Unfortunately, we have to look abroad to peel back the corona events. There was an interesting session last week with, among others, a Pfizer insider and the German Minister of Health, Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach. The complete video lasts over three hours1Sufficient video recording session March 19. Because nothing will be heard about this in the media, here are my notes.
Op 19 maart 2026 verscheen Dr. Helmut Sterz als deskundige voor de Enquete‑commissie van de Bundestag die belast is met de parlementaire evaluatie van het coronabeleid ("Aufbearbeiting"). De Duitse versie van onze Parlementaire Enquetecommissie Corona.2Website Parliamentary Corona Inquiry Commission The hearing, officially titled “Health system performance, vaccination strategy and research”3Translation: The effectiveness of the healthcare system, vaccination strategy and research, was part of the ongoing investigation into the implementation of, among other things, the vaccine programs during the pandemic.
De vraag: "waar was deze meneer in 2021 en 2022?" laten we maar even liggen. Elke bijdrage van ingewijden in het systeem is er tenslotte één. Want ingewijde is hij zeker: de toxicoloog promoveerde in de virologie en werd later met een prijs bekroond. Van 1974–1988 was hij hoofd reproductietoxicologie bij Boehringer Mannheim (pharmaceutical). From 1988 to 1995: head of toxicology at Servier (pharmaceutical) in Orléans. 1995–2001: Management of the toxicology center in Basel and the entire preclinical toxicology at Hoffmann-La Roche (pharmaceutical). 2001–2007: appointed by Pfizer (pharmaceutical company) as Head of the two European toxicology centers in Amboise (FR) en Sandwich (UK). He retired in 2007.
His book The vaccination mafia was released in December 20254The Impf Mafia is available at bol. His professional experience allowed him to reconstruct the development and authorization of the mRNA vaccines based on official EMA files, ICH guidelines and internal toxicology protocols.
Key points from Dr. Sterz
- Toxic gaps – Pfizer and BioNTech have not carried out essential tests:
- no mutagenicity studies,
- incomplete reproductive toxicology (two-week rat test),
- poor immunotoxicological analyses.
- no long-term carcinogenicity studies
- Use of risky nanocarriers – the so-called lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that transport the RNA, according to him, are not approved for human use and travel systemically through the body and organs, which explains why damage occurs to the heart, liver, and reproductive organs.
- Production differences between test and mass version – the clinically tested preparation was ultra-pure; for mass production they switched to a cheaper E. coli process. Ultimately, a different product was in the store than that of the consumer association, including residue of bacterial plasmid DNA; according to Sterz carcinogenic and mutagenic in nature.
- Violation of the Nuremberg Code – by administering experimental biotechnology to the masses without complete safety data or free, informed consent.
- Entanglement of industry and regulators – he describes a “toxic troika” of Big Pharma, regulatory authorities (EMA, FDA, RKI) and politicians covering for each other's failures. The term Impf-Mafia therefore does not refer to a conspiracy, but to the permanent triangle of interests that puts profit above safety.
- Human experiment – Sterz calculates, building on reporting systems such as VAERS and PEI-Datenbank, that the underreporting of serious side effects is at least a factor of 30; he calls the vaccination campaign “the greatest human experiment of the nose”. It reaches 60,000 deaths.
From that background, Sterz spoke unusually harsh words in the committee about the development of Pfizer's mRNA product (Comirnaty), and stated that the lack of structural safety research has led to thousands of deaths and unforeseen health risks.
Not in the video, but in the report on the Bundestag website5Report Bundestag: report of this day, zei Sterz: "Deze studies zouden hooguit gerechtvaardigd zijn geweest voor een dodelijk virus als ebola" en niet voor iets met het effect van de griep. Hij sprak over een vaccinatie-tragedie: "Miljoenen slachtoffers moeten worden betreurd."
Former Health Minister Karl Lauterbach called his claims deeply disturbing (“dismaying”) en "fake" en verwees naar internationale gegevens die volgens hem het tegendeel aantoonden. "Er is geen enkel vaccin dat we ooit op de markt hebben gebracht dat zo intensief is bestudeerd".6Source: Die Welt. He speaks in the second short video.
Regardless, Stertz's statement is now part of the official parliamentary record of the German Bundestag. They'll have to find a way to sweep it under the rug. Maybe his grandfather was in the SS?
De vertaling van de korte video 'het verhoor' volgt hieronder. Dat geeft een indruk. Daarna ook een NL-transcriptie van het verslag van het wederhoor, waarin ook Karl Lauterbach zich verdedigt.
The interrogation
Ask: Mr. Dr. Sterz, you worked as chief toxicologist at Pfizer Europe. Is that correct?
