• COVID-19 / Prof. Dr. med. Dr. hc Paul Robert Vogt – Considerations of a concerned Swiss citizen | CO-OP NEWS

    Un papier dense et très éclairant


    Foreword: why am I taking a position?

    For 5 reasons:

    1. I have been working with EurAsia Heart – A Swiss Medical Foundation in EurAsia for more than 20 years, have worked in China for almost a year and have had a continuous connection to the Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College / Huazhong University for 20 years of Science and Technology »in Wuhan, where I have one of my four visiting professorships in China. I have been able to maintain the 20-year connection to Wuhan constantly in the current times.

    2. COVID-19 is not only a mechanical ventilation problem, it affects the heart in a similar way. 30% of all patients who do not survive the intensive care unit die for cardiac reasons.

    3. The last possible therapy for lung failure is an invasive cardiological or cardiosurgical one: the use of an «ECMO», the method of «extracorporeal membrane oxygenation», ie the connection of the patient to an external, artificial lung, which is used in this The clinical picture can take over the function of the patient’s lungs until it works again.

    4. I was asked – quite simply – for my opinion.

    5. Both the level of media coverage and a large number of reader comments are not to be accepted without contradiction in terms of facts, morality, racism and eugenics. You urgently need an objection based on reliable data and information.

    The facts presented come from scientific papers which have undergone a peer review and have been published in the best medical journals. Many of these facts were known until the end of February. If you had taken note of these medical facts and had been able to separate ideology, politics and medicine, Switzerland would most likely be in a better position today: we would not have the second most COVID-19-positive people worldwide and one per capita significantly smaller number of people who lost their lives in the context of this pandemic. In addition, it is very likely that we would have no partial, incomplete lockdown of our economy and no controversial discussions about how we can „get out of here“.

    I would also like to note that all of the scientific works I mention are available from me in their original form.

    • The lifting of the „lock-down“, or the return to what we perceive as normal, is certainly everyone’s wish . Nobody can predict which steps will lead to negative consequences when returning to normalization – that is, if the infection rate flares up again. Every step towards easing is basically a step into the unknown.

      We can only say what is not feasible: an active infection of the non-risk groups with the COVID-19 virus is surely an absolute fantasy. It can only come to mind people who have no idea about biology, medicine and ethics:

      – it is certainly out of the question to deliberately infect millions of healthy citizens with an aggressive virus of which we actually know absolutely nothing, neither the extent of the acute damage nor the long-term consequences;
      – the greater the number of viruses per population, the greater the chance of an accidental mutation, which could make the virus even more aggressive. So we should definitely not actively help to increase the number of viruses per population.
      – The more people are infected with COVID-19, the more likely it is that this virus will adapt to humans “better” and become even more disastrous. It is assumed that this has already happened before.
      – with government reserves of 750 billion ostensibly, it is ethically and morally reprehensible to infect millions of healthy individuals for mere economic considerations.
      – The deliberate infection of healthy people with this aggressive virus would acutely undermine one of the fundamental principles of the entire medical history from pure, short-term economic „concerns“: the principle of the „primum nil nocere“. As a doctor, I would refuse to take part in such a vaccination campaign at all.

    • ouaouh, les recommandations bibliographiques minimales pour comprendre la situation globale…

      Instead of parroting senseless propaganda, one should perhaps deal with authors who actually have something to say at a high level, such as:

      • Pankaj Mishra: „From the ruins of the empire“
      • Kishore Mahbubani: „The Asean Miracle. A Catalyst for Peace“
      • „Has the West lost it?“
      • „Can Asians think?“
      • Lee Kuan Yew: „One man’s view of the world“
      • David Engels: „On the way to the empire“
      • Noam Chomsky: „Who rules the world“
      • Bruno Macàes: „The Dawn of Eurasia“
      • Joseph Stiglitz: „Rich and poor“
      • Stephan Lessenich: „The Deluge Beside Us“
      • Parag Khanna: „Our Asian Future“

      Reading does not mean that all these authors are right in everything. But it would be of great value for the West – including Switzerland – to replace know-it-all, ignorance and arrogance here and there with facts, understanding and cooperation. The only alternative is to try to eliminate our supposed competitors sooner or later in a war. Everyone can decide for themselves what to think of this “solution”.

      In this sense, one can only hope that humanity will remember better. Dreaming is always allowed.


    • En revanche « With a budget of 85 billion, Switzerland – in terms of the number of corona patients per 1 million population – made it to second place worldwide. » c’est pas tout à fait juste ; avec (ce jour) 15 morts p. 100 000, la Suisse est derrière la Belgique (50), l’Espagne (45), l’Italie (40), la France (32), UK (24), les Pays-Bas (22), et à égalité avec la Suède.