, 2020 (notes) that out of 14 documented cases, 86 were undocumented cases of COVID-19-positive people. In Switzerland, one must therefore expect that 15x to 20x more people are COVID-19 positive than is shown in the daily calculations. In order to assess the severity of the pandemic, we would need other data:
- An exact, globally valid definition of the diagnosis “suffering from COVID-19”:
a) positive laboratory test + symptoms;
- b) positive laboratory test + symptoms corresponding result in lung CTc) positive laboratory test, no symptoms, but corresponding findings in lung CT.
- 2) the number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the general (hospitals’) wards
- 3) the number of COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit
- 4) the number of ventilated COVID-19 patients
- 5) the number of COVID-19 patients at the ECMO
- 6) the number of COVID-19 deceased
- 7) the number of infected doctors and nurses
Only these numbers give a picture of the severity of this pandemic, or of the danger of this virus. The current accumulation of numbers is so imprecise and has a touch of “sensation press” – the last thing we need in this situation.
2. “An ordinary flu”
Is this just “an ordinary flu” that passes every year and we usually do nothing about it – or a dangerous pandemic that requires rigid measures?
To answer this question, you definitely don’t need to ask statisticians who have never seen a patient. The pure, statistical assessment of this pandemic is immoral anyway. You have to ask the people on the frontlines.
None of my colleagues – and neither of course I – and none of the nursing staff can remember that the following conditions have prevailed in the past 30 or 40 years, namely:
- entire clinics are filled with patients who all have the same diagnosis;
- whole intensive care units are filled with patients who all have the same diagnosis;
- some 25% to 30% of nurses and the medical profession also acquire exactly the disease than those patients who care for them have;
- too few ventilators were available;
the patient selection had to be carried out, not for medical reasons, but because the sheer number of patients simply lacked the appropriate material;
- the seriously ill patients all had the same – a uniform – clinical picture;
- the mode of death of all those who died in intensive care is the same;
- Medicines and medical material threaten to run out.
Based on the above it is clear that it is a dangerous virus that underlies this pandemic.
The claim that “influenza” is equally dangerous and costs the same number of victims every year is wrong. In addition, the claim that one does not know who is dying and who is dying because of COVID-19 is also out of thin air.
Let us compare influenza and COVID19: do you have the feeling that with influenza all patients always died “because of” influenza and never one “with “? Are we medical doctors in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic suddenly all so stupid that we can no longer distinguish whether someone dies “with” or “because of” COVID-19 if these patients have a typical clinic, typical laboratory findings and a typical one? Have lung CT? Aha, when it came to the diagnosis of “influenza”, of course, everyone was always wide awake and always tried the whole diagnosis and was always sure: no, with influenza, everyone dies “because of” and only with COVID-19 many “with”.
In addition: if there were supposedly 1,600 influenza deaths in Switzerland in one year, we are talking about 1,600 deaths over 12 months – without preventive measures. With COVID-19, however, there were, despite massive counter, measures600 deaths in 1(one) month! Radical countermeasures can reduce the spread of COVID-19 by 90% – so you can imagine which scenario would exist without countermeasures.
In addition: in one month> 2200 patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 in Switzerland and up to 500 patients were hospitalized in different intensive care units at the same time. None of us has ever seen such conditions in the context of «influenza».
About 8% of caregivers also acquire influenza as part of an “ordinary” influenza, but no one dies from it. In COVID-19, some 25% to 30% of caregivers are infected and this is associated with significant mortality. Dozens of doctors and nurses who have cared for COVID-19 patients have died of the same infection.
Also: look for the hard numbers on «influenza»! You won’t find any. What you will find are estimates: approx. 1000 or 1600 in Switzerland; about 8000 in Italy; approx. 20,000 in Germany. An FDA study (US Food and Drug Administration) examined how many of the 48,000 influenza deaths in one year in the United States really died from classic influenza pneumonia. The result: all possible clinical pictures were subsumed under “death from pneumonia”, for example the pneumonia of a newborn that had amniotic fluid aspirated into the lungs at birth. In this analysis, the number of (patients who) effectively “died from influenza” dropped dramatically below 10,000.
