The science fraud by Prof. Christian Drosten

Undefined
8
Average: 8 (1 vote)
The science fraud by Prof. Christian Drosten
Corona_FactsJuly 10, 2020


deepL translate
 
Prof. Christian Drosten is now known to basically everyone who has ever heard of Corona, and that should probably be most people. Strangely, few know his strange predictions, his inconsistencies, his dangerous statements, like scaremongering, but worst of all is probably the obvious scientific fraud committed by Drosten. 
The question one has to ask is, is Prof. Drosten doing this out of vaunting thoughts to reestablish his reputation from his massive mistakes (swine flu scandal), or for monetary reasons, or is it even worse justifications that I dare not address. Supplementary video by Samuel Eckert!
 
In this article I will show that Drosten has lost the scientific code, or does not know it at all. Both would be fatal. Let's get started.
 
  • The chronological sequence to the PCR test by Prof. Drosten and the Berlin Charité 
(pay attention to the chronological dates).
 
On 30.12.2019: the ophthalmologist Li Wenliang informed professional colleagues via Whatsapp that there were 7 cases in his hospital that were confirmed positive for SARS. 
 
On 31/12/2019: the Beijing government dispatched a "response team" of virologists and epidemiologists to support the cause in Wuhan.
 
On 01.01.2020: Prof. Christian Drosten of Charité heard about it and immediately started developing SARS viruses before it was even clear and could be clear whether the report from China about SARS was true and proven, and especially before the Chinese virologists published their findings! He testified that as of 01.01.2020 he has developed a genetic detection method that can reliably detect the presence of the new Corona virus in humans.
 
On 21.01.2020 (3 days before the first publication of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CCDC]) the WHO recommended all nations to use the "safe" test procedure developed by Prof. Drosten. 
 
Fact: Prof. Drosten used scientifically NOT tested data for his rapidly globalised PCR test of the 2019-nCOV, which was renamed SARS-CoV-2 on 07.02.2020 with Prof. Drosten's collaboration. This gave the impression that the Chinese had actually discovered a new virus, but this was never the case!
 
The claim that he had a reliable test procedure is therefore completely impossible. Drosten breaks and disregards the following rules.
 
1. disregarding the clearly stated rules of science, which are part of his employment contract.
 
2. increasing and globalising the Chinese epidemic panic by violating the laws of thought and logic of virology.
 
On 23.01.2020: Publication (PDF) of the development of Prof. Drosten's test procedure. On page 3 of this article, left column, 8 line from the bottom, he describes the first and decisive step of his procedure:
 
"Before public disclosure of viral sequences from cases with 2019-nCoV, we relied on social media reports announcing the detection of a SARS-like virus. Because of this, we assumed that a SARS-related CoV was involved in the outbreak."
 
 
At that time, no clinical data were available that could have been the basis for such an assumption.
 
On page 2 left column it states:
"In the present case of 2019-nCoV, viral isolates or samples from infected patients have not previously been available to the international public health community. We report here the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation that was developed in the absence of available viral isolates or original patient samples. Design and validation were enabled by close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV and supported by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology."
 
I would like to make a very important point at this point.
 
There are massive problems with the SARS-CoV-1 (2003) to which Drosten refers in his test for SARS-CoV-2 (2019).
In the publication in NATURE - Koch's postulates fulfilled for SARS(2003) virus the title suggests, as so often, that Koch's postulates were fulfilled. 
 
There, 5 authoritative studies are cited. (Also the study by Drosten at that time).
 
However, under MAIN it says "According to Koch's postulates, as modified by Rivers for viral diseases, six criteria are required to establish a virus as the cause of a disease".
 
Translated: "According to Koch's postulates, as modified by Rivers for viral diseases, six criteria are required to establish a virus as the cause of a disease" Here it becomes clear that these are not Koch's postulates, but modified postulates. After analysing the studies, it becomes clear that neither Koch's nor River's postulates were followed in the studies.  For details, please read my article "Leading Corona researchers admit they have no scientific proof of the existence of a virus".
 
As early as 2003, SARS-Cov-1 was also thought to be a genome strand of a new virus, in which Christian Drosten was significantly involved, only 2 days later Prof. Drosten offered an alleged test procedure for this thought-assembled alleged virus (entry on Wikipedia of 29.05.2020)! 
 
To date, the virologists have not succeeded in detecting a SARS virus from a patient, a bat, another animal, nor in the laboratory. The assumption of the virologists that viral genome strands exist in reality, which are structured in the same way as the genome strands that are thought to be composed of short gene sequences, could not be confirmed until today.
 
