Drosten admits mistakes: Breakwater lockdown would have been better!”

Drosten admits mistakes: Breakwater lockdown would have been better!”

Christian Drosten, one of the leading Corona experts in German-speaking countries, critically reflected on some of his decisions during the pandemic in a recent podcast. In the “Young and Naive” podcast, Drosten emphasizes that the corona vaccination did offer protection against the transmission of the virus and described contradictory claims as “scientifically incorrect”. He also confirmed that compulsory vaccination would have been justified in view of the fight against the pandemic in order to prevent the increase in infections during the winter of 2021, which many are now questioning how oe24 reported.

Drosten admits mistakes

Looking back at the measures from autumn 2020, Drosten admitted a crucial mistake: At that time he should have advocated a comprehensive “breakwater lockdown” instead of a partial lockdown. According to his assessment, this would have ensured a significant reduction in infections, while the subsequent school closures in Germany were justified in his eyes. Drosten makes it clear that the schools were only closed for 75 days - ten days more than in other European countries. “It makes me wonder, what are we actually talking about here?” he said, drawing comparisons to the international response to the pandemic. He believes that Germany could have prevented a lot by taking tougher measures in the early stages of the outbreak Yahoo News reported.

The discussion about the political processing of the corona pandemic is met with skepticism from Drosten. He criticizes the fact that an analysis that is not based on facts is not productive and is concerned about the appointment of “false witnesses” to possible committees of inquiry. Drosten, who was also part of the expert council that advised the federal government, is looking for ways to learn lessons from the pandemic but remains cautious about the political combination of science and politics. “What could come of something like that?” he asks rhetorically, placing his role as a scientist at the center of his considerations.