Medical and health experts call for an end to the threats against burger, regular new analyzes and sweeping protection of vulnerable groups
The Conference of Chancellor, Ministerial Presentations and Ministerial Presents in mid-October to deal with the SARS COV-2 / Covid-19 epidemic – has the result protocol to assess the assessment – for worrying incorrect developments. These undesirable developments relate to epidemiology, pravention concept and socio-political implications. In the previous thesespapiers, which were strictly analytically structured, our authors group has worked out that:
- The SARS COV-2 / COVID-19 epidemic is continued by asymptomatic Trag and not to be detected by linear concepts;
- For this reason, the epidemic is not to be eradicated, but spreading homogeneously in the absence of vaccination and therapy in the population, whereby it comes in addition to fermentation expansion;
- Frequency information on the basis of reasonary samples with external caution and it must be the most urgent task of reliable with cohort studies, to get representative data and to use clinical data for assessment (mortality of hospitalized patients, use of intensive capacity etc.);
- Test methods are to be validated primarily with regard to the infectiousness (specific specification problem of the PCR);
- General praventions and tracking of infections play an important role, but ultimately the success of the pravention can only be achieved through target-group-oriented measures, which mainly have the protection of vulnerable groups of persons;
- The pravention measures are not at the expense of humanitate and the person was grabbed;
- the principles of risk communication must be observed;
- Dimgaims of the fundamental rights must be justified at any time with regard to their reliability, and;
- A mixing of health protection and interventions that can reflect the superimpyandial action (eg.B. Location determination by Corona app, intervention in the private sector to control "Visit") Under no circumstances is.
Encouragement, avert and escape in false salvation
In the decisions of the above conference, there is no further development of the understanding of the peculiarities of this epidemic and for the requirements for control parameters as well as the communication of their results. Instead, the impression that the responsible persons on the ever-like procedures insisted and mails even strengthened, in their effectiveness and acceptance it must give it a scientific point of view.
In a long-term social crisis, which has developed this epidemic, the continuing, as an alternative-free cover, is based solely on the responsibility of the individual to encouragement, avert and escape in false treatment, but not to improve the effectiveness of the proposed resp. arranged measures. This is important above all in connection with a threat of threats, which from the implicit offset "Long-term winter", "Christmas in Lockdown" and "It could not be free for you to be free" is composed.
However, any risk communication ies clearly shows that the applicable procedures must be limited in accordance with the current and experienced situation that a reliable re-analysis of the situation is regularly to be made and that the growth of the crisis situation has continued to be continued with further developed concepts. However, a further development and observance of these basic findings are not visible.
A rough chance on such a re-briefing was in the Berlin Conference on 14. October unfortunately missed. The possibility had passed, about the element "Protection of vulnerable groups" to make a new dimension for the guiding idea. While this procedure is noted under point 11 in the protocol, but compared to the other approaches based solely on the idea of control and enforcing contact descriptions alone, only one side aspect pecuceeds, which goes down in the threat scenario.
Presentation of a linear epidemic event is uberholt
From the beginning – already in Marz – was detectable (theses paper 1) that compasses have no positive but strong negative effect. This impression has been more than confirmed in international comparison since. The highest numbers can be found after all in the European countries with the sharpest Lockdown rules.
It was clear from the beginning (see argumentation in theses paper 3) that a sporadic spread is not solely to be dominated by still well-equipped health marketers and tracking measures, although their work is important. This idea is on the presentation of a linear epidemic event, which should actually be awhere today the past.
In the bottom line, only the realization remains: In Germany, a concept is applied, which has developed by the restriction on general pravention measures together with threat of Lockdown and the extensive waiver of specific pravestionans paradoxically exactly to the concept, which should actually be avoided, namely the concept of herd immunitat, a concept, so the "March" only accompanied by the epidemic, but without the urgent need to protect the vulnerable population groups. Such a procedure has always criticized our authors group, and such a procedure should be sharply criticized in the future.
However, in order to enforce the mentioned compensation, one sees itself, according to the profit report of the Berlin Conference of Chancellor and Minister Presidentials and Minister Presents on 14. October this year forced unpathed with a tangled state prasence including reclaiming staff from other areas of public administration to the use of the Bundeswehr.
Because despite numerous technical and legal warnings, no return of the pre-adopted accommodation ban was agreed, this had to be correctly corrected as an unbearance. For example, it is clearly prospects that police resources could be controlled by the private sector if there was no behavior after the specified rules (items 2a and 4).