In Switzerland, we do not know the exact number of patients who die from influenza each year either. And this (reality Is) despite dozens of massively overpriced data acquisition systems; despite senseless double and triple data entry by clinics, health insurance companies and health directors; despite a senseless and overpriced DRG system that only produces nonsense. We cannot even provide the exact number of hospitalized influenza patients per month! But waste millions and billions (of Swiss Francs) on overpriced and counterproductive IT projects.
Based on the current state of knowledge, one cannot generally speak of an “ordinary flu”. And that is why the unrestrained epidemic of society is not a recipe (I believe he is saying; minimal quarantining). A recipe, of course, that Great Britain, the Netherlands and Sweden tried and gave up one after the other.
Due to the current, inadequate level of knowledge, the figures for March also say nothing at all. We can get off lightly or experience a disaster. Rigid measures mean that the curve of the sick is flatter. But it’s not just about the height of the curve, it’s also about the area under the curve and this ultimately represents the number of deaths.
3. «Only old and sick patients die»
Percentages – secondary diagnoses – morality and EUGENIK
The age of those who died in Switzerland is between 32 and 100 years. There are also some studies and reports that show that children have died of COVID-19.
Whether 0.9% or 1.2% or 2.3% die of COVID-19 is secondary and just food for statisticians. The absolute number of deaths caused by this pandemic is relevant. Are 5000 deaths less bad if they represent 0.9% of all COVID-19 carriers? Or are 5,000 dead worse if they represent 2.3% of all COVID-19 carriers?
The average age of the deceased patients is said to be 83, which many – too many in our society – probably dismiss as negligible.
This “casual generosity” when others die cannot be overlooked in our society. I know the other thing, the immediate shouting and the immediate blame when it hits someone or someone close to me.
- Age is relative. One US presidential candidate is 73 today and the other is 77. Reaching a high, self-determined age with a good quality of life is a valuable asset for which we have invested in health care in Switzerland. And it is the result of medicine that you can live to old age with three side diagnoses and good quality of life. These positive achievements of our society are suddenly no longer worth anything, but more, just a burden?
In addition: if 1000 over 65-year-olds or 1000 over 75-year-olds who previously thought they were healthy are examined, after a thorough check > 80% new 3 “secondary diagnoses”, especially when it comes to the widespread diagnoses ” high blood pressure ”or“ sugar ”.
Certain media articles and readers’ comments – far too many, in my opinion – cross all borders in this discussion, have the bad smell of eugenics and reminders of familiar times arise. Do I really have to name those years? I am amazed that our media have made no effort to write plain text on this matter. It is our media that publish these miserable opinions in their comment columns and leave them there. And it is just as surprising that the politicians do not consider it necessary to give a clear opinion on this point.
This pandemic was announced
- Was Switzerland minimally prepared for this pandemic?
- Are there any precautions taken when COVID-19 broke out in China? NO
- Did you know that a COVID-19 pandemic would spread across the world?
YES, IT WAS ANNOUNCED AND THE DATA DATE BY MARCH 2019.
SARS was in 2003 .
MERS was in 2012 .
In 2013: the German Bundestag discussed disaster scenarios: How does Germany prepare for disasters, such as floods? In this context, it was also discussed how Germany must react to a future SARS pandemic! Yes, in 2013 the German Bundestag simulated a SARS corona pandemic in Europe and Germany!
In 2015: an experimental collaborative effort was published by researchers from three US universities, Wuhan and an Italian researcher from Varese, who has a laboratory in Bellinzona. These produced synthetically produced corona viruses in the laboratory and thus infected cell cultures and mice. The reason for the work: they wanted to produce a vaccine or monoclonal antibody to be prepared for the next corona pandemic.
At the end of 2014: the U.S. government suspended research on MERS and SARS for one year because of the danger to humans.
In 2015: Bill Gates made a widely regarded speech and said that the world was unprepared for the next corona pandemic.
