Newsletter 28 / 27 Febr. 2021
Rudolf Steiner on infection in viral diseases
The rain comes because the frogs are croaking … and it is a modern superstition that the bacilli and bacteria move in and out of people and cause the sicknesses.
Preliminary remark
In the current written publications (of which I am aware) on current Covid-19 events by representatives of the organised anthroposophical medical profession and the Medical Section, it is noticeable that Rudolf Steiner’s statements are only selectively dealt with insofar as a positive attitude towards the generally valid scientific and medical views on the virus theories and the current vaccination topics can be derived from them.
A supplement appears to be urgently needed in view of the current unprecedented changes in world conditions and the underlying assumptions with which they are driven and justified. In this sense, reference should also be made to the lectures „Limits to the Knowledge of Nature„[1] , which Rudolf Steiner gave on the occasion of the opening of the first Goetheanum almost exactly 100 years ago. Knowledge of these lectures would be of decisive importance for the assessment of the current „virus faith“.
So I would like again to draw attention to the book „Virus Mania„[2]. This book is often rejected simply because of its title, which is considered offensive. On the other hand, some experts warn against this book, although they have not taken any notice of its contents. It is in the nature of a delusion (a thoroughly serious psychological term) that these do not correspond to reality. And this is precisely what is at issue both in the lectures mentioned and in the book, the authors of which precisely do not make the mistakes that are common today, which Rudolf Steiner describes in the lectures, quite in contrast to the „consensus science“ that is common today, which in this respect is actually a „pseudo-science“. Even if „delusions“ do not correspond to reality, they can very well have a reality-shaping effect, especially if they are collectively represented and become effective. Recent history is full of such examples, some with catastrophic consequences. The question of whether such a catastrophe is currently developing is more than justified.
The following notes on the occasion of Rudolf Steiner’s 160th birthday are intended to draw attention to the important medical and scientific statements and methodological remarks, in the sense of food for thought, hints, additions to broaden perspectives. However, this can also be seen as a contribution to the rehabilitation of Rudolf Steiner, because the scope of the concealment of his statements appears to be considerable.
Current situation
There are currently some heated discussions about statements on the Covid-19 vaccinations which have come from the Medical Section, the International Federation of Anthroposophical Medical Societies and a publication in the Merkurstab in connection with the University of Witten-Herdecke.[3] Even though certain concerns were expressed about the safety of the vaccines and the lack of long-term studies, a fundamentally positive attitude is unmistakable. Important aspects are neither discussed nor questioned at all, for example:
-The mRNA vaccines are basically not vaccines, but „a medical agent designed to stimulate the human cell to become a production site for [alleged] pathogens“.[4] This is a genetic intervention, the possible consequences of which are by no means foreseeable.
– Neither is being questioned whether what is considered to be “viral material” is a pathogen or the cause of Covid-19 disease at all (None of Koch’s 4 postulates is fulfilled).[5]
-And it is also not questioned whether the Covid-19 disease even occurs through the transmission of material particles from person to person.
Basically, one is content with Rudolf Steiner’s statement that one should not fundamentally oppose vaccination, e.g. „Rudolf Steiner did not oppose „sanitary and hygienic measures“, in times of need he did not oppose vaccination either, and warned (using the example of smallpox disease) against any radicalism in this respect, the „fanatical opposing of these things“.„[6] This is true, but not even half the truth. For Rudolf Steiner made these statements with regard to diseases connected with bacteria or bacilli, such as typhus, black pox, tuberculosis, syphilis, cholera and others. However, even there he questions the materialistic picture of contagion and calls this a „modern superstition“ (see above). But we are currently more interested in what he said about contagion in relation to viral diseases. Yes, that’s right, there was no talk of viruses at that time, but the diseases already existed! We will come back to this.
