The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

RKI Corona protocols published - documents show doubts about 3G and FFP2 mask requirement

2024-03-26T05:24:37.162Z

Highlights: RKI Corona protocols published - documents show doubts about 3G and FFP2 mask requirement.. As of: March 26, 2024, 5:50 a.m By: Sandra Sporer CommentsPressSplit After a legal dispute, the RKI had to publish the minutes of its Corona crisis team. They raise questions about lockdowns, mask requirements and 3G. The approximately 1,000 pages of documents cover the period from January 2020 to April 2021 and allow a look behind the scenes.



As of: March 26, 2024, 5:50 a.m

By: Sandra Sporer

Comments

Press

Split

After a legal dispute, the RKI had to publish the minutes of its Corona crisis team.

They raise questions about lockdowns, mask requirements and 3G.

Berlin - As early as May 2021, the magazine

Multipolar

requested access to the minutes of the RKI crisis team's meetings, citing the Freedom of Information Act.

When the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) refused, the matter went to court.

A long legal dispute followed, which ended with the RKI releasing the requested information - albeit with numerous redactions.

The approximately 1,000 pages of documents cover the period from January 2020 to April 2021 and allow a look behind the scenes.

Some formulations cause a particular stir.

The increase in the risk assessment - the basis of the lockdowns - is said to have happened at the “signal” of a single person.

But is that true?

Explosive passage to increase risk assessment – ​​RKI comments

The exact wording from the minutes of March 16, 2020 is: “A new risk assessment was prepared on WE.

It's scheduled to be scaled up this week.

The risk assessment will be published as soon as [...] there is a signal for it." It is not clear whose signal was waited for.

The name is blacked out.

“With eyes open”: The Robert Koch Institute has published protocols from the Corona crisis team.

© Reuhl/Imago

Multipolar

concluded that this change was “abrupt” and initiated “from outside the RKI”.

However, when asked by

IPPEN.MEDIA

, the RKI explained that it was “a person employed by the Robert Koch Institute”.

Other media also do not share Multipolar

's assessment

.

ZDF

, among others

, interpreted that this rather indicated that the RKI had created the new assessment and was simply waiting for the right time to publish it.

In fact, the number of infections rose sharply during this period.

On March 4, 2020 there were only 262 confirmed Covid-19 cases; on March 16 there were already 6,012.

RKI statement on FFP2 masks raises criticism of the mask requirement again

The protocols also spark renewed criticism of the mask requirement.

The RKI protocol from October 30, 2020 states that there is “no evidence for the use of FFP2 masks outside of occupational safety”.

However, this only means that there were no meaningful studies on it at the time.

With a completely new pathogen, like Sars-CoV-2 was at the beginning of 2020, this is not surprising.

My news

  • “That’s disrespectful”: Civil servants earn as little as citizens’ benefit recipients – and the traffic lights are watching

  • Sweater, park bench, daffodils: The hidden messages in Princess Kate's video reading

  • Seriously injured ski jumping ace with devastating bedside diagnosis

  • Skoda's novelty with a combustion engine impresses fans - read “It's sustainable”.

  • Motorcyclist from Munich has to return on foot - and takes out anger on construction yard employees

  • Weather forecast for Germany is tough: Meteorologist expects Sahara heat at Easter

Nevertheless, politicians stuck to the mask requirement that was introduced at the end of April 2020.

There has been a lot of discussion about the effectiveness of the mask, not least in the media.

However, in practice the measure proved to be effective.

A study from July 2020 came to a clear conclusion regarding the requirement to wear a mask.

And even after the general requirement to wear a mask was abolished, wearing it was still considered sensible.

Multipolar magazine

The online magazine is published by Paul Schreyer, among others.

Schreyer is the author of several books that, among other things, deal with conspiracy stories about the September 11th attacks.

He also published a book about the corona pandemic in 2020, in which he portrayed it as a staged crisis.

The magazine has sued for the publication of the meeting minutes of the crisis team of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI).

The RKI then published it, albeit with some blackened passages.

Multipolar

is now complaining that these passages should also be disclosed.

The hearing is scheduled for May 6th.

3G rule: RKI clearly spoke out against privileges for vaccinated people

A passage on the 3G regulation also caused a stir.

In a meeting on March 5, 2021, the RKI spoke out clearly against privileges based on vaccination status.

This is “technically unjustifiable and does not make sense”.

The protocol also points out that the WHO also rejects this - among other things for ethical reasons and due to a lack of security against counterfeiting.

Nevertheless, the 3G regulation was introduced in mid-September 2021.

Many questions remain unanswered about the statements made by the RKI and the seemingly inconsistent actions of politicians.

The RKI announced to

IPPEN.MEDIA

that it would make a public statement later in the day.

Multipolar plans to go to court again to obtain unredacted publication of the minutes.

A recently published study showed that a corona infection can cause serious complications even long after the illness.

(

sp

)

The editor wrote this article and then used an AI language model for optimization at his own discretion.

All information has been carefully checked.

Find out more about our AI principles here.

Source: merkur

All news articles on 2024-03-26

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.