In 2016: another research paper appeared that dealt with corona viruses. The «summary» of this publication has to be melted in your mouth because it is the perfect description of what is currently going on:
“Focusing on SARS-like CoVs, the approach indicates that viruses using the WIV1-CoV spike protein are capable of infecting human alveolar endothelium cultures directly without further spike adaptation. In vivo data indicate attenuation relative to SARS-CoV, the augmented replication in the presence of human angiotensin converting enzyme type 2 in vivo suggests that the virus has significant pathogenic potential not captured by current small animal models. ”
In March 2019: the epidemiological study by Peng Zhou from Wuhan said that, due to the biology of the corona viruses in bats (“bat”) in China, it can be predicted that there will shortly be another corona pandemic. Of course! You just can’t say exactly when and where, but China will be the hot spot.
In principle, there were 8 CONCRETE, CLEAR WARNINGS WITHIN 17 YEARS that something like this would come. AND THEN IT WILL ACTUALLY COME! In December 2019, 9 months after Peng Zhou’s warning. And the Chinese informed the WHO after seeing 27 patients with atypical pneumonia without death. The Taiwan reaction chain, which consisted of a total of 124 measures, begins on December 31 – all published by March 3, 2020. And no, it was not published in Taiwanese-Chinese in an Asian medical journal, but with the collaboration of the University of California in the ” Journal of American Medical Association “.
The only thing you had to do: from December 31, 2019, enter “bat + coronavirus” in “PubMed”, the US National Library of Medicine, and all the data was available. And all you had to do was follow the publications until the end of February 2020 to know: 1) what to expect and 2) what to do.
Uzbekistan ordered its 82 students from Wuhan back in December and put them in quarantine. On March 10, I warned Switzerland from Uzbekistan because I had been asked my opinion: parliamentarians, the Bundesrat, BAG, the media.
And what has Switzerland done since China notified the WHO on December 31, 2019? (What have) our state governments, our BAG, our experts, our pandemic commission (done)? It looks like they have not noticed anything. Of course, the situation is delicate. Should you inform the population? Create panic? How to proceed? What could at least have been done: study the excellent scientific work of the Chinese and American-Chinese scientists that have been published in the best American and English medical journals.
At least – and that would have been feasible without informing the population, without sowing panic – one could at least have filled in the necessary medical material. That Switzerland, with its 85-billion-euro healthcare system, in which an average middle class family of four can no longer pay the health insurance premiums, is on the wall after 14 days of mild headwind, with too few masks, too little disinfectant and too little medical equipment is a shame. What did the pandemic commission do? If that doesn’t need a PUK. But none that of interest to our politicians.
And so the official failure has continued to this day. None of the measures successfully used by Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong or China have been applied. No border closure, no border controls, everyone could and can still easily immigrate to Switzerland without being checked at all (I learned this myself on March 15).
It was the Austrians who closed the border with Switzerland and it was the Italian government that finally stopped the SBB at the end of March and so on and so on. And there is still no quarantine for people entering Switzerland.
Was Antonio Lanzavecchia’s research group consulted in Bellinzona? Antonio Lanzavecchia, who co-authored the research on synthetic coronaviruses mentioned above? How can it be that Mr. Lanzavecchia on March 20 in a small Ticino TV station says that this virus is extremely contagious and extremely resistant – so the BAG on March 22, 2 days later, writes of a “silver lining”?
How can it be that mixed American-Chinese authorship publishes in Science on March 6 that only a combined border closure and a local curfew are effective, but can then curb the spread of the virus by 90% – the FOPH and the Federal Council but say that border closures are useless, “because most people would be infected at home anyway”.
The mask-wearing was found not necessary – not because its effectiveness had not been proven. No, because you simply couldn’t provide enough masks. You’d have to laugh if it weren’t so tragic: instead of admitting your own omissions and correcting them immediately, you’d better have the German ambassador called in. What was said to him: That the 85 billion (euro) Swiss healthcare system has no masks to protect its citizens, nurses and doctors?
The series of embarrassing breakdowns can be expanded: hand disinfection! Recommended because it is effective and recommended already during the Spanish flu era. Have we ever heard from our decision-makers which disinfectants are effective and which are not? We didn’t, although a summary of 22 papers was published in the Journal of Hospital Infection on February 6, 2020, which reported back then that corona viruses could survive up to 9 days on metal, plastic and glass, and which three Disinfectants kill the virus within 1 (one) minute and which ones don’t. Of course, the right disinfectant could not be specifically recommended: the citizen would have noticed that there wasn’t enough of it at all, because the pandemic store, which was supposed to have ethanol (62% to 71% ethanol kills corona viruses within one minute), was closed in 2018.
