12-29-2022, 08:10 AM
How Deadly is the Vax?
Posted on December 28, 2022 by Baron Bodissey
The following article and interview concern the work of a German pathologist who — despite the political headwinds blowing against anyone who attempts an honest evaluation of the effects of the experimental mRNA treatments intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus — has conducted autopsies and analyzed the results for people who died after “vaccination”.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the Schwäbische Zeitung:
Covid vaccination as cause of death? This pathologist will find out
The Heidelberg pathologist Peter Schirmacher has been researching undiscovered and deadly vaccination consequences since the beginning of the Covid vaccination campaign. In a unique study, the scientist autopsied people who died unexpectedly within a period of up to twenty days after vaccination.
In his study, Schirmacher has now published five cases in which the vaccination was the cause of death, which corresponds to 20% of the deaths examined.
As early as the summer of 2021, he had warned that there could be a high number of unreported vaccine injuries and vaccine deaths. On this point, however, he was contradicted by several other scientists as well as the Standing Vaccination Commission (Stiko) and the Paul Ehrlich Institute.
At the time, Schirmacher called for more research, and in particular more autopsies, which the state of Baden-Württemberg then financed.
Schirmacher — who has been Managing Director of the Institute of Pathology at Heidelberg University Hospital for eighteen years and was Chairman of the German Society for Pathology until 2019 — answered a number of questions in writing about this autopsy project for the Schwäbische Zeitung.
Mr. Schirmacher, you have been researching the possible consequences of the Covid vaccination for many months. You published a study on this in the magazine “Clinical Research in Cardiology” at the end of November. In summary: What are the most important results of your research?
We can demonstrate that fatal myocardial inflammation can occur after vaccination and that this inflammation shows a typical, consistent histological and immunological picture, which helps in its diagnosis, also in the living patient and in the treatment, and is a basis for further research. Our statements are supported by other national and international publications.
In how many cases did the Covid vaccination cause someone to die?
We published five cases in our study; within the framework of our network we have identified further cases, for example fatal cerebral vein thrombosis after vector vaccines.
Over the past two years, the population has always been told that mRNA vaccines — such as those from BioNTech, for example — usually have mild side effects. According to your findings, is this thesis still justifiable?
The first thing to clarify is what is meant by mild: is hospitalization with recovery mild? Certainly the vast majority of myocarditis and other undesirable effects are mild, but not all of them, and there are numerous publications (more than fifty) on severe to life-threatening courses of myocarditis, which means that our test results are backed up and proven.
A major vaccine protection campaign has been running in the past two years, also on the grounds that research into safe mRNA vaccines has been going on for decades. In your opinion, has enough research been done in Germany on the possible side effects of mRNA vaccinations?
Certainly not. There are important unanswered questions that should be clarified through a broad survey of all undesirable effects or further research in the sense of vaccination improvement, vaccination indication and civil protection. For example: are there genetic factors or certain previous illnesses — for example autoimmune diseases — that predispose one to severe vaccination consequences?
Vaccination consequences are vaccine-dependent — but which characteristics and components of the vaccine are responsible for this? Do certain types of application play a role?
For example, there are considerations that accidental vascular injection could play a role in serious vaccine side effects such as myocarditis. Investigations such as ours are a start. Further investigations are necessary in order to improve vaccines and vaccination indications, also beyond SARS-CoV-2, and to protect the population as well as possible. It should also not be forgotten that severe vaccination damage is eligible for compensation under the Infection Protection Act.
As a pathologist, how difficult was it for you to conduct this study? How did you manage to examine the people who died after a vaccination?
At the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we contacted the state regarding the establishment and financing of an autopsy network, including register, biobank and research funding at all university hospitals. From the Ministry of Science to the cabinet and across the parties, the necessity and importance has been recognized and we have been funded since 2020, and then new aspects, such as breakthrough infections after vaccination, vaccine-associated cases and also late effects or their regression, were included in the continued funding.
Our project is a leading international flagship project, for which the country should be extremely grateful. We have published extensively in leading publications from the network on both Covid and the consequences of vaccination.
We are aware that we are conducting research in a highly emotional, politicized context right from the start, but that is precisely why we see our task in developing and presenting facts as the basis for better diagnosis and treatment of those affected and the basis for further research to accomplish.