Dr. Sterz: Yes, that's right. I was responsible for all animal testing to ensure the safety of medicines.
Ask: Thank you. My questions relate to Pfizer BioNTech's Comirnaty. You have worked intensively on the documentation about this vaccine. Is that correct?
Dr. Sterz: That's right.
Ask: Has the carcinogenicity of this vaccine been checked before approval?
Dr. Sterz: No, the carcinogenic risk has not been investigated due to time constraints. I find it very worrying and also regrettable that no alternative research has been carried out.
Ask: We see in Germany, but also in many other countries, that the birth rate has collapsed after the vaccination campaign.
Dr. Sterz: You refer to the research obligations regarding vaccines and infectious agents with regard to reproduction. A rat study for Comirnaty was inadequately conducted, which did not allow reliable estimates of the effect of the vaccine on pregnancy or subsequent development. Nothing has been learned from the Contergan(Softenon, red.)-catastrophe.
The approval was carried out in an accelerated procedure according to the RKI protocol. This meant that essential toxicity studies were sacrificed for speed without acceptable justification. I know of no case with a similar indication in which all these examinations were skipped. The approval therefore led to banned experiments on humans.
Ask: The RKI had noted internally at the time that side effects and vaccination damage should only be investigated after market introduction. What came out of that?
Dr. Sterz: Pfizer's post-marketing report cited more than 200 suspected deaths within just two months of approval. Comirnaty should have been withdrawn from the market at the latest. The Paul Ehrlich Institute has so far received – if I am correctly informed – 2,133 reports of deaths after Comirnaty. There is a high number of unregistered cases among these spontaneous reports due to under-reporting. The actual number is therefore much higher.
In the US, an underreporting factor of 30 is assumed, by which the registered cases should be multiplied. For Germany, this would amount to 60,000 deaths due to the vaccination.
Ask: The federal government is withholding important SafeVac and Kava data on vaccine damage. And the majority of this committee even refused to request this data. Could vaccine injuries and deaths have been prevented with a compliant approval?
Dr. Sterz: Yes, because if approved according to the regulations, Comirnaty should not have been approved at all.
Ask: Currently, many people with vaccine injuries in Germany are fighting for damages — and they often lose because the courts say Comirnaty has a positive benefit-risk ratio. Is this assumption justified?
Dr. Sterz: In my opinion, not at all. Comirnaty was not even studied for the prevention of serious illness or death during clinical development. Pfizer's documents therefore do not allow any recognition of a positive benefit-risk balance at all. Mathematician Robert Rockenfeller of the University of Koblenz estimates that for every serious COVID progression that Comirnaty supposedly prevented, 25 serious side effects occurred.
Ask: Okay — has age-adjusted mortality in Germany decreased after the start of this vaccination campaign?
Dr. Sterz: No. Mortality has increased significantly in 2021 and 2022 compared to 2020. With a positive benefit-risk ratio, mortality should have fallen when the vaccine became available in early 2021.
Question: During the vaccination campaigns, has the population received the active substance that Pfizer tested in the accelerated emergency approval procedure?
Dr. Sterz: No. A high purity substance was used for the pre-approval clinical testing. This was too expensive for mass production. The population was given a vaccine produced using the bacteria Escherichia coli. The result is significant contamination with bacterial DNA, and the consequence could be a significantly increased risk of cancer.
Defense of Lauterbach
Based on a video from Epoch Times Deutschland.
Voice-over: Former Pfizer toxicologist Helmut Sterz made serious accusations during the hearing in the Corona Inquiry Committee of the Bundestag on Thursday.
Dr. Sterz: My analysis examines the most widely used vaccine in the Western world: Comirnaty from Pfizer and BioNTech. And I saw that the two toxicity studies done on rats have no value whatsoever for risk assessment in humans. Ten other essential toxicity studies that could have demonstrated safety were missing. None of these studies were submitted before or after conditional approval.
In addition, toxicity studies with the toxic lipid nanoparticles - the small fat globules used as a transport vehicle for messenger RNA - were lacking. They ensure that the messenger RNA reaches everywhere in the human body.
Voice-over: The RKI protocol of April 27, 2020 states: "There will be several vaccines that have been developed and tested at rapid speed. Relevant data will only be collected after market introduction.
Dr Sterz: The intention from the start was not to carry out relevant safety checks on animals, but to test the vaccines directly on humans. This is strictly prohibited according to the Nuremberg Code.
Voice-over: According to Sterz, messenger RNA technology poses enormous health risks – something that was clear to many experts even before the approval of the mRNA COVID vaccines. Yet they were not listened to.
