Monitoring the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Prevalence of Antibodies in a Large, Repetitive Cross-Sectional Study of Blood Donors in Germany—Results from the SeBluCo Study 2020–2022
Victor M. Corman is named together with Euroimmun on a patent application filed recently regarding the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by antibody testing (“Methods and reagents for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.” Patent application no. EP3809137A1). All other authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results."
-
To cite just an excerpt:
"
3.1. Total Study-Wide Seroprevalence over Time
In CW 19–22 (May) 2020, the total adjusted seroprevalence was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.6–2.1%). It then fell to 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4–0.9%) in CW 27–34 (July–August). Afterwards, it rose again but stayed below 2% until CW 47–50 (December), where it reached 1.8% (95% CI: 1.4–2.2%). At the end of 2020, the total seroprevalence started to rise and reached 18.1% (95% CI: 17.2–19.0%) in CW 14–17 (April) 2021. In CW 36–37 (September) 2021, total seroprevalence was estimated to be 89.4% (95% CI: 88.4.3–90.4%) and in CW 17–20 (April/May) 2022 100% (95% CI: 98.5–100) (Figure 2)."
-
Which mneans data were available prior to the debate in regards to the vaccine mandate in Gemany/in Austria
-
And then - the patent mentioned.
EP3809137A1
Methods and reagents for diagnosis of sars-cov-2 infection
It should be noted that many of the policies and other restrictions produced by the narrative were brought about by the obvious holes in the narrative.
Early on, the only "gauge" for spread was those showing up at hospitals with symptoms. This led to some distorted rates that were high. Gauging spread by hospital admissions is like gauging car damage by only testing on totaled cars ending up at body shops.
This is why the seroprevalence studies were supposedly important in the beginning. The seroprevalence studies showed far more people had been exposed to COVID, and showed that the mortality rate was lower than the hospital detection showed.
Of course, this part of the narrative was still assuming COVID was something dangerous to warrant detection to begin with. And those of us who used this to argue against the narrative were drowned out by the notion that detection enough must warrant the accompanying restrictions and policies.
Everything that could have been used to placate the fear and panic narrative was used instead to serve it. Rather than concede that "according to this test, the virus is and has been ubiquitous and thus nothing to worry about," they instead used it to fuel all of the ridiculous restrictions and regulations, asserting that any day now, the mortality rate would skyrocket across the globe unless we locked down and employed all these novel restrictions.
As far as what to predicate a disease on, it should not be social media, but rather reality-based detection. Say what you want about science fiction, but the reality would be undeniable as Jessica points out during the New York situation. If New York had been hit as badly a indicated in graphs, there would be no disputing it.
There would be first responder eyewitness accounts. Not a few, but many.
It would have been wall-to-wall coverage. Overwhelmed morgues and coroner services. Outside assistance is coming in to help the beleaguered Big Apple.
They tried to do this with outside ships and freezer trucks. But there would have been a chain of evidence along the line that would have been undeniable. Except the outside Navy Hospital ship was unused, and the freezer trucks were not filled with bodies.
Also, it would not just be evident in a few places. Any city, any travel hub, should have been rife with the "spreading virus"
" the only 'gauge' for spread was those showing up at hospitals with symptoms"
Disagree that this is how the illusion was created. They needed to test people who were ALREADY IN hospitals.
People's spring 2020 narratives want to have it all ways with time-series data-- while insisting there's nothing wrong with the data and it can't possibly be manipulated or doctored (pun intended) in any way.
Definitely, this was how the illusion was created.
They either determined (pre-test) that the people entering into the hospital had Covid-like symptoms...which are not different at all than those with cold/flu symptoms.Or they tested people already in hospitals once the tests were available.
...and probably fraud involved with associated data too, because they were trying to make it look like hoards were initially rushing to hospitals with respiratory symptoms...
I agree that people either didn’t need to have any symptoms consistent with this alleged new illness, or that ANYTHING classified as such a symptom.
I’m well aware that frightened people often hyperventilate themselves into a state of incapacity (“panic attack”: I’ve experienced these as a young man & it can be really terrifying. I thought I was about to die, so extreme was my heart rate, breathlessness, ringing in the ears, inability to stand up or to think).
Anyone who shows anything like that plus a “positive test result” would quite likely have ended up sedated, intubated, ventilated and then dead.
With the benefit of hindsight, obviously no analytical method can detect non-existent things.
It doesn’t matter if the original Corman-Drosten paper had described a method that was claimed to be technically less flawed.
The Corman-Drosten Review paper described ten technical flaws with the methodology in the Corman-Drosten paper.
I now think they are irrelevant.
I also think I’ve allowed myself to be misused.
By simply contesting details of the PCR analytical method, I have inadvertently underwritten the idea of viruses and of pandemics.
