Читать книгу The Corona Lie - unmasked - Hermann von Bering - Страница 7

J' accuse!

"J' accuse!" - "I accuse!" was the beginning of an open letter by the French writer Émile Zola to the President of the French Republic in 1898. It was about the so-called "Dreyfus Affair", a political espionage scandal of enormous scope. Zola's accusation was hotly debated and eventually led to the uncovering of the scandal, the conviction of the guilty and legal reforms of the French Constitution regarding human rights.

Why do I begin my book with this old story? Because today it is once again time to openly take a stand on a tragedy that is bringing great suffering to humanity worldwide and that urgently needs to be clarified before the world is led into a dictatorship on the pretext of a pandemic that never actually existed. I know that these are serious accusations that must be substantiated. Therefore, the evidence must be as meticulous and conclusive as in a tribunal. The jury is you, my readers. You decide, after I have presented my arguments, whether the charges are valid.

I denounce the fact that many people's livelihoods are being ruined without a public and democratic discussion on the pros and cons of a lockdown having taken place beforehand. There would have been time for this and it should have been taken in view of the drastic consequences.

I am making accusation that the detection methods for Covid19 infection are uncertain and error-prone. The PCR tests can be manipulated, and so they are.

I am making accusation that it has never been proven conclusively that SARS-CoV2 causes all the cases of illness attributed to it.

I am making accusation that the statistics on infection and deaths are deliberately manipulated upwards to give the impression of a dangerous pandemic.

I am making accusation that critics, including scientists, doctors and lawyers, are ignored, vilified and muzzled to the point of losing their livelihoods.

I am making accusation that the constitutional fundamental rights and freedoms are permanently restricted. The emergency powers are not democratically legitimate.

I am claiming that people's fear of illness has been heightened to a collective fear psychosis by months of media suggestion to stifle any resistance to the coercive measures.

The mass psychosis has become so widespread – especially through the media – that critics are now forced to refute the Corona construct with facts. Actually, the onus is on governments to prove that the scientific basis for their measures is sound. But instead of facts, there are only assertions, which are repeated hundreds of times. However, the alleged "evidence" for the dangerousness of the Corona virus is easy to refute with a little expertise and good research. That is exactly what I will do in this book. I will also address the questions that keep coming up:

• Where do the numbers of allegedly infected people come from?

• What did the dead really die of?

• What about images of horror, such as the coffins in Italy?

• Why should politicians ruin their country's economy if there is no pandemic?

• How can it be that (almost) all countries in the world play along?

These are all legitimate questions. To answer them, one must examine many areas closely, not only in medicine. I maintain that the Corona crisis is a very complex undertaking, prepared over many years, and difficult to see through. But it is possible. The motives are, as so often, money, greed and power. If you follow the threads of the spider's web, you will eventually come across the spider.

I am aware that such research is defamed as "conspiracy theory". To believe that there are no conspiracies where there is a lot of power at stake would be naive. There have been at all times and there always will be. It has always been part of the strategy to ridicule those who want to shed light on them. So, who is to be condemned? The conspiracy practitioner or the theorist who uncovers his tracks? So, when, as in the Corona case, there is clear evidence of an actual plot, it is not only the right but even the duty of every investigative writer to pursue the leads.

You can already tell, dear reader, that I am angry about all this. However, I will remain objective and let the facts speak. We are all currently living in a psychologically very cleverly constructed trap, and that trap is fear. Fear is the key to the Corona plot. Many are afraid of the virus and of contagion. Others are afraid of punishment, of social ostracism or of a police state. We are all afraid of the economic disaster caused by the coercive measures and the lock-down. And we are afraid for our children. But fear has always been a bad advisor. So, what can we do?