When the difficulties of the pandemic also became apparent to the BAG, it was announced that patients who had to go to the intensive care unit would have bad chances anyway. This is in clear contradiction to 4 previously published scientific papers, which all agree that 38% to 95% of all patients who had to go to the intensive care unit could be discharged home.
I do not want to mention any other points here. Two things are clear: the pandemic has been announced at least 8 times since 2003. And after their outbreak was reported to WHO on December 31, 2019, they would have had two months to study the right data and draw the right conclusions. Taiwan, for example, whose 124 measures were published early, has the least number of infected and fatalities and has not had to “lock down” the economy.
The measures of the Asian countries were classified as not feasible for us (Switzerland) for political and diffuse reasons. One of them: the tracking of infected people. Supposedly (that is) impossible and that in a society that easily transfers its private data to iCloud’s and Facebook. Tracking? If I get off the plane in Tashkent, Beijing or Yangon, it takes 10 seconds and Swisscom welcomes me to the respective country. Tracking? There is no with us.
If one had been better orientated, one would have seen that certain countries could do without rigid measures. In Switzerland, measures were taken semi-rigidly or not at all, but actually let the population be infected. More rigid measures were taken too late. If you had reacted, you (Switzerland) might not have had to take any such measures – and could save yourself the current discussions about an “exit”. I don’t want to talk about the economic consequences.
5. Political aspects – propaganda
Why didn’t Switzerland look to Asia? There was enough time. Or in other words: how Switzerland you look at Asia? The answer is clear: arrogant, ignorant and know-it-all. Typically European, or should I say typically Swiss?
Xi Jinping was still nice when he said that because of its “narcissism” Europe had quickly become the global center of the pandemic. I would add: because of Switzerland’s arrogance, ignorance and unspeakable know-it-all.
In the comment columns, more and more readers of our media have noticed that if we ourselves have the highest rate of COVID-19 positive people and one of the highest death rates per person with Spain, we may stop teaching others constantly.
Europe seems unteachable. America – at least its scientists and some of its political journalists – reacted differently. America has recognized the excellent scientific work of Chinese authors and published it in their best medical journals. Even in “Foreign Affairs”, the most important essay journal on international politics, there are works with headings such as: “What the world can learn from China”; and “China has an app and the rest of the world needs a plan”; furthermore, that “international cooperation between scientists is an example” of how one has to “work together multi-polarity” in other areas and how the world is “interconnected”. Even the oft-cited Anthony Fauci, Trump’s chief virology,
The fact that the US political leadership has not implemented this is not the problem of the scientists, who, including WHO, praised the excellent work of the Chinese on the ground: “the Chinese know exactly what they do”; “And they are really, really good at it”.
In contrast, the German magazine DER SPIEGEL published an article entitled “Deadly arrogance” and by that they did not mean America, but arrogant Europe.
What are the facts?
After the SARS epidemic, China installed a monitoring program that should report a conspicuous cluster of atypical pneumonia as early as possible. When 4 patients in this country with its gigantic population showed atypical pneumonia in a short time, the monitoring system triggered an alarm.
On December 31, the Chinese government informed WHO that after 27 (other sources say: 41) patients in Wuhan had been diagnosed with atypical pneumonia but had not yet had one death.
On January 7, 2020, the same team at Peng Zhou, which warned of a corona pandemic in March 2019, released the fully-defined genome of the causative virus to the world so that test kits could be developed worldwide as quickly as possible, researching vaccination and monoclonal antibodies can be produced: contrary to the WHO’s opinion, the Chinese paralyzed Wuhan in January with a travel ban and a curfew.
I don’t have to go into the other measures that have been taken in China. According to international research teams, China saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of patients with these early and radical measures.
On December 31, 2019, Taiwan stopped all flights from Wuhan. The other 124 measures taken in Taiwan are published in the Journal of American Medical Association – in good time. One should only have taken note of them.
