Plague and cholera

Was corona really as devastating as the "Pictures of Bergamo" proclaimed?  Some people still ask themselves this and trust the  statistics and reports from the leading media - at least in silence. A look at history now offers the unsettled a broadening of horizons and a new opportunity for a well-founded fact check.

The cultural historian Dr. phil. Renate Reuther and her husband, radiology specialist Dr. Gerd Reuther, both well-known authors, have published their latest book "Hauptsache Panik. A new look at pandemics in Europe." well-known epidemics  took a closer look at the story. In the process, they have come across astonishing parallels to the coronavirus narrative and debunked the long tradition of epidemic tales on 150 pages.  The result of her research: "The same stories for centuries: People suddenly collapse on the street, expire within hours or three days at most." 

"Widespread fear is your friend" (Warren Buffett, born 1930) 

Profiteers have always used scaremongering to exploit the "window of opportunity" to "impoverish the population by transferring assets to the upper class, restricting the movement and activities of the masses, destabilizing people and taking measures to prevent those in power from losing power. [...] Restrictions on freedom of movement and self-determination then generally outlast the disease," the authors state. The exaggeration or even staging of epidemics is therefore not a far-fetched "conspiracy theory". The repeatedly invoked waves of epidemics never existed. In retrospect, it is no longer possible to trace what people really died of. "There are no confirmed diagnoses and objectively determined causes of death anywhere up to the present day." And this too: "All epidemics disappeared in Europe without medicine."

Poor sources, imaginative chroniclers 

The sources for the early epidemics are particularly poor. "The factual content is often dubious. Many "reports" by supposed contemporary witnesses were written later and pre-dated or are openly fictional, i.e. literary products." The plague is therefore more likely to have been introduced by historiography. The quote from Honoré de Balzac (1799-1850) fits in with this: There are "two kinds of world history: one is official, mendacious, intended for school lessons; the other is secret history, which conceals the true causes of events." The two authors turn to the second level of historical research in their book. They have researched what really happened with regard to the epidemics, what was exaggerated or overlooked and whether the deaths really affected all social classes equally. 

Productions for the collective memory

Forgery was particularly popular in the scriptoria of monasteries. "Nevertheless, this notorious practice of forgery shook neither the chronology nor the historical narrative, which is stoically repeated. As with "Corona", the narratives persist, even though the necessary evidence is "fake"." Interesting: "Documents about plague events come almost exclusively from cities." No wonder, because the streets of the cities were contaminated with waste and faeces. Most diseases could have been avoided if  streets and squares clean. "And of course those responsible in the city and country were not to blame, because the colossal pollution and poverty of the population were not accepted as the cause." So an epidemic, naturally brought in from a hostile foreign country, came at just the right time. Paradoxically, regions and cities that were supposedly plagued by epidemics nevertheless enjoyed increasing population growth, such as the city of Augsburg, which doubled its population between 1490 and 1530 despite several plague epidemics. 

Mortality figures mostly lower than stated  

The term "plague" originally comes from veterinary medicine. For centuries, diseases with many deaths that were considered contagious and were associated with increased mortality were called "plague" or "pestilence", regardless of the individual symptoms. The diagnoses and diagnostic methods varied depending on the country and doctor. It was not until the end of the 19th century that pathogens could be identified at all. However, the "Black Death", as the plague was also known, killed far fewer people than had been recorded and often made itself felt in connection with famines and wars. In the past hundred years, no epidemic would have caused excess mortality in Europe. The Spanish flu, "officially" from 1918 to 1923, was the prototype of a worldwide medical lie in which neither the name, the course nor the disease and death figures were correct. 

Stigmatize, isolate and abandon 

In large cities such as Berlin, during a cholera epidemic in 1831, most deaths occurred in lower-class neighborhoods where many poor people lived in cramped conditions. As epidemic deaths were buried in mass graves at municipal expense, the epidemic diagnosis was highly welcome among the poor. Unwelcome people could be eliminated at the same time by poisoning, including political "purges".  

The epidemic hit the wealthy less often, as they could afford better living conditions or move to the countryside. The abandonment of the sick has a long tradition: "The chronicle of Parma reports: "The poor plague sufferers were abandoned by their doctors, servants, notaries, clergy and mendicants, so that they were neither served nor cared for, nor could they make their wills or receive absolution in repentance." This is certainly reminiscent of the agonizing "quarantine" of the elderly in institutions and hospitals during the coronavirus era. 

During the last plague epidemic in France in 1720, sick people were still "locked in a hole or in the most remote room of the house, without furniture, without a toilet (...) only with a jug of water." Leprosy sufferers fared no better. According to the two authors, leprosy stigmatization was "one of the darkest chapters of European civil societies." Leprosy sufferers were unnecessarily isolated and disenfranchised, often out of greed. Diagnoses often involved the transfer of large assets, because "behind the smokescreen of epidemics, an economic war could be waged by the upper classes against the masses of the population." Epidemics promoted the polarization between rich and poor. Also  The church and the medical profession profited from this and deliberately contributed to the spiral of fear. 

Cause of death "Therapy"

"All common therapies at the time, which made little distinction between the infectious diseases, worsened the chances of recovery and survival," the authors write, making us think of the controversial corona treatments again. The only places where more people died in the supposed first corona wave, they note, were those that were treated according to Chinese instructions with toxic drugs and early ventilation. Our ancestors, on the other hand, underwent excessive bloodletting, enemas and sweating cures that brought them to the afterlife. In the 19th century, doctors then resorted to high doses of opium, high-proof spirits, camphor, musk and the mercury preparation calomel (for example against syphilis) - with equally questionable success. Later, bad experiences were also made with smallpox and polio vaccinations. According to the authors, polio is a prime example of a surrogate epidemic to cover up the toxic effects of industrial poisons. This refers to pesticides such as DDT, which were used in agriculture. 

The pressure to take medical measures was and is not questioned enough

The prerequisite for dying through risky therapies was absolute obedience to official and medical pronouncements. Infection panic was spread, alleged recklessness was branded, thereby creating feelings of guilt and misused as leverage. Does any of this sound familiar? The authors summarize: "There was no infectious disease that caused as many deaths as its treatments. [...] Even then, humans were more dangerous than viruses."

Without this book, it is impossible to adequately understand and categorize the corona pandemic. The historical review by the two authors adds an important dimension to the corona reappraisal and encourages us to always critically question exaggerated and dramatic epidemic narratives in the future. This non-fiction book, written in an understandable and clear way, belongs on the list of must-reads.