Our primal instincts, which we have in common with animals, allow for three reactions when faced with danger, for example from a predator: 1. attack, 2. flee, or 3. play dead. So, if they want to force us to stay at home, wear masks, stop visiting our family, accept travel bans, take tests or be vaccinated with barely tested substances, they want to counter that. But you can't because of the penalties. The state has the upper hand. So, escape? Where to? This time it is a pandemic, there is no "where to" anymore. So, play dead in the knowledge that it is basically of no use either. Not even repression is left to us, because we are confronted with the misery every day. We live in permanent stress, and its psychosomatic consequences are well known. Then there is a mask on top of it, so that you can't even breathe through it.

I felt the same way until I realised that a large part of my fear is actually anger. Repressed anger. I decided to be angry rather than afraid, that was the first step towards liberation. The second was deciding to get to the bottom of the corona story. I researched for months. I had time because of the lock-down, and I used it. The knowledge about the whole hoax brought me another piece of liberation. And then I decided to become active with what I'm good at, namely writing.

This book is the result of my search and should also bring you liberation from fear. If we succeed in transforming it into a "holy anger", then we can also change something. The most important weapon in this struggle, however, is a solid knowledge of all that is going on. So, I invite you to follow with me the invitation of the philosopher Immanuel Kant:

"Sapere aude! Have courage to use your own mind!"

PS.: A word about the structure of the book. It has two parts:

The first part deals with the virus, the disease, the tests and the real infection figures. I looked very closely at the PCR test, because all the coercive measures are based on its results. If the test falls, then the justification for lock-down, masks and everything else falls.

I will prove that Covid19 is not a dangerous pandemic and show what is really happening. I will also discuss vaccinations in general and the Corona vaccination in particular. Here I will explain exactly why you should not get vaccinated with it under any circumstances.

The second part explores the question: What is the point? What is behind it? Who benefits from it? What are the goals?

This dichotomy is important because it reflects the two most important aspects of the crisis itself: the medical and the political. You can understand the medical aspect by looking at it systematically, but the question always remains in the back of your mind: why would someone stage something like this? You only really understand it when you see the complete picture, without the political background it remains a mystery. Only when the political goals become known does the whole thing make sense.

The third hurdle to understanding is that most people can imagine racketeering, fraud and corruption, but not on a global scale. This is something people shy away from, and yet it is so, because madness becomes invisible when it reaches very large proportions.¹ But this should not deter us. Only when we see through things can we draw the right conclusions.

As I am German, the original edition was written in German. Even if the focus of the book is on the situation in Germany, Austria and Switzerland the system is the same all over the world, and thus the fraud is the same, and so are the conclusions. I am sure you will find a lot of similar proves in your country when you take a closer look on the facts.

Some readers may be surprised that I go into so much detail and bring so many footnotes. Remember: this book is an indictment, and such an indictment must be well supported with facts and sources. All my statements are substantiated, because only with clear evidence can the jury, that is you, my readers, reach a verdict. You don't have to follow every detail exactly, but if you want to, you have the opportunity to do so. Many of the footnotes are highly interesting and provide additional clues. It is worthwhile to follow up on some of them.

At university we used to have a saying that the student had to know everything, the assistant had to know where it was written, and the professor had to know someone who knew where it was written. At least you will know where to look.

Enjoy reading!

How the numbers are manipulated - the most important tricks

An epidemic always affects many people in an area. In the past, if we had to miss school because of measles or mumps, our friends were usually also affected. Or if a wave of flu spread during cold and wet weather, then we knew quite a few other colleagues and friends with sniffles and coughs. These were epidemics, albeit small ones.

With Corona, everything is different. Few know anyone who knows someone who would have been seriously ill or even died from Corona. Perhaps one knows someone who has tested "positive" and who has flu or nothing at all. Yes, people have died who tested "positive" too. But was the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus the trigger? Or were there other causes of death? That needs to be clarified first.

At any rate, it doesn't feel like an epidemic, if it weren't for the high numbers of statistics that are announced daily in all media like water level reports at "below the ground". Apparently, the epidemic is taking place elsewhere, but not in our village or district. Yes, it is taking place, but in virtual space, because the "infection figures" are the only "proof" of a pandemic.

