The following article refers to a video from the Telegram channel https://t.me/Klartext2021Gemeinsam and is a continuation of the article “How credible is the alternative enlightenment scene?” (https://indepnews.org/en/how-credible-is-alternative-enlightenment/).
Unspecific symptoms as proof?
In a recent video from the Telegram channel “Klartext2021Gemeinsam”, the so-called “shedding” in connection with the COVID-19 vaccines is discussed. It lists various symptoms that are said to occur in unvaccinated people after contact with vaccinated people – allegedly caused by the spike protein produced by the body.
Some of the symptoms mentioned include Cardiac arrhythmia, diarrhoea, headaches, nausea, altered blood values, dry cough and weight loss of up to 10 kilos.
However, these symptoms are not specific and can also occur with many other illnesses or stresses. From a medical point of view, it is not possible to make a statement about “shedding” on the basis of such symptoms alone. It is therefore problematic to assign such symptoms to a specific trigger without a clear clinical or laboratory diagnostic basis. There is no diagnostic evidence and no objectively verifiable criteria given. Such interpretations primarily cater to diffuse fears and contribute to uncertainty – they are not medically tenable.
BAU values: Numbers game without significance?
In addition, the video mentions a study from Switzerland in which healthy people were tested for antibody levels – so-called BAU values. According to the video:
- 50 % of those tested were in the normal range between 0 and 400 BAU/ml,
- 50 % had values significantly above 400 – between 1000 and several thousand BAU/ml,
although they said they were healthy.
This raises the question what values like these mean for healthy people. The discussion is reminiscent of the concept of “asymptomatic patients”, which was also repeatedly taken up with the PCR test during the pandemic.
If 50% of healthy people allegedly have “pathological antibody levels”, then this is not proof of a medical problem, but a clear indication that the reference values do not pass a scientific stress test. In science, what regularly lies outside the norm in healthy people falsifies the norm, not health.
The video goes on to talk about viruses, antibodies and receptors, the actual evidence for which is based on assumptions and interpretations.
Conclusion:
The educational scene, as in this video, should finally get to grips with the basics of vaccination in general, the non-functioning mRNA technology, the non-specific laboratory tests and the non-existence of disease-causing viruses. Then they would realise that their statements are untenable and that their tests are not specific and therefore unnecessary.
Further information on this and other topics can be found on the science platform NEXT LEVEL – Wissen neu gedacht.
