Rabid Fact Foxes

The press is increasingly ceasing to be the ‘fourth estate’ and is instead becoming a court reporter, thereby acting as the gravedigger of democracy

In many of my blogs during the coronavirus pandemic, I have repeatedly asked, “Where are the investigative journalists?” “Where is the critical press?” With a few exceptions, I have noticed little critical reporting on official coronavirus policy, the ‘measures’, the state’s desire to force vaccinations on everyone, and related topics. The press has almost always sung from the same hymn sheet as the official statements from the government and its health related agencies. In my interview study, which I have so far only analysed in my coronavirus novel “Verschachtelte Wahrheit”, I also asked several media professionals why this is the case. The answers were complex, but one key element runs through them all:

The mental filter. There may well have been official directives from above at times, telling the editorial staff which way to go. But far more important is the “perceived truth”, what most people see as the “right” thing, what is politically correct, what people need to be taught. It is no longer what is actually the case that counts, but rather that one displays the correct attitude. And the correct stance is that of those perceived as progressive, liberal, left-wing—in short, the majority—and, coincidentally, it is also the stance of those in power. If you fail to toe this majority line, as a normal reporter or editor you run the risk of no longer being taken seriously, of no longer getting assignments, and perhaps even of losing your contract. The precarious world of short-term contracts and freelance work, which can be terminated at any time, has, according to my informants, largely replaced the once more common positions of editors and chief reporters who could not easily be sacked and were therefore steadfast in their views.

Read more

Book review Helmut Sterz: The Vaccination Mafia

I have read Helmut Sterz’s new book and will discuss it briefly here. It will be published on 1 December and is the most important book on coronavirus awareness that I am aware of (though I haven’t read them all). I highly recommend it to the readers of my blog. The book is only available in German, but I still want to convey the most essential aspects with my discussion for my English language readers.

Helmut Sterz: Die Impf-Mafia (The Vaccine Mafia). Pfizer’s former chief toxicologist proves how toxic substances were illegally sold to us as a cure for Covid-19. Basel: Rubikon. 240 pages. £24, ISBN 978-3-907606-00-1

The most significant part of this book on the coronavirus comes at the very end, on pages 206–210: ‘Demands for the investigation of the global pharmaceutical scandal’. There, the author makes 18 demands. In my opinion, the following are particularly noteworthy (in my own words – where not indicated by quotations, which are literal translations from the book):

Read more

Scientific publication on the mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis

The global, collective mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis has now been clearly outlined and published in a scientific journal

Quinn, G. A., Connolly, R., ÓhAiseadha, C., Hynds, P., Bagus, P., Brown, R. B., . . . Walach, H. (2025). What Lessons can Be Learned from the Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic? International Journal of Public Health, 70, 1607727. doi:10.3389/ijph.2025.1607727; https://www.ssph-journal.org/journals/international-journal-of-public-health/articles/10.3389/ijph.2025.1607727/full

I have worked with 36 other authors on a detailed policy paper on the international collective mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis, which has now been published and is available to the general public via the link above.

Some of these authors are well known, such as Robert Malone, Harvey Risch, Jessica Rose and Norman Fenton, while others have been less active in the public eye than in academia, such as Gerry Quinn, the lead author and organizer of the consortium, and others. One of the authors, Yaffa Shir-Raz from Haifa, has just published, together with others, a detailed critique of the claim that COVID-19 ‘vaccinations’ have saved millions of lives (Preprint; see also).

What they all have in common is that during the COVID-19 crisis, they argued extensively and with good scientific documentation that one or more aspects of the response to the crisis were not sufficiently scientifically sound or were even harmful. Whether it was masks, mandatory vaccination, social distancing rules, ‘vaccinations’ or other non-pharmaceutical measures (‘lockdown’).

Read more

Paul Ehrlich Institute database on side effects of COVID-19 ‘vaccinations’

A workshop report

In my last blog, I discussed the study by the Cologne working group led by Prof. Jan Rybniker. If the findings of immune training were only positive, then we would not be seeing so many serious side effects as a result of these interventions. But we are seeing them, in the side effect database of the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI). I had just finished evaluating the first part of the data that the PEI published publicly last summer, when the second part came out. I will therefore have to repeat the evaluation at some point, otherwise it will hardly be of sufficient scientific value. But I will report on my evaluation of the first part here. This is a workshop report; the data has not been published anywhere else.

Read more

People With Covid-19 ‘Vaccination’ Are Sicker

Our new representative survey has been published, and other data prove this.

Our new representative survey in Germany has recently been published [1]. It shows that people who have had at least one Covid-19 ‘vaccination’ are sicker, have Covid-19 infections and muscle and joint problems more often than people who have not had a ‘vaccination’. The news is piling up and showing that these interventions are dangerous. The high water mark, above which a safety signal should have been triggered, was crossed long ago. Compared to other vaccinations or interventions that have been withdrawn from the market, this ‘vaccination’ is associated with at least five times as many deaths [2].

Our new representative survey on adverse reactions to vaccination

Our survey was recently published by ‘Medical Research Archives’, the official organ of the European Society of Medicine, of which I am a member. You can download the PDF directly here. As we have done before [3], we used a professional panel provided by the company Debaro GmbH. Approximately 20,000 people participate in such a panel, and whenever a new survey is conducted, they are contacted and the company then collects as many responses as needed to reach a number that can be assumed to be representative based on sampling characteristics such as age, gender and socio-economic status.

Read more