To keep it that way, these figures have to be maintained. Not directly falsified, that would be too conspicuous, but manipulated upwards with a few tricks. Especially when there is an urgent need for a "second wave" that just won't come. These tricks are not new, but they work. At least until you take a closer look.

Trick no. 1: The numbers are simply added up

When we look at the data on Corona, we usually get reports that say how many people in our country or around the world have been "newly infected" with Corona or have died.

That says nothing at all at first. Let me give you an example: the number of road deaths in Germany in 2019 was just over 3,000 (and has fortunately fallen compared to previous years). It would not occur to anyone to simply add them up over the years. Then we would have 6,000 road deaths next year and 9,000 the year after. Everyone can see that this is nonsense, but this is exactly how it is done with the Corona cases. The time period is missing: per day, month, year? But here they just add them up, so the number can only grow.

How many have allegedly been "infected" is relatively uninteresting. The question must be: How many of them became ill in the first place? How many of those infected have recovered in the meantime? And how many have died in the last week compared to the weeks before? These are the relevant questions about the course of an epidemic.

The mere piling up of case numbers is not honest statistics. It only serves the purpose of suggesting a steady increase (there are always more, never less) and presenting the highest possible numbers in order to spread fear and terror.

Another trick that is used is the following: If a person tests positive several times, then each test will be counted separately in the statistics, even though it is the same person, because the data for statistics are usually anonymized.

Trick no. 2: The reference data are missing, they are simply concealed

Even if a time period is given like: "Again over 2,000 new infections per day" or: "We have twice as many infected people as 5 weeks ago," that still says nothing without the frame of reference. How many tests were done 5 weeks ago? And how many now? Only when you find out after a long search that twice as many tests were done, it is logical that twice as many hits also turned up. This does not mean that the infection rate has doubled, but that it has remained constant.

An example: You send someone into the forest to collect berries. In the forest there are lots of blackberries and also rare forest raspberries. The blackberries represent the vast majority of the non-infected, the raspberries represent the infected. Our friend now collects all the berries he finds. At noon he comes back with 1,000 blackberries and one raspberry. The next day you send two people to collect and they now bring back 2,000 blackberries and two raspberries. If someone were to conclude from this that the number of raspberries in the forest has doubled since yesterday, then they have a problem with logic. But that is exactly what they want us to believe about the Corona case numbers.²

It is not as if the experts have forgotten their little basics of statistics. They know very well what they are doing. In an interview on television, Health Minister Jens Spahn blurted out that excessive testing leads to many more false positives than actual positives, even though the incidence of infection is declining. This is due to the fact that the test is not one hundred percent accurate.³

Here, for once, the gentleman is right. But the policy did not stick to it, because from the time of his interview (14.6.2020) until the end of August, the number of tests was tripled.⁴ So logically, the number of positive test results also tripled, which is then sold to us as a "second wave", although the proportion of people tested positive per 1,000 tests remained constant.⁵

The Chancellor had already used the same trick in March to justify the planned lock-down: In just one week, the "case numbers" reported by the RKI had tripled from 8,000 to 24,000. Chancellor Merkel spoke of an “exponential increase” and that the numbers would “explode”. All right, the people said to themselves, where there's a lot of smoke, there must be fire, and dutifully got themselves locked up. But there was no smoke, only stage fog of the show. The RKI had in fact "forgotten" to announce that the number of tests had also almost tripled during the week: from 130,000 to 350,000.

In reality, the proportion of positive test results had barely increased, from six to seven percent. The virologist Hendrik Streeck later confirmed in an interview that there had never been an exponential increase before.⁶

Such tricks are also popular around the world. US Senator Ron Paul writes that in the USA the number of tests has almost quintupled, free coronation tests are offered everywhere, for example, in Houston, which creates a propagandistic "2nd wave".⁷

Although (or because?) it is quite clear that more tests bring more false-positive numbers, there are repeated calls to "test, test, test", for example by the head of the WHO⁸ or on German TV-news.⁹ Right from the start, people were anxious to present the highest possible numbers.