This is not always easy in this environment, and there is always the possibility of misinterpreting or misusing our results, but we see no alternative in the interest of gaining knowledge, of those affected and also of the general public. Therefore holding back results is certainly not the right way, and that is why we and everyone involved have to go through it.
Stiko recommends a fourth booster vaccination for people over 60. With a view to the forthcoming third winter with the corona virus and your study results: To whom would you recommend a booster vaccination?
The current data clearly show that it is not Corona, but the many other infectious respiratory diseases that have been slowed down by the Corona measures of the last three years, which are our problem now. Here we are currently being overwhelmed by the expected “catch-up effect” with children and adults. I do not give a vaccination recommendation; that is neither my task nor my competence to recommend something parallel to the Stiko.
In your opinion, did the vaccination campaign make sense?
This is an important question that goes far beyond medicine and to which scientists from many fields should contribute. Completely independent of Corona, vaccinations are without a doubt one of the great medical achievements, and our goal must be to provide the best possible vaccinations for the appropriate population groups.
We can contribute to this discussion with our results. A comprehensive evaluation should be developed in an interdisciplinary manner, and it is beyond my competence.
Last year you drew attention to the fact that some vaccinations can lead to severe inflammation of the heart muscle as a possible consequence. Despite this, your findings have hardly been reported. During this time, did you have the feeling that you were not taken seriously enough as a scientist?
It is correct that we pointed this out last year so as not to miss any time. The information has already been noticed and many colleagues have reacted, so that further cases have been registered.
In the meantime, we have been working on scientifically validating and publishing our results, which were still preliminary at the time. We are now also working intensively on comparing the corona infection and its course over the three years, also depending on the virus variants. It’s not so important how one feels about it; it’s important to ask the right questions and investigate, and I’m sure that’s going to catch on.
Afterword from the translator:
I have to say that he caught on quite quickly that this is a politically-inspired plandemic; you can see it in his answers, which are very carefully phrased. I guess he has to be careful, otherwise they’ll cut off the funding and bury his findings under a bureaucratic dungheap, never to be seen again.
Posted on December 28, 2022 by Baron Bodissey
The following article and interview concern the work of a German pathologist who — despite the political headwinds blowing against anyone who attempts an honest evaluation of the effects of the experimental mRNA treatments intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus — has conducted autopsies and analyzed the results for people who died after “vaccination”.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the Schwäbische Zeitung:
Covid vaccination as cause of death? This pathologist will find out
The Heidelberg pathologist Peter Schirmacher has been researching undiscovered and deadly vaccination consequences since the beginning of the Covid vaccination campaign. In a unique study, the scientist autopsied people who died unexpectedly within a period of up to twenty days after vaccination.
In his study, Schirmacher has now published five cases in which the vaccination was the cause of death, which corresponds to 20% of the deaths examined.
As early as the summer of 2021, he had warned that there could be a high number of unreported vaccine injuries and vaccine deaths. On this point, however, he was contradicted by several other scientists as well as the Standing Vaccination Commission (Stiko) and the Paul Ehrlich Institute.
At the time, Schirmacher called for more research, and in particular more autopsies, which the state of Baden-Württemberg then financed.
Schirmacher — who has been Managing Director of the Institute of Pathology at Heidelberg University Hospital for eighteen years and was Chairman of the German Society for Pathology until 2019 — answered a number of questions in writing about this autopsy project for the Schwäbische Zeitung.
Mr. Schirmacher, you have been researching the possible consequences of the Covid vaccination for many months. You published a study on this in the magazine “Clinical Research in Cardiology” at the end of November. In summary: What are the most important results of your research?
We can demonstrate that fatal myocardial inflammation can occur after vaccination and that this inflammation shows a typical, consistent histological and immunological picture, which helps in its diagnosis, also in the living patient and in the treatment, and is a basis for further research. Our statements are supported by other national and international publications.
In how many cases did the Covid vaccination cause someone to die?
We published five cases in our study; within the framework of our network we have identified further cases, for example fatal cerebral vein thrombosis after vector vaccines.
Over the past two years, the population has always been told that mRNA vaccines — such as those from BioNTech, for example — usually have mild side effects. According to your findings, is this thesis still justifiable?