Those who’ve followed my evolving understanding of acute respiratory illnesses know that I no longer believe in the virus cause & contagion.
Under no circumstances should anyone agree to “diagnostic tests”, comply with restrictive “countermeasures” or roll up their sleeve to be “vaccinated”.
You are not stating otherwise, but irrespective of whether your co-authors on the review believe viruses exist, the social media sourcing needs to be confronted -- perhaps more so by those who are actively involved in dissecting/advocating around the COVID event and continue to speak and write about what they believe SARS-CoV-2 is etc
I don't see how it's ethical to avoid the question at this stage.
I don’t understand the importance of the social media part. It’s probably obvious to you. Would you please explain the issue as if I was ten years old?
I still haven’t read the original Corman Drosten methods paper, though I did read the excerpt that you quoted.
I hope you know me as someone with nothing to defend or hide from.
If I’ve ****ed up, I want to understand how, in case there’s something I can do about it, five years on.
Best wishes
Mike
Ps: I can see how I’ve inadvertently become party to what some classify as pro-Camp 2 activity. Interview of David A Hughes by James Delingpole. Camp 1 are “The Normies”. Camp 2 are those who realise we’re being lied to, but who still accept most things, crucially, that viruses, contagion and pandemics are things. I’ve done a harmful thing. At the time, I was in Canp 2 and failed to recognise when I moved to Camp 3 (it’s all lies: start from blank sheet) that I needed to correct past errors.
I’ve made much worse errors and tried my best to correct those.
I've followed Bobby from the start of the shitshow, been in his private group, until he closed it down. He is a trailblazer and an investigative genius. He noticed a lot, voiced and proved it with meticulous research and documentation about the so called resistance and their talking heads.
Off-Guardian was a real life line back in 2020. Here is another highly contrarian (but off topic here) interview that T Engelbrecht published there in 2022. To my knowledge it never generated the buzz and discussion that it should have.
It's my contention that the entire 'pandemic' was orchestrated, by big pharma and their allies, through the control of both Chinese and Western social media. Its intention was to explicitly create a market for a vaccine, to make lots of money, and to create some sinophobia into the bargain.
Was not familiar with him or the concept/framework but just read a summary.
Can you articulate the parallels or manifestations as you're seeing those with respect to "what you are describing" - so that we are clear about the connection you are offering?
This I just got:
Monitoring the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Prevalence of Antibodies in a Large, Repetitive Cross-Sectional Study of Blood Donors in Germany—Results from the SeBluCo Study 2020–2022
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/12/4/551
Offergeld R, Preußel K, Zeiler T, Aurich K, Baumann-Baretti BI, Ciesek S, Corman VM, Dienst V, Drosten C, Görg S, et al.
Pathogens 2023, 12(4), 551
https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens12040551
Published: 2 April 2023
-
"Conflicts of Interest
Victor M. Corman is named together with Euroimmun on a patent application filed recently regarding the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by antibody testing (“Methods and reagents for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.” Patent application no. EP3809137A1). All other authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results."
-
To cite just an excerpt:
"
3.1. Total Study-Wide Seroprevalence over Time
In CW 19–22 (May) 2020, the total adjusted seroprevalence was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.6–2.1%). It then fell to 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4–0.9%) in CW 27–34 (July–August). Afterwards, it rose again but stayed below 2% until CW 47–50 (December), where it reached 1.8% (95% CI: 1.4–2.2%). At the end of 2020, the total seroprevalence started to rise and reached 18.1% (95% CI: 17.2–19.0%) in CW 14–17 (April) 2021. In CW 36–37 (September) 2021, total seroprevalence was estimated to be 89.4% (95% CI: 88.4.3–90.4%) and in CW 17–20 (April/May) 2022 100% (95% CI: 98.5–100) (Figure 2)."
-
Which mneans data were available prior to the debate in regards to the vaccine mandate in Gemany/in Austria
-
And then - the patent mentioned.
EP3809137A1
Methods and reagents for diagnosis of sars-cov-2 infection
https://patents.google.com/patent/EP3809137A1/en
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/db/67/45/21010f482f2c53/EP3809137A1.pdf
Inventor: Katja STEINHAGEN - Claudia MESSING - Erik LATTWEIN - Konstanze Stiba - Fabian LINDHORST - Eva Neugebauer - Marcel Müller - Victor CORMAN
Current Assignee: Charite Universitaetsmedizin Berlin - Euroimmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG
2021-04-21 Publication of EP3809137A1
-
The public private partnership at work.
Thanks. Yes it is.
I have a hypothesis about the antibody testing that I need to more fully articulate; this may be a good excuse.
