Explosive RKI adjustment for those who have recovered: Lauterbach and Wieler are left with crucial points

Created: 2022-01-20Updated: 2022-01-20 11:59 am

By: Andreas Schmid

Corona infected people are only considered recovered for 90 days.

The adjustment made at short notice is irritating.

Unanswered questions remain - also in the direction of Lauterbach.

Berlin – At the weekend, the Robert Koch Institute changed its information on the recovered status.

As the RKI announced on its website, people after surviving a corona infection should only be considered recovered for three months instead of the previous six.

On Friday (January 14), the Federal Council ensured that this provision could become legally possible.

Spicy: The adjustment was made at short notice, which is why Health Minister Karl Lauterbach is now coming into focus.

Did the SPD politician responsible for the Corona policy push through the new measure single-handedly?

Why did the adjustment come about at all?

The RKI, led by Lothar Wieler, answers covered, virologist Hendrik Streeck warns against arbitrary decisions.

Only 90 instead of 180 days recovered: RKI justifies the decision with the unvaccinated and Omikron

The Robert Koch Institute justifies its adaptation in particular with the situation of unvaccinated people. Specifically: "The duration of the recovered status was reduced to 90 days, since the previous scientific evidence indicates that unvaccinated people who have undergone an infection have reduced and temporally even more limited protection against renewed infection with the omicron variant compared to the delta variant."

When asked, the RKI did not initially mention the exact scientific findings. On Monday afternoon (January 17), a reference to two scientific papers appeared on the RKI website. A UK study of Omicron hospitalization and a briefing from the UK Health Authority. At first glance, the studies do not reveal why the recovery period has to be reduced. There is scientific evidence that the protection of those who have recovered from re-infection is decreasing. However, 90 days seems quite tight. Especially since other countries have much more generous deadlines (more on that later).

The RKI also refers to the Stiko recommendation from the end of December, according to which the booster vaccinations should start after three months.

Health Minister Lauterbach argued on Twitter: “The unvaccinated person who now gets the omicron infection will have little protection against other variants in the autumn.

(...) Omikron does not replace vaccination."

Lauterbach's speech in the Bundesrat: How the minister made the new rule possible in the first place

The RKI's course is therefore in line with Lauterbach.

This is not surprising, after all it is an agency of the Federal Ministry of Health.

Nevertheless, it is interesting how the new provisions came about.

Actually, the 90-day rule was not on the agenda of the Federal Council meeting number 1015 last Friday.

On Thursday evening, the Federal Council's website said: "The period of validity

should be slightly shorter in the course of European standardization and should be 180 days instead of six months." There was no talk of a reduction to 90 days.

The relevant passage is no longer available on the Federal Council's website, but can be reconstructed using the Internet Archive - a kind of library for websites.

Changes take place without the influence of the Minister.

Health Minister Karl Lauterbach on Friday (January 14) in the Bundesrat.

Actually, the Bundesrat should vote on the new Corona regulation. It results from the resolutions of the last prime ministers' conference on January 7th. In that MPK there was no resolution towards the 90-day rule. It was Lauterbach who set the course for adjustment in the plenum. As a representative of the cabinet, he advocated that in future it should no longer be parliament that should decide on the validity of the convalescent status, but the Paul Ehrlich Institute and the Robert Koch Institute. Lauterbach said literally: "Changes only take place without political influence, solely on the basis of new scientific findings, i.e. without being influenced by the minister, for example."

Lauterbach pointed out another advantage of the new rule to the politicians present: “We will inform you so that you do not have to regularly look at the pages (of the RKI and PEI) and check whether anything has changed.” Possible objections would “of course be taken into account " will. Overall, it is a “good solution” because you can react “quickly”. Lauterbach did not mention that there could be an additional shortening of the convalescent status. He spoke for a total of 20 minutes in the plenum. The Federal Council unanimously approved the Minister of Health's proposal. The next day, the updated regulations could finally be read on the RKI website.