Now, organised anthroposophical medicine has evaluated these mRNA vaccinations as an essential and fundamentally positive contribution to the containment of the pandemic, basically expressing that they share the materialistic view of these virus theories. However, these vaccinations would only make sense if the cause of the Covid-19 disease was actually the SARS-CoV2 virus and this was physically transmitted from person to person. However, there is no scientific proof of the existence of this virus as a pathogen, nor of its transmission. You would not believe it, but that is the way it is: even if it is claimed repeatedly: This evidence does not exist, it is simply not provided. Anyone who questions this widespread and generally accepted „virus belief“ is usually accused of being unscientific, especially in the media, and no discourse takes place. In the meantime, a reward of more than 200,000 Swiss francs is being offered – for the umpteenth time – for a scientific evidence of the virus.[7] That is a lot of money and would be easy to earn, but the experts involved do not seem to be interested.
It is also clear from the literature on the subject mentioned below that numerous renowned virological institutes, which are currently in charge, have not been able to provide evidence of a virus, even after repeated requests. In medicine and science in general, the so-called 4 Koch postulates[8] must be fulfilled in order to detect a pathogen. Not one of these postulates has been fulfilled so far. (And let there be no misunderstanding: It is not denied that there is this material which is thought to be viruses. It is only stated that a virus detection is missing! Nor is the existence of the disease Covid-19[9] with its sometimes severe courses of disease denied).
No one should have to believe anything!
Everyone is capable of forming his or her own judgement, as Rudolf Steiner clearly points out in the lecture „How can the spiritual misery of the present be overcome“.[10] This thought-provoking suggestion is intended to point out the basis of judgement necessary for this: The article „The Phantom Virus“ is suitable as an introduction.[11] Particularly recommended is the book „Virus-Wahn“ (Virus Mania)[12] , which is also easy to read for everyone and contains interesting and important information and little-known facts beyond the current situation, which helps to dissolve the partly false representations about polio, HIV, BSE and other diseases as well as the Spanish flu. In an exemplary phenomenological and scientific manner, the authors examine today’s prevailing theories and hypotheses on the existence of viruses and the claim that they are transmissible pathogens. Entirely in the spirit of Rudolf Steiner’s remarks in the lectures „Limits to the Knowledge of Nature„[13], which he gave at the opening of the first Goetheanum 100 years ago, the authors do not make the mistake of going beyond the phenomena in thought, so to speak, and thus verifying the theories put forward not on the basis of observation of nature, but on the basis of purely mentally generated ideas, quasi on themselves (the theories). Thus, there are no theories and hypotheses in this book. Instead, it explains that the theories and claims on which the whole alleged pandemic is based lack scientific proof. For us, it is of particular importance that both the methodology and the conclusions in this book are confirmed not only methodically but also in terms of content by Rudolf Steiner’s statements!
The latter are not even mentioned at all in the official announcements cited above and from the explanations one can gather that they were not taken into account either. Are these deliberately concealed, e.g. to remain politically correct? In order not to offer any attack surfaces? Or even to protect anthroposophical medicine? We will not speculate about the motives here, but it is certain that this behaviour is not truthful. It does, however, fit in with the basic attitude to the Corona affair currently emanating from the Goetheanum.[14] It is actually a scandal, both in the natural sciences and in the humanities, because there is no discussion or dialogue about these questions, and suggestions and hints are either not responded to at all or are evaded. I had sent both Georg Soldner and Matthias Girke a copy of this book „Virus Mania“. Only when requested did Matthias Girke comment as follows: „The book has reached me and I have already had a look at it. When you work in Havelhöhe again and again and are confronted with the many ventilated patients in the intensive care unit and a full hospital ward, you do have some critical thoughts about the subject matter presented. Practice and theoretical considerations are then very different.“[15] In terms of content, that was all, and remarkably: no theoretical considerations are made in the book at all! On the contrary: the lack of evidence of the currently accepted virus theories is impressively proven! Moreover, it is not about the disease itself, but about its causes, which are based exclusively on unproven theories. All measures (lockdown, mask obligations, restrictions on freedom) are based on these unproven theories! [On the overcrowding and forced ventilation in hospitals mentioned by Matthias Girke: see links at the end of the article].
Thus, those who should represent Rudolf Steiner’s medicine do not mention his clear statements, simply remain silent on essential scientific questions and follow the mainstream, although glaring contradictions do exist.
This should be pointed out on Rudolf Steiner’s birthday.