Without a doubt, China’s command and control structure initially led to the suppression of relevant information, but vice versa it worked even more effectively later in limiting the pandemic. Dealing with ophthalmologist Li Wenliang is terrible, but it fits in with such events. When in 1918 the American country doctor Loring Miner in Haskell County in the US state of Kansas saw several patients with flu symptoms who exceeded the severity of all previous symptoms, he turned to the United States Public Health Service and asked for support. This was refused. Three Haskell County patients were drafted into military service. Albert Gitchell, the NCO – the patient NULL – spread the virus to the company he was cooking for and which was being relocated to Europe. Some 40 days later there were 20 million infected and 20,000 dead in Europe. The 1918 pandemic caused more deaths than World War I.
Western complaints about Li Wenliang’s “treatment” are justified, but they are dripping with double standards, since one knows what fate whistleblowers experience in the West with their great values. The United States government also attempted to filter medical information by directing America’s leading virologists to Trump to discuss any public statements with Mike Pence, the vice president, which was published in the recently published “Science” under the title ” Do us a favor ”has been described as“ unacceptable ”and compared to China.
Politics is one thing; scientific work is another. By the end of February 2020, so many excellent scientific papers with Chinese and mixed American-Chinese authors had appeared that one could have known what the pandemic was about and what should be done.
Why did you miss everything?
(We miss) because neither politicians, nor the media nor the majority of citizens are able to separate ideology, politics and medicine in such a situation. Viral pneumonia is a medical and not a political problem. Thanks to the politically and ideologically justified ignoring of medical facts, Europe quickly made itself the worldwide pandemic center – right in the middle of Switzerland with the second highest infection rate per capita.
Politics and the media play a particularly inglorious role here. Instead of focusing on their own failures, the population is distracted by continued, stupid China bashing. In addition, as always, Russia bashing and Trump bashing. You don’t have to like Trump at all – but until the US is on a par with Switzerland in terms of COVID 19 deaths per capita, (no one in the US should bash Trump).
How can Switzerland constantly criticize other countries if you have the second most infected person per capita with the second most expensive healthcare system in the world and you don’t have enough masks, enough disinfectants or enough medical equipment? Switzerland was not surprised by this pandemic – after December 31, 2019, there was at least 2 months to take the urgently needed precautions. And the media have contributed enough to this behavior. The media coverage is exhausted in fine speeches, what the Federal Council and BAG cause and in criticizing other countries.
There are enough examples of stupid China bashing: “The Chinese are to blame”! Anyone who claims something like this understands nothing about biology and life in general. “All pandemics come from China”: the Spanish flu was in fact an American flu, HIV came from Africa, Ebola came from Africa, swine flu from Mexico, the cholera epidemic of the 1960s with millions of deaths from Indonesia and MERS from the Middle East with center Saudi Arabia.
Yes, SARS came from China. But the Chinese, unlike us, have learned how “Foreign Affairs” wrote on March 27, 2020: “Past Pandemics Exposed China’s Weakness. The Current One Highlights Its Strengths ”.
If it is consistently claimed that the figures published by China on the COVID 19 pandemic are all glossed over anyway, what does that mean? Does that mean we don’t have to do anything about it? Or does it not mean much more – if these figures are really glossed over – that it is an even more dangerous pandemic for which we should make arrangements in Europe? So much for the logic of senseless, political chatter!
With constant statements like “the Chinese are only lying anyway” “Taiwan you can’t believe anything”; “Singapore, a family dictatorship, is lying anyway”, one cannot cope with this pandemic. Here, too, the US magazine “Foreign Affairs” – certainly not China-friendly per se – is acting smarter, as you can read on March 24, 2020: “The US and China Could Cooperate to Defeat the Pandemic. Instead, Their Antagonism Makes Matters Worse ”. And on March 21st: “It Takes a World to End a Pandemic. Scientific Cooperation Knows No Boundaries – Fortunately ”.
I can only welcome Lukas Bärfuss’ criticism. In particular his statement:
«Why the relevant factories are no longer in Biberist. But in Wuhan. And whether this allocation problem may not only affect cellulose, but also information, education, food and medication ».
This statement hits the mark and unmask our arrogance and ignorance.