Trick no. 3:

False positives are simply included in the count

All tests have a certain margin of error, this cannot be avoided. As a result, people are tested as "positive" who are not. This is then called "false positive". Conversely, there are also "false negative" test results, but these would only be mathematically significant if the vast majority were infected. But since the vast majority of people are not infected at all, they can be ignored. Mathematically, this is because, for example, 2% of a large majority are more than 2% of a small minority.

According to the manufacturers' own praise, the error rate is around 1-2%. That sounds good at first, but the fewer real infected people there are, the more noticeable the error becomes.

We can calculate this using the blackberry example: We collect 1,000 blackberries and one raspberry. Let's assume that our collector has forgotten his glasses and has an error rate of 2% when sorting them out, just like the Covid19 test. So, he will mistakenly sort out 20 blackberries, 2% of the 1,000, as "raspberries" because they might look a little reddish. So, 21 berries end up in the pot for the raspberries, that is, 20 false positives and one real one.

Now the quiz question: What is the probability that if you have tested "positive" (therefore, ended up in the raspberry basket), you are really a raspberry? Quite simply: 1:20.

In other words, there are 20 false positives for every one true positive! Because 2% of 1,000 is much more than the one in a thousand. Staggering, but such are the laws of mathematics. So, the test accuracy drops to less than 5% under these circumstances.¹⁰

If one knows this, and the "experts" should know, one would have to test all those tested positive a second time in order to sort out the false results, if it is possible with a new swab and the test of another company, and in any case in another laboratory. But this is hardly ever done, and so the vast majority of false positives are stigmatised, frightened and sent into quarantine - just to inflate the statistics!

But not even the alleged accuracy of 98% is maintained in practice. The “Indian Council of Medical Research”, for example, examined Roche's PCR test "LightMix Modular"¹¹ more closely and found that the specificities of two of the gene fragments tested with it were only 67% and 60% respectively!¹² This would mean that instead of 20, at least 330 blackberries were incorrectly sorted. Now we know why such fantasy figures are always reported from all over the world. They are not necessarily falsified, they are only based on faulty tests with a simultaneously low "prevalence", i.e. real distribution of the virus.

The same faulty tests are of course also applied to deceased persons, who then ensure as many “coronavirus deaths” as possible in the statistics, even if they died of something completely different. There are now hundreds of reports on the net about terminal cancer patients, serious cardiovascular diseases, even accidental deaths registered as "coronavirus deaths". A "positive" PCR test is enough. So, if someone was "positive" once, even false-positive, but never sick, and months later gets run over or commits suicide, that's official - a coronavirus death!

This is how statistics are faked all over the world.

The internist and lung specialist Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg¹³ says in the magazine "Rubikon":

"What exists are test orgies that create a false dynamic. Given the low prevalence (frequency) of SARS-CoV-2 infections, a positive test says nothing at all. The number of cases now "found" is equal to the number of healthy people who would be expected to test false positive. The more tests are done, the more incorrectly "positive" healthy people are found. This has nothing to do with disease, but only with the expensive testing that is abused for fear-mongering."14

In plain language, this means that the false-positive rates are always at least 1-2%, even without a virus, because the test generates them artificially!

Where is there a real virus when the case numbers have been in the error range of less than 1% since May 2020?

The real total number of tests is mostly concealed so that no one can calculate the positive rate. A woman from Würzburg wrote in a letter to the editor, ‚journalist Boris Reitschuster:

"Dear Mr. Reitschuster, as you have certainly heard, Würzburg is a Corona hotspot. What you may not know is the extent to which testing has taken place here. Even after intensive attempts to find out how high the daily or weekly number of tests actually is and was for the city of Würzburg, neither I nor a journalist managed to find out in writing.

We would have liked to see the course of the positive quota, as the suspicion suggests that the positive cases merely represent the noise of the error tolerance. After all, we now have a verbal statement that as many as 2,900 tests took place on one day last week. On a single day!