For now, here are three articles we've written on the topic this year:
Engler, J., & Hockett, J. (2025, March 12). "Novelty and immunity: Why were we so blind to the obvious?" Sanity Unleashed. https://sanityunleashed.substack.com/p/novelty-and-immunity-why-were-we
Neil, M., Engler, J., Fenton, N., & Hockett, J. (2025, April 9). "The Fallacy of Trust: Revisiting the Reliability of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing Methods." Where Are the Numbers? https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-fallacy-of-trust-revisiting-the
Engler, J., Neil, M., & Hockett, J. (2025, April 12). "Does the UK's 'REACT-2' antibody study prove that a novel virus was in circulation in 2020?" Sanity Unleashed. https://sanityunleashed.substack.com/p/does-the-uks-react-2-antibody-study
It should be noted that many of the policies and other restrictions produced by the narrative were brought about by the obvious holes in the narrative.
Early on, the only "gauge" for spread was those showing up at hospitals with symptoms. This led to some distorted rates that were high. Gauging spread by hospital admissions is like gauging car damage by only testing on totaled cars ending up at body shops.
This is why the seroprevalence studies were supposedly important in the beginning. The seroprevalence studies showed far more people had been exposed to COVID, and showed that the mortality rate was lower than the hospital detection showed.
Of course, this part of the narrative was still assuming COVID was something dangerous to warrant detection to begin with. And those of us who used this to argue against the narrative were drowned out by the notion that detection enough must warrant the accompanying restrictions and policies.
Everything that could have been used to placate the fear and panic narrative was used instead to serve it. Rather than concede that "according to this test, the virus is and has been ubiquitous and thus nothing to worry about," they instead used it to fuel all of the ridiculous restrictions and regulations, asserting that any day now, the mortality rate would skyrocket across the globe unless we locked down and employed all these novel restrictions.
As far as what to predicate a disease on, it should not be social media, but rather reality-based detection. Say what you want about science fiction, but the reality would be undeniable as Jessica points out during the New York situation. If New York had been hit as badly a indicated in graphs, there would be no disputing it.
There would be first responder eyewitness accounts. Not a few, but many.
It would have been wall-to-wall coverage. Overwhelmed morgues and coroner services. Outside assistance is coming in to help the beleaguered Big Apple.
They tried to do this with outside ships and freezer trucks. But there would have been a chain of evidence along the line that would have been undeniable. Except the outside Navy Hospital ship was unused, and the freezer trucks were not filled with bodies.
Also, it would not just be evident in a few places. Any city, any travel hub, should have been rife with the "spreading virus"
" the only 'gauge' for spread was those showing up at hospitals with symptoms"
Disagree that this is how the illusion was created. They needed to test people who were ALREADY IN hospitals.
People's spring 2020 narratives want to have it all ways with time-series data-- while insisting there's nothing wrong with the data and it can't possibly be manipulated or doctored (pun intended) in any way.
It's incredible
Definitely, this was how the illusion was created.
They either determined (pre-test) that the people entering into the hospital had Covid-like symptoms...which are not different at all than those with cold/flu symptoms.Or they tested people already in hospitals once the tests were available.
Both
The advent of CLI (COVID-Like Illness) was part of how positive flu tests were intentionally disappeared. "Cross-fade" https://x.com/Wood_House76/status/1635856587859402752/photo/1
...and probably fraud involved with associated data too, because they were trying to make it look like hoards were initially rushing to hospitals with respiratory symptoms...
https://x.com/Wood_House76/status/1934596885890871529
As I say, there is much confusion and denial about what occurred - and about how conflicted the data are.
I agree that people either didn’t need to have any symptoms consistent with this alleged new illness, or that ANYTHING classified as such a symptom.
I’m well aware that frightened people often hyperventilate themselves into a state of incapacity (“panic attack”: I’ve experienced these as a young man & it can be really terrifying. I thought I was about to die, so extreme was my heart rate, breathlessness, ringing in the ears, inability to stand up or to think).
Anyone who shows anything like that plus a “positive test result” would quite likely have ended up sedated, intubated, ventilated and then dead.
Chalk up another “Covid death”.
I’m told of several such cases in Italy.
They weren’t even ill.
With the benefit of hindsight, obviously no analytical method can detect non-existent things.
It doesn’t matter if the original Corman-Drosten paper had described a method that was claimed to be technically less flawed.
The Corman-Drosten Review paper described ten technical flaws with the methodology in the Corman-Drosten paper.
I now think they are irrelevant.
I also think I’ve allowed myself to be misused.
By simply contesting details of the PCR analytical method, I have inadvertently underwritten the idea of viruses and of pandemics.
Those who’ve followed my evolving understanding of acute respiratory illnesses know that I no longer believe in the virus cause & contagion.