Isn’t it enough that at the beginning of this pandemic, the West looked snotty and with a certain glee at China? Does China’s support for Western countries now have to be maliciously defamed? To date, China has supplied 3.86 billion masks, 38 million protective suits, 2.4 million infrared temperature-measuring devices and 16,000 ventilators. Not China’s alleged claim to world power, but the failure of Western countries has led to the West literally hanging on China’s medical drip.
6. Where does this virus come from?
There are approximately 6400 mammal species on our globe. Bats and fruit bats make up 20% of the mammalian population. There are 1000 different types of bats and fruit bats. They are the only mammals that can fly, which explains their large range of motion.
Bats and fruit bats are home to a myriad of viruses. Bats and fruit bats in the history of development have probably been the entry point for viruses in the pedigree of mammals.
There are numerous dangerous viruses that have spread from humans to the “bats” and are responsible for many diseases: measles, mumps, rabies, Marburg fever, Ebola and other, rarer, no less dangerous diseases. (I wonder if this statement should be bats to humans?) In other mammals, viruses derived from “Bats” have repeatedly led to mass deaths in pig, chicken or bird breeding.
These are biological processes that are millions of years old. The DNA of healthy people also contains remnants of viral gene sequences that have been “built in” over the millennia.
SARS and MERS have intensified research on corona viruses, precisely because an expected new corona virus epidemic or pandemic is expected soon. Some 22 of the 38 known and by no means definitely classified corona viruses have been extensively studied by Chinese researchers, see, among others, Peng Zhou’s publication on the epidemiology of “bat coronaviruses in China” and the other publications by American authors mentioned above. Peng Zhou predicted an upcoming new corona epidemic in March 2019 for the following reasons:
- high biodiversity in China;
- high number of “bats” in China;
- high population density in China = close coexistence between animals and humans;
- high genetic variability of the “bats”, ie a high probability that the genome of individual coronavirus types can change spontaneously as a result of random mutations;
- high active genetic recombination of corona viruses means: Corona viruses of different types exchange genome sequences with each other, which can then make them more aggressive for humans;
- The fact that many of these viruses – corona viruses, but also Ebola or Marburg viruses – live together in these «bats» and can accidentally exchange genetic material
Although not proven, Peng Zhou also addressed Chinese eating habits, which increase the likelihood of these viruses being transmitted from animals to humans. Peng Zhou warned of a corona pandemic in his March 2019 article. And he wrote that he could not say exactly when and where this pandemic would break out, but that China would very likely be a “hot spot”. So much for scientific freedom! Peng Zhou and his group from Wuhan continued to research, and it was they who identified the genome of COVID-19 on January 7 and shared it with the world.
There are 4 theories on how this virus spread to humans:
1) The COVID-19 virus has been transmitted from a bat directly to humans. However, the virus that comes into question and genetically matches 96% of the current “COVID-19” virus cannot, due to its structure, dock to the “angiotensin converting enzyme” (ACE) type 2 in the lungs. However, the virus needs this enzyme in order to be able to penetrate into the lung cells (and into the cells of the heart, kidney and intestine) and destroy them.
2) A COVID-19 virus jumped onto humans from pangolin, a Malaysian dandruffed mammal that was illegally imported into China, and was initially not disease-causing. 3) As part of consecutive human-to-human transmissions, this virus has adapted to the general human conditions thanks to mutation or adaptation and was finally able to dock onto the ACE2 receptor and penetrate the cells, which “started” the pandemic.
4) There is a parent strain of these two COVID-19 viruses, which unfortunately has so far remained undetected.
It is a synthetic laboratory virus, because this is exactly what was researched and the biological mechanism of arousal was already described in detail in 2016. The virologists in question denied this possibility, of course, but they cannot exclude it, too, to look up in the recently published “Nature Medicine”: “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” by Kristian Andersen.
The special thing about these facts is that corona viruses can live together with the Ebola virus on the same «bat» without the bat becoming ill. On the one hand, this is scientifically interesting because perhaps immune mechanisms can be found that explain why these bats do not get sick. These immune mechanisms against corona viruses and the Ebola virus could provide insights that are important for Homo sapiens. On the other hand, these facts are worrying because one can imagine that due to the high, active, genetic recombination, a “supervirus” can form, which has a longer incubation period than the current COVID-19 virus, but the lethality of the Ebola virus.
