Toxicologist Hockertz: Approval of the corona vaccine is “willful gross bodily harm”

Volunteers test a vaccination station in Hanau, December 10, 2020 - SNA, 1920, December 16, 2020


One of the most renowned critics of the rapid development of corona vaccines is toxicologist Prof. Stefan Hockertz. He was director and professor of the Institute for Experimental and Clinical Toxicology at the University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf. In the interview he calls the rapid vaccine approval “willful gross bodily harm”.- Prof. Hockertz, will you be vaccinated?I will not be vaccinated with this vaccine , which is currently about to be approved and which is actually still under development, because in my opinion this vaccine is not fully developed. I am not a vaccination opponent. I got vaccinated against many highly dangerous infectious diseases – typhoid, cholera, rabies when I was on a motorcycle in Central Asia last year. That means I am not a vaccine opponent, but I value quality.– So the development and approval of corona vaccines is going too fast for you?

Translated from…


I have evidence that, especially in the pre-clinical area, many studies have not been carried out that concern the efficiency and safety and thus the quality of this vaccine. And I also have indications from the companies involved that insufficient toxicological data are available. I am a trained toxicologist, so I can evaluate it and I am sure that not enough has been done here to really give people a safe medicine.

Curevac is also in the starting hole: 25 percent fever, 100 percent antibodiesDecember 15, 6:09 pm– For a long time there were only press releases about the new vaccines. Now the first providers have published scientific details. Have you already been able to get an impression of the data from Biontech, Moderna or AstraZenica?

Of course. We also need to distinguish the vaccines. Biontech, Moderna or Curevac work with messenger RNA. AstraZeneca works with an adenovirus which I think is even more problematic because it is a DNA virus.Of course, I looked at the documents. I would like to dedicate myself to the vaccine from Biontech, because it has received approval in the UK and will probably also be the first to be approved in the EU. That is basically already clear.This vaccine from Biontech is already showing in many test subjects that they are healthy people, side effects that should not and cannot occur as such. For example, I have a side effect report for facial paralysis, the so-called Bell’s Palsy Syndrome, and this already occurs in six people in the group of those who have been vaccinated. This is a partial facial paralysis that lasts longer and of which in this case it is not yet known whether it will heal completely.– So in that case would you say the side effects are too strong, isn’t it worth the risk?The risk of side effects is too great for me. We are now seeing some side effects and they are very noticeable. We also saw transverse myelitis with the AstraZeneca vaccine, which is no longer curable. Many years ago we had swine flu, even with an insufficiently developed vaccine, with many people suffering from narcolepsy as a side effect. And I wonder why we have to take this risk again now.– Vaccine development for other coronaviruses, Mers and Sars was stopped after animals died in experiments. Why are you more successful with this new type of coronavirus, even though it seems to be more dangerous?You are not really that. Already in 2004 – that was a publication by a Canadian working group headed by Weingartl et al. – there was an intensive warning against such a Sars-Cov vaccine, because it is apparently able to not only protect people from a serious illness protect, but can make this disease even more severe. Already at that time it was warned against using spike proteins in order to undertake appropriate vaccinations, because the side effects there can lead to liver damage and also because binding antibodies can arise that tend to intensify this disease. So this shot could backfire. In my opinion, clarifying investigations have not been carried out at Biontech.– Would you rather favor dead vaccines, live vaccines or vector vaccines over DNA or mRNA vaccines for the anti-Covid vaccination?We have been warned against vector vaccines like the one AstraZenica is developing against Corona for years because they are actually able to change our genome via a very simple mechanism.I would always favor a path that has already proven itself in the past.I would prefer a similar approach to the influenza vaccine. In the case of influenza, we have vaccines that work to some extent with an effectiveness of around 40 percent, which is actually quite good. And we have certainly achieved success with it. I would proceed in the same way as with the influenza vaccine, that is, to breed a coronavirus via the hen’s egg, weaken it and inject it into humans. Then we have a well-known vaccination principle that I can rely on to some extent, we call it referential approval.

The Corona Vaccine Race: Too Fast and Too Dangerous?December 3, 14:59– Do you think that the novel coronavirus could mutate to such an extent that the vaccines become ineffective?