Those who speak English can directly recognise the fact that the "viral genome strand" (complete genome) is only constructed in thought in this publication, in which the RKI was significantly involved: "Complete Genome Sequence of a Wild-Type Measles Virus Isolated during the Spring 2013 Epidemic in Germany”.
 
 
 
Prof. Mankertz, co-author of this publication and head of the National Reference Institute for Measles, Mumps and Rubella at the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), has claimed in response to questions that control experiments were carried out for this study, which ruled out the possibility of misinterpreting typical cellular components (expert opinion no.3) as virus components. 
https://telegra.ph/Gerichtsprotokolle-bestätigen-Es-existiert-kein-wissenschaftlicher-Nachweis-für-das-Masernvirus-07-06
However, she refused to hand over the documentation of these control experiments. In an appeal, Prof. Mankertz replied that she did not have any control experiments after all and that her colleagues in Munich had certainly carried out and documented these control experiments. Dr. Stefan Lanka wrote to all authors and their laboratory directors and asked for the control experiments, which have been mandatory since 1998. None of those contacted replied. The rectors of the institutes contacted did not reply either, and so the complaint procedure came to nothing.
 
—————
 
Only On 24.01.2020 and 03.02.2020: The authoritative virologists of the Chinese disease control agency (CCDC) published their results on 24.01.2020 and 03.02.2020. They report on the isolation of "many" short gene sequences, which, when strung together, could represent a genetic strand of a novel virus. 
The authors explicitly pointed out (also all other virologists involved to date "as of 10.07.2020") that the compellingly necessary experiments have not yet been carried out that would allow to claim that it is indeed a genetic strand of a disease-causing virus. 
On the contrary, in fact: the Chinese virologists even explicitly point out that the constructed genetic strand has up to 90% similarity with genetic strands of harmless and claimed corona viruses in bats that have been known for decades.
Thus, the study of 24.01.2020 states under Discussion "our study does not fulfil Koch's postulates".
 
On 30.01.2020: after several previous tests, which were always negative, the doctor finally tested positive with one test. This increased the panic as the ophthalmologist announced this to the world
 
Insight:
The all-important question is whether Prof. Drosten has fulfilled his scientific duty,which is part of his employment contract (§2 "Principles of Good Scientific Practice"), to verify himself and consistently all claims in his publication about the detection method he developed and his public statements based on it.
 
 
The answer is a clear NO
Because of this central scientific duty, three central questions arise:
1. did Prof. Drosten check whether the gene sequences that are the basis of his test procedure and that he was provided with by Chinese virologists are actually sequences that originate from a virus?
 
Did Prof. Drosten carry out the control experiments that are mandatory in science to prove whether the sequences he used actually originate from a virus? Has he carried out the control experiments to prove whether the sequences he uses, which he attributes to the new virus, are not in fact sequences which he attributes to the new virus, are not in fact sequences which arise in every metabolism, perhaps even in plants, such as in Tanzanian papayas (fruits) [ Video of the President [ Reuters also reported ] or which arise more frequently in the metabolism in diseases?
 
 
3. on the basis of which assumptions, experiments and control tests can prof. Drosten claim that his test procedure, with which he only detects partial areas of 2 (two) genes from the genome of a total of 10 (ten) genes of the corona virus, detects a whole, active and disease-producing virus? And not only fragments of a virus, after an assumed successful fight of the immune system or the presence of defective or incomplete or harmless viruses in our genetic material, which are typical and make up 50% (statement of virologist Prof. Karin Mölling) of the gene masses of our chromosomes?  
 
Note to Karin Mölling: What Ms Mölling does not know, or is concealing, is the fact that metabolism constantly produces a large quantity of RNA gene sequences of any composition that do not appear in the form of DNA sequences in the chromosomes. This fact challenges the existence claims of all RNA viruses, such as Corona virus, Ebola virus, HIV, measles virus and the SARS viruses. This fact is also the basis why control experiments will immediately end not only the Corona crisis but the fear and mishandling by the entire virology of the alleged disease viruses. 
 
———-
 
Answered in summary: By the chronological sequences and the apparent act from them, the questions are clearly answered "Prof Drosten" did not follow up on these questions. He and his staff assumed, based on social media reports, that a SARS-related corona virus could be involved in the claimed outbreak of atypical pneumonia. At the time, there was no clinical data to base such a supposition on. 
For the further steps he has taken that show the fraud, I ask you to read Dr. Stefan Lanka's free paper 
Wissenschafftplus Misinterpretation Virus Part 2 on page 7, 8 and 9
 
 
For detailed information on PCR tests, read my two articles 
"PCR: A DNA test becomes an instrument of manipulation" and
 
 
and 
"The PCR test is not validated".
 