Karl Lauterbach on Friday at the 1015th session of the Federal Council - a special session on changes to the Corona Ordinance.

© Political Moments/Imago

New rule for those who have recovered: virologist Streeck speaks of arbitrariness

The new adjustments came as a surprise to many observers.

The fact that the RKI did not publish any additional information at the weekend and left the new rules on its website without comment caused additional irritation - apparently also among members of the Federal Council, as

reported by

the

.

RKI President Lothar Wieler has so far failed to provide clarity.

The doctor, who is generally less present in the media and taciturn, has not yet commented on the new rule for those who have recovered.

Virologist Hendrick Streeck was also surprised by the new regulations

compared to the

.

“Of course it is up to the Robert Koch Institute to determine how long the convalescent status should be valid.

But we really have to be careful that the decisions are based on well-founded knowledge and are not made arbitrarily," said the virologist, who also sits on the Federal Government's Expert Council.

There are few reasons to equate recovered people with unvaccinated people.

"Especially since in most cases they would have a much broader immune response."

Scientific knowledge changes constantly, that's normal.

But as late as October 2021, the renowned society for virology declared: "The proven duration of protection after a Sars-CoV-2 infection has gone through is at least one year." In December, the virologists corrected this information to six months.

The GfV is constantly working on new scientific findings and will adapt its recommendation "if the GfV experts believe this should result from the scientific data", as stated on request.

This is currently not the case.

Recovered status: what about vaccinated infected people?

Far from the unclear coming about of the new rule, other questions remain unanswered. For example, what about vaccinated people infected with omicron? "That can't be answered yet," says a spokeswoman for the RKI in an interview with

. "It also depends on whether and how Omikron changes genetically or whether new virus variants appear."

Which regulations apply specifically does not fall within the competence of the Robert Koch Institute.

Just look at the scientific data.

"Whether the federal states also apply this to their 2G or 3G regulations or take it into account in their regulations is not at the discretion of the RKI." ​​Individual federal states have already done so.

The legal basis for the measure is the change in the Covid-19 Protective Measures Exception Ordinance that came into force on January 15.

The same ordinance that the Federal Council passed the day before based on Lauterbach's descriptions.

Since the new regulation is effective immediately, previously issued recovery certificates that are more than three months old are no longer valid.

Corona recovery status: In Switzerland, the certificate is valid for 365 days - in Germany, in fact, two months

Recently, there have been repeated comparisons between the DA-CH countries, Germany, Austria and Switzerland when it comes to the pandemic. The neighboring countries have a comparable vaccination rate - but differ significantly when it comes to dealing with those who have recovered. In Austria, six months are currently considered recovered. According to

information, the Ministry of Health under Minister Wolfgang Mückstein (Greens) is not currently planning any adjustments.

In Switzerland, the convalescent status is valid for 365 days. To our editors, the social-democratic Swiss Federal Office of Public Health justifies this with scientific findings, i.e. it argues with the same means as the RKI. "The data that an earlier infection protects very well against a new infection has been consolidated," says a spokesman. "Retrospective studies have shown that you are well protected from re-infection for more than six months." The Swiss Federal Council wants to reduce the validity of all vaccination and recovery certificates from 365 to 270 days. However, this is only intended to ensure that the certificate remains recognized in the EU. 

One cannot comment on why decisions are made differently in Germany. The RKI, in turn, does not want to comment on regulations in Switzerland. What is certain is that the new regulations will have a massive impact on many people. People who became infected more than three months ago are now excluded from many parts of social life. Without (re)vaccination, they no longer fall within the 2G range, which is still required in many places.

The regulation also applies to newly infected people.

In fact, the recovery status expires after about two months because there is a transition period of 28 days.

Only then can a certificate of convalescence be applied for.

Incidentally, the RKI mentions this in a subordinate clause.

So far, communication of the new provisions can at least be improved.

Lauterbach and Wieler leave some questions unanswered.