Under no circumstances should anyone agree to “diagnostic tests”, comply with restrictive “countermeasures” or roll up their sleeve to be “vaccinated”.
Thanks.
You are not stating otherwise, but irrespective of whether your co-authors on the review believe viruses exist, the social media sourcing needs to be confronted -- perhaps more so by those who are actively involved in dissecting/advocating around the COVID event and continue to speak and write about what they believe SARS-CoV-2 is etc
I don't see how it's ethical to avoid the question at this stage.
Jessica,
I don’t understand the importance of the social media part. It’s probably obvious to you. Would you please explain the issue as if I was ten years old?
I still haven’t read the original Corman Drosten methods paper, though I did read the excerpt that you quoted.
I hope you know me as someone with nothing to defend or hide from.
If I’ve ****ed up, I want to understand how, in case there’s something I can do about it, five years on.
Best wishes
Mike
Ps: I can see how I’ve inadvertently become party to what some classify as pro-Camp 2 activity. Interview of David A Hughes by James Delingpole. Camp 1 are “The Normies”. Camp 2 are those who realise we’re being lied to, but who still accept most things, crucially, that viruses, contagion and pandemics are things. I’ve done a harmful thing. At the time, I was in Canp 2 and failed to recognise when I moved to Camp 3 (it’s all lies: start from blank sheet) that I needed to correct past errors.
I’ve made much worse errors and tried my best to correct those.
I've followed Bobby from the start of the shitshow, been in his private group, until he closed it down. He is a trailblazer and an investigative genius. He noticed a lot, voiced and proved it with meticulous research and documentation about the so called resistance and their talking heads.
With due respect to Mr. Malhotra, there is more to this story.
Dr. Borger replied to me; Malhotra has not.
Credit as well to Mike Yeadon for dialoguing and reflecting in public.
Bobby has "disappeared" or stepped back from the public long ago. Or someone got to him. I doubt he will ever reply. I hope to be wrong.
He posted on X in early August
Oh wow. Maybe contact him privately?
My attempt to contact him is embedded in the article above
I don't wish to communicate privately
I get it.
Let me introduce:
-
Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html
22.01.2007
... und re-published (full-text)
NYT 2007: FAITH IN QUICK TEST LEADS TO EPIDEMIC THAT WASN’T
by Silviu "Silview" Costinescu
https://silview.media/2020/12/26/nyt-2007-faith-in-quick-test-leads-to-epidemic-that-wasnt/
-
And then:
COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless
Though the whole world relies on RT-PCR to “diagnose” Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose
Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter
https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/
27.06.2020 - Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter
Yep, old news to me on both - but thank you for posting so that others can see!
Off-Guardian was a real life line back in 2020. Here is another highly contrarian (but off topic here) interview that T Engelbrecht published there in 2022. To my knowledge it never generated the buzz and discussion that it should have.
https://off-guardian.org/2022/11/07/that-mrna-vaccines-cause-cells-to-produce-spike-proteins-is-a-fairy-tale/
Two publications early on - fully ignored.
-
Worse Than the Disease?
Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19
https://www.ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/23
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56098/ijvtpr.v2i1.23
Published 2021-05-10 — Updated on 2021-06-16
Stephanie Seneff - Greg Nigh
-
mRNA, Nanolipid Particles and PEG: A Triad Never Used in Clinical Vaccines is Going to Be Tested on Hundreds of Millions of People
https://biomedres.us/fulltexts/BJSTR.MS.ID.005501.php
Alejandro Sousa, María José Martínez-Albarracín and Almudena Zaragoza Velilla
DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2021.34.005501
22.02.2021
-
Vaccines are a curse.
All of them.
Hiya, The late Stefano Scoglio was very confused about the spike protein and about the nature of antibodies. https://jowaller.substack.com/p/spikes-and-knobs
Thanks. We may need a title change/correction to account for the fact that one of the 22 authors is deceased
Oh my goodness, Stefano is no more?? :((
yep https://substack.com/home/post/p-151502416?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
I can't read the last two words without hearing the song "Fresh Eyes" by Andy Grammer, so here it is: 🙂
https://youtu.be/xipU1hxO_nk?si=_udV7UVumIL1_EK4
I hadn't noticed this either.
It's my contention that the entire 'pandemic' was orchestrated, by big pharma and their allies, through the control of both Chinese and Western social media. Its intention was to explicitly create a market for a vaccine, to make lots of money, and to create some sinophobia into the bargain.
https://jowaller.substack.com/p/xi-and-li-and-the-great-hoax
What you are describing is Michael A. Hoffman's revelation of the method.
Thx for commenting.
Was not familiar with him or the concept/framework but just read a summary.
Can you articulate the parallels or manifestations as you're seeing those with respect to "what you are describing" - so that we are clear about the connection you are offering?