 
Prof. Christian Drosten was denounced by Dr. Stefan Lanka 
 
Prof. Drosten is the main person responsible for the fact that people all over the world have been and are still being put under living conditions that are defined as crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Code (VStGB) by means of the assertion of a demonstrably false fact.
Section 7 of the International Criminal Code (VStGB) defines in (1) as.
 
"Crimes against humanity":
"Whoever, in the course of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population".
2. "with the intention of destroying a population in whole or in part, places it or parts thereof in conditions of life likely to bring about its destruction in whole or in part,"
 
5. "tortures a human being in his or her custody or otherwise under his or her control by inflicting significant bodily or mental harm or suffering that is not merely the result of sanctions permitted under international law,"
 
8. "inflicts serious bodily or mental harm on another person, in particular of the kind referred to in section 226 of the Criminal Code,,"
 
Prof. Drosten knows that with his test, even assuming that a SARS-CoV-2 virus actually existed and was proven to have pathogenic properties
- whereby to this day the virologists involved point out that this proof has not yet been provided (sic!) -,
a. cannot prove the existence of an intact, infectious virus, but at best fragments that are attributed to the virus;
b. cannot distinguish between endogenous and exogenous substances.
 
Continue reading on the newsletter of Wissenschaftplus Magazine 13 June 2020 - Misinterpretation of the virus part II: Beginning and end of the corona crisis
 
  • Prof. Christian Drosten relies on models of those who have been completely wrong all the time.
 
The Imperial College in London had published a modelling, i.e. a projection or prognosis, put very simply, of how infection figures and deaths will continue, what measures are necessary, using the example of Great Britain and the USA. There are huge potential mortality rates. Even among people over 60, more than every fourth infected person is expected to end up in intensive care. 
How did Drosten assess this calculation? 
"Yes, I can't say now what my colleagues think, because this study is so new that hardly anyone has had time to read and understand it. But I also think it is a very important study. It is probably also one of the studies that was behind the current political decisions in Great Britain. But there, too, it's the same as with us: scientists were consulted for a long time, and these scientists also tried to provide very differentiated data. But at some point a political decision was made, and that is the right thing to do. We simply have to have political decisions now where it is said that it is better to do something now than to miss some opportunity - and then rather re-evaluate scientifically how the measures can be readjusted."
 
The question one has to ask is, if he couldn't even actually read the study, and as I will point out in a moment, one of the people in charge "Neil Ferguson" also called Mr. Genuis, was completely wrong with all his previous pandemic modelling, why did he [Drosten] and others [governments] rely on something like this? Let's move on to Niel Ferguson.
 
——-
 
The British corona middleman Neil Ferguson, seen and yet not observed!
Through his institute at London's Imperial College, he has great influence on the world's population. He himself is called Mr Genius when it comes to projecting computer models of epidemics.
 
According to the Business Insider: 
 
"Ferguson's team warned Boris Johnson that the quest for 'herd immunity' [letting people in Britain live their lives in the wild] could cost 510,000 lives, resulting in an abrupt U-turn [massive national lockdown in Britain].... His simulations were influential in other countries and were cited by authorities in the US, Germany and France."
These countries used Ferguson's model as a model and implemented it.
The "see Business Insider source" instruction led to a lockdown in a number of countries and economic devastation as a result!
 
So let's look at NEIL Ferguson's track record as outlined in the Business Insider article:
"Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Analysis of Infectious Diseases, based at Imperial, in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks."
...
"It receives tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, works with the UK National Health Service and the US Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), and is tasked with providing the World Health Organization with 'rapid analysis of urgent infectious disease problems'."
Does it click with you?
- Gates' money goes to Neil Ferguson 
 
- Gates demands and promotes vaccines and more vaccines.
 
- Gates wants a COVID vaccine before all aspects of the planetary lockdown end. Of course, the lockdowns are already ruining the planet's economy.
 
I need not mention that Bill Gates, also already well known in the mainstream media, is the secret head of the WHO.
 
Niel Ferguson provides the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and WHO with a frightening computer projection of COVID deaths. Ferguson thus provides a rationale for the Gates vaccine plan. 
The CDC and WHO are acting on what Gates wants, as Ferguson puts it. We have come full circle.
 