R 28 – part 2
Rudolf Steiner on contagion e.g. for viral diseases
From „Hygiene as a Social Question[16]
Now I do not want to be misunderstood; I do not want to be misunderstood as taking a special stand for anything in this lecture, which is to be dedicated to the subject of „Hygiene as a Social Question“. To a certain extent, I do not want to treat in a one-sided manner those things which today tend to be treated from a party standpoint or from the standpoint of a certain scientific conviction. I do not want to take sides – perhaps you will allow me to drop out of my role in this introduction – with the old superstition that devils and demons go around as diseases and move in and out of people, nor do I want to take sides with the modern superstition that bacilli and bacteria move in and out of people and cause disease. Whether we are dealing with an ancient spiritual superstition or a materialistic superstition may be of less concern to us today.
The rain comes when the frogs croak…[17]
He who claims that diseases come from small living beings, who says, for example, that influenza comes from the influenza bacillus and so on, is of course just as clever as someone who says that the rain comes from the frogs that croak. Of course, when the rain comes, the frogs croak because they feel it, because they are in the water that is stimulated by that which causes the rain. But the frogs do not bring the rain. Similarly, the bacilli do not bring the flu, but they are there where the flu is, just as the frogs come out in an inexplicable way when the rain comes.
So you can’t say on the one hand that the bacilli test is of no use to you. It is as useful as knowing that a person is exposed to the disease, just as we know that frogs croak when it rains. So one must not throw out the baby with the bathwater and say that examining the bacilli is unnecessary. But on the other hand, you have to know that the bacilli do not make the disease. Otherwise you will never explain properly if you always just say: for cholera there are the bacilli, for influenza there are the bacilli and so on. Of course, that’s just laziness for the fact that people don’t want to investigate the real causes of disease.
From a question response[18]
Would you please comment on how the emergence of an epidemic, such as influenza or scarlet fever, came about if not through the transmission of bacilli. In many diseases, the pathogen has been scientifically identified. What is your position on this?
- Steiner: Well, if I were to discuss this very question, for which I have indicated that I do not want to take sides, then I would have to give a whole lecture. However, I would like to draw attention to the following. The one who is compelled by his findings to draw attention to the fact that for diseases accompanied by bacilli or bacteria there are deeper causes as primary causes than just the appearance of the bacilli, does not yet claim that the bacilli are not there. It is quite another thing to assert that the bacilli are there and that they occur in the wake of the disease, than to look for the primary cause in the bacilli. I have developed in detail what is to be said in this direction in the course which is now being held. But this takes time. This also applies to certain elements that have to be dealt with beforehand. This cannot be done quickly in an answer to a question. Nevertheless, I would like to point out the following. This human constitution is not as simple as one often imagines. Man is a many-membered being. I explained this at the beginning of my book „On Riddles of the Soul“, that a human being is a tripartite being, a being that can be called the sensory-nervous man, secondly the rhythmical man, thirdly the metabolic man. That is the human being. And these three members of human nature work together, and they must not, if man is to be healthy, work together in any other way than that there is a certain separation of the regions at the same time. Thus, for example, the sensory-nervous man, who is more than that which is imagined by present-day physiology, must not without further ado transmit his effects to the metabolic man in any other way than that these effects are mediated by the rhythmic movements of the circulation and respiration processes, which, after all, extend into the outermost periphery of the organism. This interaction, however, can be interrupted in a certain way. Now something quite definite is brought about by this interaction. When such questions are asked, you will forgive me if I say that it is necessary to answer them properly; I want to be as correct as possible, but it is necessary to say some words that must be listened to properly. For example, it is quite true that processes take place in the human abdomen which are integrated into the whole organism. If they are integrated into the whole organism, then they work in the right way. However, if they are intensified by some processes, either directly in the abdomen, so that they become more active there, or if the once appropriate processes – for such corresponding processes are always there – are made smaller in their intensity in the human head or in the human lungs, then something very peculiar occurs. Then it becomes