However, the number of test positives is in no way related to the number of tests. It is also not clear whether this number was also added to the test results in the case of multiple testing. So, we sometimes had a 7-day incidence of more than 70. And from this, unreasonable measures followed. Würzburg became a risk area and hotspot with additional restrictions on personal rights. I am writing to you because we are bouncing off all those responsible in Würzburg, we are being fobbed off with non-transparent figures and would not like to remain sitting and accept this powerlessness."15

Dr. Wodarg is absolutely right when he says:

"Stating "cases", "infected" or "positives" without concurrent information on the population studied and the total number of tests performed in the process should be punishable by a heavy fine for misleading public opinion."16

To explain the tactics of the health authorities in another way:

If you test one million men with a pregnancy test

with 98% specificity (as with PCR),

you will find 20,000 pregnant men.

They are then "scientifically confirmed".

Revision is not welcome

Another problem is that the test should actually consist of two parts: A "search test", with high sensitivity but lower accuracy, first looks for the so-called "E gene", which also occurs in other viruses. If this is positive, then a more precise "confirmation test" looks for the "RdRP gene", the "S gene" or the "ORF1 gene", which supposedly only occur in SARS-CoV-2 (Covid19). Only the second test achieves the high specificity of >98%. The first test is far below this, thus producing many more false-positive results. The test person is only "positive" if both tests are successful.

So much for the theory. In practice, however, a positive "screening test" is enough, because the regulations and recommendations of the WHO and the RKI allow “two-part” tests with only one positive partial test.¹⁷ Only a "high prevalence" (frequency) of the virus is required for this, but not prescribed.¹⁸

That is why the laboratories make it easy for themselves, as the website of an Augsburg laboratory shows, where it was pointed out that, following the recommendation of the WHO, the findings would be shown as "positive" if only the E gene was found.¹⁹ And that's the end of the alleged "high specificity", because a "positive" in the non-specific search test is already sufficient. The same was explained in a technical information of the test manufacturer "Biovis Diagnostik".²⁰

The RKI confirmed briefly and succinctly on request that no test repetition is usual for standard tests.²¹ The RKI obviously doesn't care what this means for those affected, who then have to spend two weeks in quarantine, and in the case of schoolchildren, the whole class at the same time.

In order to keep the numbers nice and high, they are of course not interested in second tests. If this does happen, the PCR usually looks bad. On 23 June 2020, the German Radio reported that 14 positive tests from the Vogelsberg district had been negative after being checked by another laboratory, because the first laboratory had only tested for one gene. The responsible head of the health department criticised that those affected had to be tested twice and that this should not be a permanent state of affairs.²²

The deprivation of liberty of hundreds of people in two blocks of flats in Göttingen can also be traced back to faulty tests, because in 600 second tests only four were positive, whereupon the cordoning off of the blocks of flats was lifted.²³

In a hospital in Upper Bavaria, 60 people had tested positive, but this was not verified by second tests. Only two were confirmed. Allegedly, the laboratory had used the wrong reagents.²⁴

Author and publisher Peter Haisenko writes: "Review tests only exist when the first test result has uncomfortable consequences. Let's remember Thuringia, when a member of parliament was positive and thus the vote in the state parliament could not have taken place. Quickly there was a second test, which of course turned out negative.

This pattern is evident in a large number of cases. In most cases, the second, control test was negative. This is probably the reason why it is generally strongly discouraged to do a control test, because it clearly proves the unreliability of the tests. That would be conclusive evidence!

After the debacle with the large demonstrations, which could not provide any increasing infection figures, they continue to ban large events such as football or concerts because there is also the "danger" that there will be no mass infections. This is precisely what would provide the evidence that the whole Corona racket is a pure pilot issue that only serves political goals."25

It is also logical that secondary tests are often negative, because these are the tests with the higher specificity. That's why they are undesirable, because the people in the government know that, of course.

So if you ever test positive, insist on a second test! And be sure to get the test's package insert or remember the name, because it usually says that the test is not approved for diagnostic purposes. (More on this later).

