“Long Covid” is not only a cover term for health damage caused by the so-called gene-based injections.
It also served as a pilot project for concealing all pharmacological “side effects.” If symptoms are attributed to an illness—even long after it has officially ended—then all medications used during treatment automatically gain a legally watertight alibi. Crime writers have long known that presenting a supposed culprit is the best protection for the real perpetrator.
Source: Uni.-Doz. Dr. Gerd Reuther, tkp.at; 02 February 2026
Framing: “Side Effect”
In the interpretation promoted by the medical-industrial complex, undesirable effects of treatments were early on trivialized as “side effects,” even though both positive and negative outcomes are equally perceptible to patients. The supposed hierarchy of effects exists only in the eyes of the practitioner and the pharmaceutical industry. Efficacy and potential for harm are inseparable.
For the pharmaceutical industry, “side effects” are not a problem because they cause harm, but because they threaten public acceptance of their products. Therefore, efforts have long been made to make them disappear in various ways:
- Complaints are denied.
- Complaints are not recorded or deliberately misclassified (e.g., “vaccinated” status only after the second injection).
- Complaints are attributed to genetically determined individual reactions (“allergy,” “overreactive immune response”).
- Complaints are assigned to the underlying disease being treated.
- After recovery from the initial illness, complaints are reinterpreted as the consequence of having survived the infection (“post-infectious diseases”).
All of these strategies have been practiced in medicine for centuries. “Covid-19” acted like a prism, refracting and concealing the damages from gene-based injections through all of these methods up to the present day. With the invention of “Long Covid,” pharmacological health impairments were recast as supposed disease consequences. Any symptom can be explained as the aftereffect of a previous illness. This eliminates the need for a demanding search for causes or the uncomfortable admission of iatrogenic harm.
Diagnostic Alchemy on Demand
Long before “Long Covid,” a similar claim was made about a potentially fatal brain inflammation that was, without scientific proof, attributed to measles infections—sometimes many years in the past. Yet this very inflammation is acknowledged by pharmaceutical companies as a “side effect” of certain medications used against measles, as well as of vaccinations. A causal link with measles itself has never been proven and remains highly questionable, despite being used as justification for compulsory measles vaccination.
The model for concealing treatment-related damage is highly expandable. Reportedly at the urging of industry, German Research Minister Dorothee Bär has launched a “Research Decade Against Post-Infectious Diseases,” immediately allocating €500 million.(i) “Long Covid” is not meant to remain a singular diagnosis. Syndromes formerly known as vaccine-related—such as “Chronic Fatigue” and “Myalgic Encephalomyelitis”—have simply been reframed as “ME/CFS,” now labeled post-infectious. Science® will once again deliver, just as it once produced viruses as supposed causes of poisoning. Financial grants, scientific awards, and professorships ensure obedience.
Whenever symptoms fail to subside during treatment—or new ones appear—a “severe course” is proclaimed, expected to last well into the future. All therapeutic attempts are then at best ineffective, but in any case, officially free of unwanted effects, since every health problem is attributed to the underlying disease. Even in severe illness or death, the patient will not blame the treatment, but may instead regret their “bad genes.” Questions of liability for drug manufacturers and doctors are thus things of the past.
The Sword of Damocles Hanging Over Every Therapy
Every patient and practitioner should be aware that treatment always carries the risk not only of failure but also of worsening the condition. Christoph Wilhelm Hufeland (1762–1836), Germany’s most renowned physician of the early 19th century, already pointed out that treatments could cause additional “artificial diseases,” meaning every patient had to recover from “two illnesses” to regain health. (ii) He therefore advised careful consideration before prescribing any therapy.
Modern conventional medicine has erased this parity of symptoms from the minds of doctors and patients alike. No later than 1881, when the pharmaceutical industry began to gain momentum, the trivialization of therapy-related illnesses as “side effects” became a dominant narrative. (iii)
Outlook
Given the steadily increasing treatment-related harm in recent years—caused by drugs that intervene ever more deeply in our physiological metabolism—a prophylactic “elimination” of therapy-induced damage by reattributing it to prior illnesses has become bitterly necessary. Before the many gene-based therapies now in pharmaceutical pipelines are unleashed on humanity, authorities intend to preempt public outrage and legal claims by offering prepackaged explanations. If needed, mysterious “immune deficiencies” will serve as justification.
At the same time, the harmful effects of treatments can even expand the business: by the early 21st century, at least 5% of hospital admissions were already treatment-related (iv), and one in three deaths was linked to previous medical interventions.(v) What has so far remained utopian in engineering has become reality in medicine: a perpetual motion machine. Treatments generate from every illness countless secondary diseases, feeding the system that created them. As a central hub, “fatigue centers” are now being established—soon to be as indispensable to modern medicine as pain centers once became.
i https://www.bmftr.bund.de/SharedDocs/Kurzmeldungen/DE/2026/01/dekade-postinfekt.html
ii Hufeland CW: Die Kunst, das Leben zu verlängern. S. 633; Jena 1797
iii Lewin L: Die Nebenwirkungen der Arzneimittel. Pharmakologisch-klinisches Handbuch. August Hirschwald; Berlin 1881
iv Gahr M et al.: Unerwünschte Arzneimittelwirkungen. Warum Meldungen nicht erfolgen. Dtsch Arztebl 2016; 113(9):B-320-1
v Reuther G: Der betrogene Patient. 4. Auflage S. 137ff.; Riva; München 2019