Dr. Sterz: These technologies must be banned immediately. An increase in so-called turbo cancer cases as a result of the vaccination is registered in all age groups. And birth rates have fallen by 17% on average across all EU countries.
The most important first step towards dealing with the COVID crisis and learning from mistakes would be a moratorium on this new messenger RNA technology.
Voice-over: Epoch Times asked former Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (SPD) about these accusations.
Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach: Of course, the toxicity has been investigated. The carcinogenicity has also been investigated and whether it leads to hereditary damage. All these things have been investigated. And the suggestion that certain parts of the approval study were not carried out at all is also incorrect. In the approval study, steps that are normally done one after the other have been carried out in parallel to speed up the study. However, this did not lead to a loss of security, as we saw later.
Voice-over: In his answer, the SPD politician also referred to a French four-year study in which 28 million adults were examined.7See also article French study: Less mortality and more suicide among vaccinated people
Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach: The mortality among vaccinated people was indeed reduced by 25%8See why that's not correct in it article by maurice. The study conservatively concludes that the vaccination did not lead to excess mortality. Also no turbo cancer or similar diseases as just suggested. On the contrary: the vaccination reduced mortality by 75% in people who became ill and had previously been vaccinated9See why that is also incorrect article by Herman Steigstra.
The aftertaste
Onderstaand gesprek met Sterz, opgenomen een paar dagen na zijn verklaringen in de Bundestag, duurt 1:19 uur. Het komt op hetzelfde neer. De interviewer is niet echt goed ingevoerd in de materie. Dat heeft als voordeel dat het wat toegankelijker is om door te sturen aan mensen die minder op de hoogte zijn maar wel het Duits goed beheersen - en 1:19u willen investeren om erachter komen waarom hun wereldbeeld moet worden bijgesteld 😬
Footnotes
- 1Sufficient video recording session March 19
- 2
- 3Translation: The effectiveness of the healthcare system, vaccination strategy and research
- 4The Impf Mafia is available at bol
- 5Report Bundestag: report of this day
- 6Source: Die Welt
- 7See also article French study: Less mortality and more suicide among vaccinated people
- 8See why that's not correct in it article by maurice
- 9See why that is also incorrect article by Herman Steigstra
Interesting. This confirms once again – with very good substantiation – what everyone who has studied this technology gradually knows.
In addition: Robert Malone has published an interesting article about the IgG4 switch and its consequences:
https://www.malone.news/p/igg4-class-switching-immune-tolerance?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=583200&post_id=191771141&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1m6l1d&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Maarten Keulemans will dismiss this as 'fake news' before he has watched or read it. When will that man finally keep his mouth shut? Sigh.
About two years ago I once spoke to Jan Bonte, who was labeled by Keulemans (or was it Chris Klomp?) as a “slander neurologist”.
He already explained what the IgG4 switch was and that it was not to be trifled with.
It's all a matter of waiting, unfortunately. What is injected into it will not come out again.
Willem, who graduated in biopharmaceutical sciences but who, among others, Chris Klomp calls “the dance teacher” (which Willem also knows) when Willem speaks about corona and the harmful injections, has wished Chris Klomp a recovery. Chris Klomp has been diagnosed with prostate cancer that has spread. The man has a hereditary burden, in my opinion, because both his parents died of cancer, but at such a young age and the rapidity of his clinical picture (self-published) is striking. Get well soon! Of course, this does not absolve him from accountability for his statements and the promotion of unsafe injections, as the article above shows. After 10 injections per person it will stop because that much has been purchased or another 11th to use up the remains...
At the very beginning of the vaccination madness, an American acquaintance pointed out to me that he would probably not get injected, especially not with one of the mRNA 'vaccines'. Early 2021 I think. It was only then that I started looking for the difference between these methods. I liked his statement: “you can't unring the bell”, and it also helped me. Sounds like your “What's injected into it won't come out again”.
Without any further medical knowledge, anyone can conclude that the long-term effects of a product that was put together in a few months are unknown. Then you actually already know enough. Later I gradually learned more, partly through sites like this one. I haven't regretted skipping those injections for a second.
The text states “Nothing has been learned from the Contergan catastrophe”, which refers to the softenon scandal, the drug was sold in Germany under the name Contergan.
I have never understood why the softenon scandal has been mentioned so little in the vaccine discussions, you should keep this in mind with every safety question.
It seemed obvious to me, but I just added it. Totally agree. Any confidence is misplaced. Transparency and strict control are a dire necessity.
Great that this work continues!