The national governments capitulate to the WHO and the CDC. They introduce a LOCKDOWN!
 
And here it comes!
"Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, told the paper he had 'déjà vu' after reading the [Ferguson] Imperial paper [on COVID] that Ferguson was responsible for the excessive culling of animals during the 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak."
...
"Ferguson warned the government at the time that 150,000 people could die. 6 million animals were slaughtered as a precaution, costing the country billions in farm revenue. In the end, 200 people died."
...
"Similarly, Niel Ferguson was accused of creating panic by overestimating the possible death toll during the 2005 bird flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated that 200 million people could die. The actual number was in the low hundreds."
 
So this man was demonstrably wrong all the time and spread incredible panic through his computer models that had nothing to do with reality. But it is precisely this man that Prof Drosten is following in his footsteps!
 
"In 2009, one of Ferguson's models predicted that 65,000 people could die from the swine flu outbreak in the UK - the final figure was less than 500."
 
So you have to ask yourself, why would anyone believe what Ferguson predicted in this COVID hoopla?
Are his expert colleagues and or the presidents/prime ministers so "stupid"?
Probably some of them are, some of them KNOW but dare not say anything (we are currently witnessing this from many lawyers and doctors), some of them are implicated and thereby want to create new structures that will destroy economies and lead us into a new world order.
 
He has the story, all dressed up in a computer model, composed by a man with a past of abject and devastating failures.
 
Neil Ferguson is the ghost in the machine. The machine is the World Health Organisation and the CDC. The man behind the ghost is Bill Gates.
 
As luck would have it, then on 05.05.2020 comes the news that government scientist Neil Ferguson is resigning. 
 
 
It is not only the entanglement of the same people over and over again that worries me, but also the complete ignoring of flawed pasts. It's not as if those in charge don't know this. With all the knowledge we have today, one can no longer speak of ignorance, but must assume full intention. 
 
 
——
  • Prof. Drosten and the swine flu scandal
 
I don't want to list the entire swine flu scandal here, you can already read the excellent documentary (Arte - Profiteure der Angst) and the article (Rubikon -Schweinegrippe 2.0), among others. 
 
I would like to reproduce a statement by Drosten from Profiteers of Fear, which was so aptly answered by Raphael-Viaveto Post Wed 25 Mar 2020, 13:28 that I agree 100% with this description. It couldn't have been put any better. 
 
It's worth watching the whole film (Profiteers of Fear), but in particular one particular interview segment first greatly exhilarated me, then taught me to shudder. A virologist had his say, talking about how viruses should change (from min. 27:30)
 
O-Ton: "One could say that this virus could acquire certain gene segments from very dangerous other viruses, for example from bird flu viruses, and then become a very dangerous virus. But there too, always, one has to say with caution: the present virus is actually already very, very successful and one wonders what such a virus would gain from that. Because such a sudden mutation jump is almost always accompanied by the virus being worse off than before, at least for a while. For the virus does not want to kill people, it simply wants to exist. It can do this particularly well if its hosts continue to move inconspicuously in their social environment, i.e. are not seriously ill."
 
 
I almost collapsed with laughter at the sheer ridiculousness and the quasi-religious, medieval belief in demons behind it. Then I wanted to have another look at who was yapping such nonsense. And to my quickly emerging horror, it was actually Prof. Christian Drosten, who developed the current corona PCR test and is known as the co-discoverer of the cute corona viruses.
 
The belief behind these statements is, for me, characterised by an almost incomprehensible, childish ignorance. The alleged virus, i.e. a simple membrane shell with RNA content, is assumed to have a will and the ability to make decisions!!! The virus is assumed to be able to make a mutational leap at will when it feels bad (whatever that may mean; how does a membrane-enveloped RNA feel bad?) (nothing about "random mutations", the virus decides when it mutates)!!! The virus is supposed to have a survival instinct (it doesn't want to kill, it wants to exist)!!!
 
Such abysmally silly humanisation can no longer even be called unscientific. It is the purest pre-scientific, infantile belief in ghosts. It is not easy, after the many, many years of dealing with the bullshit that is passed off as modern science, to surprise, or even shock, me with nonsensical statements. But this account, combined with the position this man holds today, actually appalls me. It is the most bone-chillingly stupid thing I have heard from an academic's mouth in the last ten years. But it makes you realise a lot about virology.
 
 
  • Interesting facts about Prof. Christian Droste
1. Drosten was already rash in calling for vaccination against swine flu.

