The Naysayers Were Right: Covid-19 “Vaccinations” Never Protected Against Transmission

They are associated with increased mortality and have many side effects – therefore they should be banned now

Some unpleasant news about the Covid-19 vaccination campaign

A few newspapers reported at the end of November (“The Berliner Zeitung“; “Die Weltwoche“) and otherwise mainly internet portals (“Die Achse des Guten“; “tkp“) about a letter signed by the head of the European Medicine Agency (EMA), Emer Cooke, in response to a question from some Members of the European Parliament (here the question from Oct. 12, 2023).

The essence of the EMA’s letter in response to the parliamentarians’ question is a surprise only to those who have not yet informed themselves well enough. Ms. Cooke says bluntly: The Covid-19 vaccines had not been tested from the outset to prevent infection transmission and did not do so. Incidentally, this was stated in the Comirnaty package insert. Even more brazen is the response from Stella Kyriakides on behalf of the Commission: The EMA had already reported this in 2020. Subtext: So why the stupid question and all the excitement?

Where did the question come from? Didn’t Ms. von der Leyen claim that we are not only protecting ourselves, but also “our loved ones”, i.e. others? Subtext: because vaccinated people don’t get sick and can’t pass on an infection. This is wrong and Ms. von der Leyen, in particular, should have known this in 2020. How did Spahn, Lauterbach, Merkel, Scholz, the whole squad of Berlin high politics and the German media world trumpet this? “Anyone who doesn’t get vaccinated is a dangerous person, antisocial, should be locked up, must be forced’’, etc. Yes, it’s easy to forget such embarrassments. But you shouldn’t. Because now, a long three years later, it’s official. Politicians knew that the “vaccines” did not protect against transmission, and claimed the opposite. In my view, that is the definition of a lie. And collectively. Also in the German media landscape. It is therefore consistent that the leading media are apparently unwilling to discuss this fact. The fact that the EKD is asleep – see my last blog – comes as no surprise to anyone. But the otherwise so alert sleuths from SZ, FAZ, BILD and co? Well, they just don’t like to admit that they’ve made mistakes, I know.

But now that another wave of infections seems to be rolling in, the talk will get louder again: Vaccination helps, vaccination is good for your health, vaccination helps others above all, if not me, then grandpa, and maybe vaccination will help the poor animals too …

Read more

Self-Amplifying RNA Shots Are Coming: The Untold Danger

The truth behind RNA-based vaccine technology (Part 3)

From time to time, I publish contributions from other scientists and authors who seem to me to be appropriate to topics that are of current concern to me and on which I myself can provide less competent information. Prof. Klaus Steger is a molecular biologist and has published a three-part article on Covid-19 vaccines and the active principles of modRNA (nucleoside-modified mRNA) in the English version of “Epoch-Times”. I find these texts very informative.

Harald Walach

The original article is available at Epoch-Times (follow this link)

Read more

The EKD Smashes The “Corona Round Table” to Pieces …

… before it even stands – a few thoughts on the most recent example of censorship

In mid-August, I reviewed the book “Angst, Politik, Zivilcourage“, edited by T.A. Seidel and S. Kleinschmidt in the Evangelische Verlagsanstalt review [1]. The review was originally published in the online newspaper “Achse des Guten“. I had expressed a faint hope at the time: What Ms. Lengsfeld, who is also represented in the book with a contribution, and her friends had achieved after the fall of communism – namely a political round table – that could perhaps begin with this book as a “Corona Round Table” – as the beginning of a critical but binding reappraisal of the political decisions that went wrong during the corona crisis. This hope has now been dashed. The Protestant Church is smashing the round table to pieces before it is even finished.

On Monday, 11/27/2023, “Tichys Einblick” published: Under pressure from the “Evangelische Kirche in Mitteldeutschland” and the “Gemeinschaftswerk der Evangelischen Publizistik“, both of which are shareholders in the Evangelisches Verlagswerk, where the book was published, delivery of the book was halted. The reason for this: In some contributions, “red lines” had been crossed by “contempt for democracy” and “anti-Semitism”. The book therefore were “a serious mistake” from which they wanted to learn. Those responsible justified the book censorship in a press release at the beginning of November.

This reminds me of the language of forced self-incrimination. Those responsible know best themselves whether they actually acted out of honest conviction or because of external pressure. But one thing I do know: withdrawing a book from circulation that analyzes the lack of discourse in a democratic state and calls for new discussions is in itself contempt for democracy.

Read more

The Retraction of Our Homeopathy ADHS Meta-Analysis Causes a Stir

A reference to an article on and my questions to the author, Hinnerk Feldwisch-Drentrup

On Monday, Nov 6, 2023, an article appeared on, which addresses the retraction of the publication of our homeopathy ADHS meta-analysis. On the occasion of this incident, he also mentions the other two retractions (of the “Vaccines” study [1], which was republished in “Science, Public Health Policy and the Law” after a triple-blinded review [2] and the children’s mask study [3], which was republished in “Environmental Research” after an extensive review in its long version [4]).

The article is a very good example of how one can apparently work journalistically correctly, namely by not making any false statements or providing good evidence for one’s assertions, but still lying. Because there are two kinds of lies: Someone can lie by claiming something false. And someone can lie by omitting or concealing known, true and important facts. In this case, the second form of lie is endemic. It leads very easily to the presumably intended effect, namely the assassination of my character in the view of all those who don’t know me and who don’t have the time or inclination to take a closer look at the matter. This will probably lead to Wikipedia authors finding even more reason to make critical comments in the article about me, which means that the critical citation cat bites its own tail once more.

Feldwisch-Drentrup knows from me what he is hiding, or could easily have found out by doing more research. I had sent him a detailed email with details about this retraction and the meta-analysis, which are not mentioned in the article.

I then sent him the following letter and waited until Monday, Nov 13, 2023, the deadline, for a response. Having received none, I am publishing the letter. If I receive a reply later, I will of course also publish it.

Here is my letter:

Read more