Head of the Swiss vaccination commission criticises COVID management
Professor Christoph Berger, chairman of the Federal Commission for Vaccination in Switzerland and an infectious disease expert, known for actively supporting the vaccination campaign in the media, is now taking a critical approach to the measures taken during the crisis.
A leading figure in Switzerland
Professor Christoph Berger, a doctor specialising in paediatrics and infectious diseases, is considered an eminent figure in Swiss medicine. A professor at the University of Zurich, he headed the department of infectious diseases and hospital hygiene at the University Children’s Hospital Zurich.
Like a Van Ranst in Belgium or a Delfraissy in France, Prof. Berger is recognised in the Swiss media landscape for “his ability to communicate complex scientific issues”…
A virus “not at all dangerous for adolescents and children”
In an interview on 28 December on the Swiss radio and television broadcaster SRF, Professor Christoph Berger, who left his post at the Vaccination Commission in June 2023, looks back on the vaccination strategies advocated during the covid crisis[1]. He now acknowledges that “the infection was not at all dangerous for adolescents and children”. And he states clearly that in his view “children and adolescents suffered less from the virus than from the measures taken”.
Mandatory vaccination wrong for this population group
Professor Christoph Berger notably stated that it had been wrong to oblige adolescents to be vaccinated in order to take part in their school camp. He also indicates that “the claim that getting vaccinated protects others from infection” “was not justified with the Delta and then Omicron variants”. He stresses that “the measures restricting the unvaccinated should have been stopped from the second winter”.
Serious side effects
In a previous interview for the Basel business newspaper[2] in January 2023, Professor Christoph Berger had stated “it is clear that there are adverse effects linked to vaccination, including serious ones”. And “we must take [the victims] and their suffering seriously, and help them”.
A vaccine to be considered with full knowledge
The professor had also indicated that, given the risk of side effects, “each person must assess their own risk and make a decision for themselves” about whether to be vaccinated. He had specified that “for young and healthy people, the vaccine makes no difference. It protects neither against infection nor reliably against mild illness.”
How to tell covid from flu?
Asked whether one should still worry today when noticing symptoms similar to those of Covid, the professor replies that, although Covid is “much more contagious [than flu]”, “children rarely fall ill”. He also points out that covid is “very similar to flu” and that “the two diseases cannot be told apart with certainty”[3].
In that case, are tests necessary?
Asked about the usefulness of covid tests, Professor Christoph Berger, with his aplomb and his strong Swiss accent, retorts that “the usefulness of covid tests is very limited” “unless it is a person unquestionably at risk”. This is a far cry from the discourse that laid down the law in our country. Everyone remembers the long queues in front of the hundreds of testing centres all over Belgium, which in 2021 could carry out up to 100,000 tests a day.
Why take such a position?
What were the reasons that pushed Switzerland’s “Mr Vaccine” to adopt such positions during the crisis? Professor Christoph Berger mentions the political pressure exerted on the Vaccination Commission[4]. In particular from the WHO, the EU and as a result of politicians’ international agreements. But also at national level, “there was also a certain pressure on the vaccination commission in Switzerland”.
When will other countries reassess?
Professor Christoph Berger is far from the only one to have looked back critically on the measures advocated during the management of the covid crisis. For example in England, Christoph Ferguson[5], and in Germany Christian Drosten[6], who have questioned the measures they themselves had advocated. When will there be a similar reassessment in France or Belgium?
A major ethical problem
The use – and the collaboration – of renowned scientists to encourage the population to get vaccinated, sometimes in contradiction with principles they themselves recognise, raises a considerable ethical issue. Beyond the many victims who were knowingly misled, this approach has deeply and lastingly undermined public trust in scientists and institutions.
By Nicolas Mertens, citizen journalist for BAM!
Illustration: edited image from Mythe #11 sur la vaccination : Garantie de protection
[1] Impfchef Christoph Berger blickt auf die Coronapandemie zurück - News - SRF
[2] Christoph Berger im Interview: « Es ist klar, dass es unerwünschte Impferscheinungen gibt, auch schwere » | Basler Zeitung
[3] Corona: Schweizer Impf‑Chef räumt Fehler ein - Play SRF
[4] https://www.infosperber.ch/gesundheit/es‑gab‑einen‑gewissen‑druck‑auf‑die‑impfkommission/
[5] Failures of an Influential COVID‑19 Model Used to Justify Lockdowns | The Heritage Foundation
[6] Drosten und die "RKI‑Leaks": Nicht verschwiegen, sondern veröffentlicht | tagesschau.de