SARS had a10% mortality; the mortality of MERS was 36%. It was not due to homo sapiens that SARS and MERS did not spread as quickly as COVID-19 now. It was just luck. The claim that a virus with a high mortality rate could not spread because it was killing its host far too quickly was correct at the time when an “infected” camel caravan had left X’ian towards the Silk Road and because of it the high mortality in the next caravanserai no longer arrived. Today is a snap. Today everyone is massively networked. A virus that kills in 3 days still goes around the world. Everyone knows Beijing and Shanghai. I have known Wuhan for 20 years. None of my colleagues or acquaintances has ever heard of Wuhan. But did you see how many foreigners there were in Wuhan – in a city that “nobody knows” – and how they were distributed to all regions of the world at lightning speed? That is the situation today.
7. What do we know? What we don’t know
1) that it is an aggressive virus;
2) that the mean incubation period lasts 5 days; the maximum incubation period is not yet clear;
3) that asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers can infect other people and that this virus is “extremely contagious” and “extremely resistant” (A. Lanzavecchia);
4) we know the risk populations;
5) that in the past 17 years it has not been possible to develop either vaccination or a monoclonal antibody against coronaviruses;
6) that vaccination against whatever corona virus has never been developed;
7) that the so-called “flu vaccination” has only a minimal effect, contrary to popular advertising.
What we don’t know:
1) whether or not there is immunity after undergoing infection. Certain data indicate that humans can develop immunoglobulins of the G class from day 15, which should prevent re-infection with the same virus. But it has not yet been definitely proven;
2) how long a possible immunity could protect;
3) whether this COVID-19 virus remains stable, or whether a slightly different COVID-19 spreads again around the world in the autumn, analogous to the usual flu wave, against which there is no immunity;
4) whether the higher temperatures in summer will help us because the casing of the COVID-19 is unstable at higher temperatures. It must be mentioned here that the MERS virus spread in the Middle East from May to July, when the temperatures were higher than we have ever experienced;
how long it takes for a population to be so infected that the R-value is <1:
If you test 1 million people in Zurich at a certain point in time, 12% to 18% COVID-19 is said to be positive at the moment. In order to deprive the pandemic of its pandemic character, the R value must be <1, ie approximately 66% of the population must have had contact with the virus and have developed immunity. Nobody knows how long, how many months it will take until the infection, which is currently supposed to be 12% to 18%, has reached 66%! But it can be assumed that the spread of the virus from 12% to 18% to 66% of the population will continue to generate seriously ill patients.
- so we don’t know how long we’ll be dealing with this virus. Two reports, which should not be accessible to the public (US Government COVID Response Plan and a report from Imperial College London) come independently to a “lock-down” phase of up to 18 months;
- and we don’t know if this virus will occupy us epidemic / pandemic or maybe even endemic;
- we still have not recognized and widely applicable, defined therapy; We have never been able to present one of these in the case of influenza.
Perhaps authorities and the media should put the facts on the table instead of presenting reports of an apparently successful vaccination that is not far away every two days.
- What can we do now?
I can’t answer the question about the best solutions either. It is possible whether Switzerland can contain the pandemic at all or whether the infection continues unaffected because all measures have initially been overslept.
If so, one can only hope that we will not pay (for) this “policy” with too many dead and critically ill. And that not too many patients suffer from the long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection, such as “thanks to” COVID-19 newly acquired lung fibrosis, a disturbed glucose metabolism and emerging cardiovascular diseases. The long-term consequences of having undergone SARS infection are documented up to 12 years after the alleged healing. Let’s hope that COVID-19 will behave differently.
The lifting of the “lock-down”, or the return to what we perceive as normal, is certainly everyone’s wish. Nobody can predict which steps will lead to negative consequences when returning to normalization – that is, if the infection rate flares up again. Every step towards easing is basically a step into the unknown.
We can only say what is not feasible: an active infection of the non-risk groups with the COVID-19 virus is surely an absolute fantasy. It can only come to mind people who have no idea about biology, medicine and ethics:
it is certainly out of the question to deliberately infect millions of healthy citizens with an aggressive virus of which we actually know absolutely nothing, neither the extent of the acute damage nor the long-term consequences;
1) the greater the number of viruses per population, the greater the chance of an accidental mutation, which could make the virus even more aggressive. So we should definitely not actively help to increase the number of viruses per population.