Prof Sterz stelt in zijn betoog dat het corona mRNA vaccin niet goed op veiligheid getest is.
Navraag bij chat GP levert de volgende informatie. De volgende vraag is gesteld:
Het is toch bewezen dat de eerste goedgekeurde vaccin procedure afwijkt van de latere op grote schaal gevolgde procedures van voor de markt geproduceerde vaccins?
Chat GPT zegt:
Het klopt dat er een verschil was in het productieproces tussen de vaccins die werden gebruikt in de vroege klinische studies en de vaccins die later op grote schaal voor de commerciële markt werden geproduceerd. Dit staat in de farmaceutische wereld bekend als het verschil tussen “Process 1” en “Process 2”.
Dit zijn de belangrijkste feiten over dit verschil:
Process 1 (Klinische fase): Dit proces werd gebruikt om de doses te maken voor de eerste grote klinische studies (zoals de fase 3-studie van Pfizer/BioNTech). Hierbij werd het mRNA geproduceerd via een methode die gebruikmaakt van PCR (polymerasekettingreactie), wat geschikt is voor relatief kleine hoeveelheden.
Process 2 (Massaproductie): Om aan de enorme wereldwijde vraag te voldoen, moest de productie worden opgeschaald. Pfizer stapte over op een methode waarbij DNA-plasmiden in E. coli-bacteriën werden gekweekt om als sjabloon voor het mRNA te dienen. Dit proces is efficiënter voor miljarden doses.
Controle door autoriteiten: De Europese Medicijnautoriteit (EMA) was op de hoogte van deze overstap. Uit gelekte documenten bleek dat de EMA aanvankelijk vragen had over de “RNA-integriteit” (de mate waarin het mRNA intact was) bij Process 2, die lager lag dan bij Process 1.
Goedkeuring: Na aanvullende data en aanpassingen in het zuiveringsproces gaf de EMA aan dat de kwaliteit van de commerciële batches (Process 2) voldoende was en vergelijkbaar met de vaccins uit de klinische testfase.
Huidige discussie: In de context van de Duitse parlementaire enquête in 2025 en 2026 wordt kritisch gekeken of deze procesverschillen voldoende transparant zijn gecommuniceerd en of ze invloed hebben gehad op de effectiviteit of het bijwerkingenprofiel op de lange termijn.
Hoewel het procedé dus inderdaad afweek, stelden toezichthouders destijds dat de eindproducten “bio-equivalent” waren, wat betekent dat ze dezelfde werking zouden hebben. Critici gebruiken dit punt echter vaak om de haast van de toelating en de grondslag van verplichtingen aan te vechten.
De kernvraag ,die nog niet beantwoord is ,is de volgende: Zijn de volgens Process 2 geproduceerde vaccins ,waarin niet intact mRNA en minimale hoeveelheden plasmide DNA aanwezig zijn en na injectie in de cellen van de mens terechtkomen, terecht door de EMA veilig verklaard in 2021?
The EMA indeed stated in the 2021 authorization report that the vaccines are contaminated with DNA fragments and did not consider this to be problematic. Independent researchers have shown that contamination in some batches was much greater than permitted. Besides that, there's something even more disturbing. It did not take into account that the pollution would also be packaged in the lipid nano particles. This means that the contamination can very easily end up in the cell nucleus and possibly change DNA transcription.
In addition, the plasmids contain the cancer-promoting SV40 promoter.
Jessica Rose, Kevin McKernan and others have done research on this.
Hierbij een transparante video met meer uitleg over de effecten van het toegediende mRNA ,de lipiden nanodeeltjes en het DNA afkomstig van de E Colibacterie op het immuun systeem bij de mens.
https://youtu.be/Jr-WKRRLi9U
It is better to ask these types of questions at https:/alter.systems. ChatGPT summarizes the consensus. We know them by now…
But to my knowledge the procedure has never been approved, so I asked the question slightly differently. The conclusion of the long answer:
🎯 Conclusion
Yes — the procedure deviated substantially from the normal pre-market doctrine.
This does not automatically mean that the vaccine had to be unsafe by definition, but from a procedural point of view it is misleading to say that “everything has been done according to the usual steps”.
The significance is greater than a formality: it points to a structural shift where regulation has bent to industrial and political pressure, rather than the other way around. Transparency and long-term safety validation — the foundations of pharmaceutical ethics — were partly eroded.
Zwitserland verricht grondig onderzoek:
https://youtu.be/fKEsUZLmqb8
Unfortunately, Kruse is just someone in Switzerland. Things did not go much better here than in the Netherlands, and there was mostly silence.
“Maybe his grandfather was in the SS?” 😂 Gold!