The first thing to clarify is what is meant by mild: is hospitalization with recovery mild? Certainly the vast majority of myocarditis and other undesirable effects are mild, but not all of them, and there are numerous publications (more than fifty) on severe to life-threatening courses of myocarditis, which means that our test results are backed up and proven.
A major vaccine protection campaign has been running in the past two years, also on the grounds that research into safe mRNA vaccines has been going on for decades. In your opinion, has enough research been done in Germany on the possible side effects of mRNA vaccinations?
Certainly not. There are important unanswered questions that should be clarified through a broad survey of all undesirable effects or further research in the sense of vaccination improvement, vaccination indication and civil protection. For example: are there genetic factors or certain previous illnesses — for example autoimmune diseases — that predispose one to severe vaccination consequences?
Vaccination consequences are vaccine-dependent — but which characteristics and components of the vaccine are responsible for this? Do certain types of application play a role?
For example, there are considerations that accidental vascular injection could play a role in serious vaccine side effects such as myocarditis. Investigations such as ours are a start. Further investigations are necessary in order to improve vaccines and vaccination indications, also beyond SARS-CoV-2, and to protect the population as well as possible. It should also not be forgotten that severe vaccination damage is eligible for compensation under the Infection Protection Act.
As a pathologist, how difficult was it for you to conduct this study? How did you manage to examine the people who died after a vaccination?
At the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we contacted the state regarding the establishment and financing of an autopsy network, including register, biobank and research funding at all university hospitals. From the Ministry of Science to the cabinet and across the parties, the necessity and importance has been recognized and we have been funded since 2020, and then new aspects, such as breakthrough infections after vaccination, vaccine-associated cases and also late effects or their regression, were included in the continued funding.
Our project is a leading international flagship project, for which the country should be extremely grateful. We have published extensively in leading publications from the network on both Covid and the consequences of vaccination.
We are aware that we are conducting research in a highly emotional, politicized context right from the start, but that is precisely why we see our task in developing and presenting facts as the basis for better diagnosis and treatment of those affected and the basis for further research to accomplish.
This is not always easy in this environment, and there is always the possibility of misinterpreting or misusing our results, but we see no alternative in the interest of gaining knowledge, of those affected and also of the general public. Therefore holding back results is certainly not the right way, and that is why we and everyone involved have to go through it.
Stiko recommends a fourth booster vaccination for people over 60. With a view to the forthcoming third winter with the corona virus and your study results: To whom would you recommend a booster vaccination?
The current data clearly show that it is not Corona, but the many other infectious respiratory diseases that have been slowed down by the Corona measures of the last three years, which are our problem now. Here we are currently being overwhelmed by the expected “catch-up effect” with children and adults. I do not give a vaccination recommendation; that is neither my task nor my competence to recommend something parallel to the Stiko.
In your opinion, did the vaccination campaign make sense?
This is an important question that goes far beyond medicine and to which scientists from many fields should contribute. Completely independent of Corona, vaccinations are without a doubt one of the great medical achievements, and our goal must be to provide the best possible vaccinations for the appropriate population groups.
We can contribute to this discussion with our results. A comprehensive evaluation should be developed in an interdisciplinary manner, and it is beyond my competence.
Last year you drew attention to the fact that some vaccinations can lead to severe inflammation of the heart muscle as a possible consequence. Despite this, your findings have hardly been reported. During this time, did you have the feeling that you were not taken seriously enough as a scientist?
It is correct that we pointed this out last year so as not to miss any time. The information has already been noticed and many colleagues have reacted, so that further cases have been registered.
In the meantime, we have been working on scientifically validating and publishing our results, which were still preliminary at the time. We are now also working intensively on comparing the corona infection and its course over the three years, also depending on the virus variants. It’s not so important how one feels about it; it’s important to ask the right questions and investigate, and I’m sure that’s going to catch on.
Afterword from the translator:
I have to say that he caught on quite quickly that this is a politically-inspired plandemic; you can see it in his answers, which are very carefully phrased. I guess he has to be careful, otherwise they’ll cut off the funding and bury his findings under a bureaucratic dungheap, never to be seen again.
![[+]](https://www.deepwaveanalytics.com/forum/images/bootbb/collapse_collapsed.png)