apparent that the human organism, in order to live normally, must develop processes within itself which are only allowed to develop to a certain extent so that they take up the whole human being. If the process is intensified, then it localises itself, and then, for example, a process occurs in the lower abdomen of the human being whereby that which takes place in the human head or in the lungs and that which corresponds to certain processes in the lower abdomen are not separated in the right way. The processes always correspond to each other in such a way that they go parallel to each other. In this way, however, that which may only be present in the human being to a certain extent, so that it maintains its vitality, the spirit- and soul-borne vitality, is brought up above a certain level. Then it becomes the terrain, I would say, for all kinds of lower organisms, for all kinds of small organisms, then these small organisms can develop there. That which is the creative element of the small organisms is always within the human being, it is only extended over the whole organism. If it is concentrated, then it is a living soil for small organisms, microbes; they find a soil in it. But the reason why they can thrive there is to be sought in extremely fine processes in the organism, which then turn out to be the primary reason. I am really not speaking out of antipathy to the bacillus theory. I quite understand the reasons that people have who pay homage to the bacillus belief. You can believe me when I say that if I didn’t have to speak for factual reasons as I am speaking now, I would recognise these reasons, but it is the experience that leads to the recognition of something else, and that then forces one to say: I see a certain landscape, there are a lot of extraordinarily beautiful cattle, well cared for. I now ask: Why are there certain living conditions in the area? They come from the beautiful cattle. I explain the living conditions of this area by saying that beautiful cattle have moved in from somewhere and have spread out there. – Of course I will not do that, instead I will investigate the primary causes, the diligence and understanding of the people, and that will explain to me why on this soil these beautiful cattle are developing. But I would be giving a superficial explanation if I merely said: It is beautiful here, it is good to live here, because beautiful cattle have moved in.
It is basically the same logic if I find the typhus bacillus and then state that one has typhus for the reason that the typhus bacilli have moved in. To explain typhoid fever, quite other things are necessary than merely referring to the typhoid bacilli. But one is misled in quite another way if one indulges in such false logic. Certainly, the primary processes which give the typhus bacilli the basis for their existence are then the basis for the typhus bacillus, and in turn cause all sorts of other things which are not the primary reason. And it is very easy to confuse or confound what is secondary with the actual original picture of the disease. These are the things that lead to the right answer here on this point, or that show how that which is justified in a certain sense is to be shown its limits.
Perhaps you can see from the way I have given this answer – although I can only sketch, so it can easily be misunderstood – that this is really not about the all-popular ranting on the germ theory, but that this is really about examining things quite seriously.“
Compiled by Thomas Heck,
Dornach 27 February 2021
[1]GA 322.
[2]See footnote below.
[3]https://medsektion-goetheanum.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/Stellungnahme_zur_Impfung_gegen_SARS-CoV-2_2020-Jan-12_final.pdf
https://www.anthromedics.org/PRA-0971-DE
[4]https://www.extremnews.com/berichte/gesundheit/c1c9180a4fdebc3, Supplement TH, Source.
[5]For more details, see the book „Virus Delusion“. See also footnotes 8 and 12.
[6]Peter Selg in „Perspectives and Initiatives on the Corona Age“, Uli Hurter / Justus Wittich, Verlag am Goetheanum.
[7]https://www.samueleckert.net/isolat-truth-fund/.
[8] The assertion that these postulates do not have to be fulfilled for viruses is incomprehensible, since one of the aims is to detect the pathogen. If this proof is not provided, it is a phantom. And the same applies to infection. See the book „Virus Mania“.
[9]In fact, Covid19 is not clinically diagnosable, i.e. based on symptoms, and cannot be distinguished from many other and common respiratory diseases!
[10]GA 168, Zurich, 10 October 1916.
[11]https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/das-phantom-virus,
A printable version: https://wtg-99.com/documents/Phantom-Virus-print.
[12]„Virus-Wahn“, Torsten Engelbrecht, Dr. med. Claus Köhnlein, et al., Books on Demand, 2021. Don’t be put off by the title – it merely reflects the facts. The new edition, now published by Books on Demand, has been considerably expanded in the Corona section.
[13]GA 322.
[14]Thomas Heck, „Continuing to be absolutely politically correct“, European No. 12/2020. or
https://wtg-99.com/Weiterhin_politisch_korrekt.
[15]Email dated 9 January 2021.
[16]GA 314, 7 April 1920
[17]GA 348, Workers‘ Lectures, p. 141
[18]GA 314, 1991, page 254.