"Normal" people are often refused a second test. Maybe it helps if you play football, because recently we have heard of several footballers who were suddenly negative after second tests and were then allowed to play after all.²⁶

Journalist Boris Reitschuster asks: "Is there a two-tier society when it comes to testing, for example, when football clubs let those affected be tested several times, which would probably be difficult at least for normal positive test persons? Do the clubs have so little confidence in the tests that they have them retested so often? Or, as in the case of FC Bayern, despite a positive test, do not send the other players into quarantine, or even let them continue to play?"27 Politicians are also retested so that they are quickly "negative" again.

Trick no. 4: Never tested but counted as "positive"

The dubious practices of the RKI automatically include the "contact persons" of those tested positive (whether genuine or false-positive is completely irrelevant). On the RKI website, a "case" is defined in such a way that no clinical picture (symptoms) has to be present, but only a "contact".²⁸ This means that contacts to a "case" are themselves counted as a "case". This additionally drives the case numbers up.

By the way, it is actually "forbidden" to criticise the rules established by the RKI because they are said to be standard and should never be questioned.²⁹

Who has the cheek to claim something like that? It is the veterinarian Dr. Lothar Wieler, currently head of the RKI. No questions allowed – it could be embarrassing for the RKI.

This is the same Mr. Wieler who on 18 March 2020 predicted an exponential growth of the "epidemic" and forecast ten million infected people in Germany in the following 100 days. One wonders how much idea of epidemiology he can demonstrate. If someone in charge in the business world were to make such a fool of himself, he would have flown the coop long ago. But this is not about science, it's about fear-mongering, and every false prognosis comes in handy.

In the USA, they are even more brazen: in some districts, they have started to count as "positive" cases that are "probable cases". The threshold for "probable" is ridiculously low. Texas Judge Hill said that a fever and headache would be enough to be considered a Covid-19 patient, as was determined in Collin County. Moreover, up to 15 people would also be classified as "probable cases" if they were only close to a "probable case".³⁰

The newspaper "Die Welt" wrote on 15.4.2020 that the city of New York also counts "suspected cases" among the Corona deaths who were never tested for the virus. These were 3,700 deaths that were included in the statistics for the 10,000 Covid-19 deaths since 11 March. This is one of the reasons for the exorbitant "case numbers" in New York.

In New York, Elmhurst Hospital in the borough of Queens was such a "corona hotspot". Nurse Erin Marie Olszewski, who worked in the Covid department there in April and May, said in an interview that in the USA there was a bonus of $11,000 for the hospitals for each patient who tested positive. If he was artificially ventilated, the hospital received another $30,000. This put many patients on the Corona wards who did not have Corona at all, or even tested positive. 31

In the USA, almost all family doctors have been ordered by the health authorities to write "Covid-19" on the death certificate if the cause of death is unclear. There are such reports from all over the world. In Argentina, hospital staff have been unofficially instructed to declare all new patients as "Covid-19 patients", no matter what they are suffering from. Apparently, they get more money from the state, too.

In Spain, the government distributed six billion euros as initial aid, most of it according to the following key: 30% to the districts according to the number of test positives, 10% according to the total number of PCR tests done and 25% according to the number of hospitalised.³² This is virtually an invitation to report as many cases as possible to Madrid.

Trick No. 5: Positive tested are passed off as "sick"

For the Corona panic, virologists have quickly rewritten medicine. Ever since infectious diseases have been known, a distinction has been made between "infected" and "sick". A "sick" person is one who shows symptoms of a disease. One can be "infected" without necessarily being "sick", as in the case of herpes viruses, which can be latent without causing symptoms. This has been thrown out the window with Corona, because the supposedly "infected", i.e. those with a "positive" test result, are simply called "ill" and counted, even if they are symptom-free. This way of counting leads to all those who were symptomless positive and later tested negative being called "recovered" in the reports, although they were not ill at all.