We can’t rule anything out. But it is known that the coronaviruses are more stable than, for example, influenza viruses, which change every year. Corona has different properties. The virus is able to produce different types of antibodies. Antibodies are a double-edged sword: some have a neutralizing effect, others do their job. But the binding antibodies that the corona disease can also trigger lead to an aggravation of the disease. And we don’t know which antibodies are triggered by vaccination. Therefore, our immune system initiates a completely different immune response, not just antibodies, but also cytotoxic T cells. They are not even recorded by the vaccination.– What if I’ve already been through Covid-19? Should I still get vaccinated? In theory, I have already built up antibodies?That’s a good question. According to a study in Bavaria, only about 60 percent of those who have had an infection develop antibodies. The others don’t. The others likely have cytotoxic T cells.It is not yet known how the vaccination will affect us if we have already had the infection. And I suspect a lot of us have already had this infection. We also don’t know how our immune system reacts because the infection is introduced into the wrong cells – the vaccine is injected into the muscle cells and not into the airway cells. Does that lead to side effects, to autoimmune phenomena? We do not know that.And even Biontech admits in their package insert for the vaccine in the UK that they don’t know how people react to it who have already been through this infection. And that is an unacceptable risk, because we cannot even use an antibody test to determine with certainty that the coronaviruses also form binding antibodies.– So before a vaccination with a new corona vaccine is no antibody test done?No. There is not even an explanation of such things. If someone says they have already had this infection, there are not even instructions that they should not be vaccinated.And there is no data on how a person who has already had a Covid infection reacts to a vaccination against it.– As a relatively young, fit person, do I perhaps no longer need to be vaccinated at all if the seasonal situation relaxes again in summer and the high-risk groups have been vaccinated by then?Even now, as a young and fit person, you do not need to be vaccinated because your risk of developing this disease is negligible – even the Robert Koch Institute says that. Rather, we should be giving people guidance on how to strengthen their immune systems; Vitamin D, zinc, echinacin and so on. This is how we deal with this infection superbly.– The EMA, the European approval authority, is now giving in to the pressure of politics and wants to approve the Biontech vaccine a week earlier. What do you make of it?I consider this to be willful gross bodily harm because, in my opinion, there is not enough data, neither from the preclinical nor from the clinic. The clinical trials are scheduled for two years. And to derive approval from a few interim evaluations against a disease that is only fatal to a small extent, I consider irresponsible.– In certain risk groups , the disease is quite fatal.Protection of these risk groups is possible with conscientious hygiene. If a vaccine has been developed state of the art and has also been specially adapted to the immune system, e.g. of old people, then vaccinating it naturally makes sense. However, this vaccine has not yet been studied in people with a weakened immune system. Hence my reference to knowingly assault.– You have been dealing with vaccines for decades and are in contact with colleagues, for example at the Paul Ehrlich Institute. There everyone is of the same opinion and everything is good.It is always very bad when science is determined by politics. I see that now and it hurts my heart. Our most sacred ethical principles that we have in science to protect human beings are thrown overboard for politics. Politics governs science – via the Robert Koch Institute , the Paul Ehrlich Institute and the Friedrich Loeffler Institute. Outstanding scientists work there, but they report directly to the federal government. And that’s why these colleagues who worked there or who have responsibility must do what the rulers, i.e. Ms. Merkel and Mr. Spahn, give them up. This can not go well. When politics influences science, it usually ends fatally.Dead viruses, vectors or mRNA? Cross-comparison of vaccinesDecember 14, 17:53– These gentlemen cannot and must not express themselves. How do they deal with you? Are you seen a bit as a polluter? Or do you at least say behind closed doors: you’re right?Outside, the few colleagues who express themselves, like me, are absolutely discredited by the mainstream media. In contrast, most colleagues agree with me in direct discussions. I also have the approval of employees from the Paul Ehrlich Institute, who literally tell me: we no longer understand the world, but we are not allowed to express ourselves publicly. I would like to point this out to all of these colleagues once again in public: remonstrate! You have the right and you even have the duty to do so, even our Basic Law says that, provided it is still in force, that we may remonstrate when our ethics and when our conscience advises us against doing something that politics orders us to do .– There are professional groups, especially in the medical field, where there is a lot of pressure to get vaccinated. How should these people deal with it?The more people we convince not to get vaccinated, the less this social pressure is. And when I read that over 80 percent of doctors and nursing staff are either critical of this vaccination or even say very clearly that we will not be vaccinated, then a society should please accept it. Just as it is obviously accepted that the journalist Nikolaus Blome, whom I have also sued, expressly calls for social disadvantages for everyone who does not get vaccinated. He literally wrote: “May the entire republic point the finger at them”. Obviously we now live in a country that allows such hate speech.


Leave a Reply