2) The more people are infected with COVID-19, the more likely it is that this virus will adapt “better” to humans and become even more disastrous. It is assumed that this has already happened before.
3) with (Swiss) government reserves of supposedly US$750 billion, it is ethically and morally reprehensible to infect millions of healthy individuals for mere economic considerations.
The deliberate infection of healthy people with this aggressive virus would acutely undermine one of the fundamental principles of the entire medical history out of pure, short-term economic “concerns”: the principle of the “primum nil nocere” (Translation: First do no harm). As a doctor, I would refuse to take part in such a vaccination campaign at all.
The determination of the COVID-19 IgM and IgG antibody concentration in the blood apparently goes hand in hand with the neutralization of the COVID-19 virus. The quantitative and qualitative diagnosis of these antibodies has so far only been investigated in a small clinical study with 23 patients. It is currently not possible to say whether the determination of the mass of antibodies in the blood will make a controlled “lock-down” more secure by allowing only infectious and infectious people to move freely. It is also unclear when this method will be clinically valid and widely applicable.
This pandemic raises many political questions. “Foreign Affairs” with Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci on the cover wrote on March 28, 2020: “Plagues Tell Us Who We Are. The Real Lessons of the Pandemic Will Be Political ”.
These political questions will be national and international.
The first questions will definitely affect our healthcare system. With a budget of 85 billion, Switzerland – in terms of the number of corona patients per 1 million population – made it to second place worldwide. Congratulations! What a shame! Basic and cheap material is missing in Switzerland after 14 days. That comes when self-proclaimed “health politicians”, “health economists” and IT experts spend billions on projects such as e-health, electronic health cards, overpriced clinic information systems (ask the Lucerne Cantonal Hospital!), Tons of computers and “Big Data.” »Invest and thus withdraw billions from the healthcare system that are completely misused. And the medical profession and FMH are literally too stupid to finally stand up to it. They prefer to be called rip-offs and criminals every week. Switzerland must finally investigate How much out of each 1 million cash funds are still used for medical services, which benefit the patient directly and how much money is used for other purposes than lobby associations outside the industry, which shamelessly enrich themselves on the 85 billion cake without ever seeing a patient . And, of course, adequate quality control of medical services is finally needed. I do not want to go into further measures as part of the reorganization of the Swiss healthcare system here. And, of course, adequate quality control of medical services is finally needed. I do not want to go into further measures as part of the reorganization of the Swiss healthcare system here. And, of course, adequate quality control of medical services is finally needed. I do not want to go into further measures as part of the reorganization of the Swiss healthcare system here.
The international questions primarily concern our relationship with China and the Asian countries in general. Critical comments: yes. But constant, stupid “bashing” of other nations cannot be a recipe for tackling global problems together – I don’t even want to speak of “solving”. Instead of parroting senseless propaganda, one should perhaps deal with authors who actually have something to say at a high level, such as:
Pankaj Mishra: “From the ruins of the empire”
Kishore Mahbubani: “The Asean Miracle. A Catalyst for Peace “
“Has the West lost it?”
“Can Asians think?”
Lee Kuan Yew: “One man’s view of the world”
David Engels: “On the way to the empire”
Noam Chomsky: “Who rules the world”
Bruno Macàes: “The Dawn of Eurasia”
Joseph Stiglitz: “Rich and poor”
Stephan Lessenich: “The Deluge Beside Us”
Parag Khanna: “Our Asian Future”
Reading does not mean that all these authors are right in everything. But it would be of great value for the West – including Switzerland – to replace know-it-all, ignorance and arrogance here and there with facts, understanding and cooperation. The only alternative is to try to eliminate our supposed competitors sooner or later in a war. Everyone can decide for him/herself what to think of this “solution”.
In this sense, one can only hope that humanity will remember better. Dreaming is always allowed.
The challenges are global. And the next pandemic is just around the corner. And maybe this will be caused by a super virus and take to an extent that we would rather not imagine.
In the first two days, the article had already been read over 350,000 times and shared a thousand times Prof. Dr. med. Dr. HC Paul Robert Vogt