The RKI has experts who should know the difference between an infection and a disease. If they don't, they only need to take a look at Wikipedia, where it clearly states that infection and infectious disease are two different things, because infections do not automatically trigger a disease.³³ Learning should not end with the acquisition of a doctorate.

In the meantime, we know that over 85% of the "positives" do not get sick at all. They have no symptoms and the test eventually becomes negative. Another 10% have only mild symptoms or a normal flu. People cheekily speak of 100% "sick" people, but 85% of them are healthy!

Imagine there is a virus that is so dangerous that you have to get tested to see if you even have it.

What is this virus that is sometimes "dangerous" but mostly not? Or does the test have nothing to do with the virus at all? Or does the virus have nothing to do with the disease at all? We will take a closer look at this. But first, let's take a look at what science thinks it knows about viruses.

1 Modified from a quote by Bertold Brecht. In the original he spoke of stupidity.

2 In my example, that would be 0.1%. According to the RKI (the German Centre for Disease Control), however, there are only 16,442 "active corona cases" in Germany with 83.7 million inhabitants, that is only 0.01%. (as of 3.9.2020)

3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfWEYeokZiA

4 from weekly 326,645 to 987,423

5 https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Situationsberichte/

6 https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-angekundigte-krise

7 http://www.antikrieg.eu/aktuell/2020_07_07_istdieCovidspitze.htm

8 In: WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, 16.3.2020

9 https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/heute-journal/heute-journal-vom-3-05-2020-100.html

10 With the low prevalence (infestation) that we have. This is also called the "prevalence error".

11 produced in cooperation with TIB MOLBIOL Syntheselabor GmbH in Berlin, which also marketed Prof. Drosten's first PCR test worldwide in 2003.

12 Express Healthcare; Usha Sharma; ICMr. approves 3 #Covid19 test kits commercial use https://www.expresshealthcare.in/Covid19-updates/icmr-approves-three-Covid19-test-kits-for-commercial-use/417799/ Also at: https://peds-ansichten.de/2020/07/pcr-test-correctiv-deutung/

13 Former medical officer, one of the most competent critics of the Corona policy, see also: http://www.wodarg.com/

14 https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-fiktive-pandemie

15 https://www.reitschuster.de/post/wie-erschaffe-ich-einen-corona-hotspot/

16 https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-fiktive-pandemie

17 https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-Covid-19-and-medical-devices/faqs-testing-sars-cov-2#validation

18 https://peds-ansichten.de/2020/07/pcr-test-correctiv-deutung/

19 This message has been deleted from the lab's website, but can be found using the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20200504014525/http://www.labor-augsburg-mvz.de/de/aktuelles/coronavirus

20 https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Corona-Lockdown-Droht-tatsaechlich-eine-akute-nationale-Gesundheitsnotlage-4942433.html

21 Source: Paul Schreyer: https://multipolar-magazin.de/artikel/das-schweigen-der-viren

22 https://www.hessenschau.de/panorama/coronavirus--vogelsberg-reihenweise-falsche-test-ergebnisse--aus-fuer-deutsche-sunexpress--35-neuinfektionen-,corona-hessen-ticker-314.html

23 Source: https://www.n-tv.de/panorama/Hochhausbewohner-aus-Isolation-entlassen-article21873253.html

24 Source: Bayern 2 Nachrichten, 28.10.2020 05:00 Uhr

25 https://www.anderweltonline.com/klartext/klartext-20202/corona-die-erlogene-evidenz/

26 https://www.reitschuster.de/post/zwei-klassen-gesellschaft-bei-corona-tests/

27 ibid

28 https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Falldefinition.pdf from 29.5.2020

29 https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/mehr-Covid-19-faelle-in-deutschlandrki-praesident-die.676.de.html?dram: article_id=481382

30 http://www.antikrieg.eu/aktuell/2020_07_07_istdieCovidspitze.htm

31 https://www.compact-online.de/das-war-grob-fahrlaessig-panik-und-pfusch-in-new-york-2/

32 https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2020/06/17/

33 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infektionskrankheit (if it has not been changed for Corona in the meantime)