Virologist Christian Drosten has commented on calls for a committee of inquiry or a commission of inquiry to examine Corona policy. “I am not sure whether a parliamentary commission can cover the whole spectrum, whether everyone who should have their say would have their say. But I would have nothing against trying,” Drosten told “Spiegel”.
At the same time, the investigation is also a “task for the media and also for science”. There is specialist research on the topic, but there also needs to be a discussion process that comes “from the broader scientific community”. With regard to the discussion about vaccinations and their side effects, Drosten said that there are “statistical misunderstandings of the simplest kind”.
“If you disregard all quantitative aspects, you have to say: yes, there are serious side effects in some cases. But you have to consider the consequences of the infection,” explained the virologist. “Almost everyone has now been infected, fortunately most of them only after the vaccination. Let’s imagine if that had happened without vaccination, what that would have meant in terms of disease burden and deaths in the population as a whole!”
In the interview, Drosten reiterated his position on the origin of the coronavirus. The evolution of the virus shows that the virus did not initially come to humans once, “but twice, in a short period of time.” Since not all transmissions survive, it can be deduced that there must have been eight transmissions originally. An infection in a laboratory is therefore “not likely.”
Drosten said that it cannot be conclusively proven that the virus originated in a market in Wuhan, China. “However, the scientific community does not believe that a laboratory origin is as realistic a possibility as a natural origin. It is much less likely.”
The virologist is calling on politicians to create a single expert council in the event of the next pandemic, which should then be staffed predominantly by experts sent by science. The criterion for such a staffing should be exclusively “competence in the respective field”, not “media presence or other factors”.
It is about “visibly identifying mandated assessments and statements. This also happens elsewhere in science; there are expert committees and spokesperson functions everywhere that are based on real expertise. Naming would be a typical task of academies or scientific organizations.”
Everyone is allowed to express their opinion in public, Drosten added. “But the division of labor in the field is such that specialists talk about their area of expertise and the others tend to hold back. This should be part of good practice in public science communication.”
The virologist is currently concerned about the spread of bird flu in the USA. Specialist colleagues there have observed that the H5N1 virus is being transmitted in dairy herds. “In some US states, you can take a carton of milk from the supermarket shelf and test it. Then you have a good 20 percent chance of finding traces of the virus in it,” said Drosten. “Fortunately, milk is usually pasteurized there, so the virus is probably largely inactive.”
If H5N1 infects mammals, it could cause serious illnesses. “A possible adaptation is a concern for all scientists who are familiar with this.” The professional community is discussing whether a clearer position should be taken on this. Since it concerns livestock populations with a high economic value, there is “a certain lack of transparency when it comes to current data from the USA – we would like to have better insight into this.”