2. The vaccine Pandemrix, which Drosten prematurely called for in 2009 without any data, turned out to be a disaster both for drug safety (countless vaccinated people fell ill with narcolepsy as a result of the vaccination, see PEI of 28.11.2016) or (WDR) and for state budgets (vaccine purchased for hundreds of millions of euros had to be destroyed).
[On a fictitious ranking of who would have completely disqualified themselves as policy advisors to assess epidemic risks to related vaccines in medical history, no one comes after this indisputable pole position (Drosten) by a wide margin...]
 
3. Drosten demands: ""We must suspend regulations for vaccines". It is actually inconceivable how someone who in 2009, through his completely wrong assessment of the vaccine, is now even calling for the regulations to be suspended. I am really stunned!
 
4. "Drosten's fascist fantasies" 
Short excerpt: And the question about the voluntary nature of the app is answered irritatingly by the authors of the British study: of course this app had to be voluntary, just like in China, where the app was "not compulsory but was required to move between quarters and into public spaces and public transport". A deeply disturbing understanding of "not compulsory" for authors of a democratic society.... .
The fact that the de facto exclusive advisor to the German government in the discussion about the use of apps in the pandemic does not unmistakably raise his voice in warning here and take up a lance for the yes existing data-saving and human rights respecting alternative, but goes even further than the Chinese-inspired British model and fantasises about fascist surveillance and isolation strategies in the hands of artificial intelligence and algorithms, disqualifies Christian Drosten once again as an advisor to a democratically legitimised government whose actions must be based on the free democratic basic order.
 
5. Cooperation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with Lothar Wieler (RKI) and Christian Drosten (Berlin Charité) 
 
6. Although the many side effects of mRNA vaccines are known, as well as the massive side effects of nanoparticles [Spiegel] | [mdr] | 
[Vlad Georgescu] which are present in the vaccine, Drosten comes up with the following words "gene-based vaccines have potential". 
 
7. As part of the NDR podcast series "The Coronavirus Update with Christian Drosten", Christian Drosten, the head of the institute at Charité and virologist, talks about the corona crisis. 
André Barmettler, editor of the ExpressZeitung, listens a little closer and finds a budding salesman presenting his only solution to the terrified people, but not without getting bogged down in contradictions and using nasty sales tricks such as Hegelian dialectics.
Listen carefully to what the "star virologist" says!
 
8. Virologist Drosten about his test: I quote: "Of course: towards the end of the course, the PCR is sometimes positive and sometimes negative. That's where chance plays a role. If patients test negative twice and are discharged as cured, positive test results may well occur again at home. That does not necessarily mean that there is a reinfection.
 
 9.Drosten has repeatedly spread panic: "it will be very bad" or Drosten warns of dangerous background effects, even warning of a second wave, although there has not yet been a first one. "It's a bit scary" - corona mutation? Drosten ventures a worrying prognosis. As we know today, there was no danger at any time.
 
10.  Drosten and the children - numbers with a target.... - 30.04.2020
Anyone who publicly formulates clear questions in advance - as Drosten does here - and then interprets the results of scientific studies in such a, let's put it delicately: one-sided way, and as a virologist once again does not even hide political demands in scientific papers ("Based on these results, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation" - Jones 2020), disqualifies himself (once again) as an unbiased advisor to a democratic government.
Supplement: Questionable methods - Drosten study on contagious children grossly wrong.
 
11.Cambridge statistician: retract Drosten study, admit mistakes - 27.05.2020Renowned epidemiologist and statistician David Spiegelhalter of Cambridge University has joined the ranks of those who have sharply criticised Drosten's study on the alleged infectivity of children.
 
12. After Prof. Drosten had already been in a tussle with several magazines, BILD, Spiegel, etc., Alexander Kekulé (Director of the Institute for Medical Microbiology) and Drosten also came to blows.
 Kekulé - "Recalculating the statistics cannot save the current work", to which Drosten tweeted: "Kekulé is stirring things up. His presentation is tendentious. He doesn't know our data and misquotes. Kekulé himself could not be criticised, he would have to publish something first." So you see how it is done here.  It is like a Punch and Judy show. All this is happening even though there is no proof of SARS-CoV-2. 
 
13.Jan Fleischhauer on the diva from the Charité - 08.06.2020 - The infallible Dr. Drosten: The Habeck of medicine has his very own rules
 
14.After all the impertinence and false statements that have led to health damage, Drosten seriously attacks his "colleagues" [Tagesspiegel].
“Fake news about the coronavirus Drosten and over 100 doctors warn of lying pandemic”