It looks like a new sow is being driven through the village. In any case, the media newspapers rustle loudly (see “Time”[1]„Welt“[2] and many others).
Why is?
About Karl Lauterbach (once again) and his electronic patient file, which he would like to see introduced as mandatory for everyone from the end of 2024. Will that work?
In any case, the matter of the “obligatory vaccination” did not work out quite as Mr. Lauterbach had imagined. So could this “duty of electronic patient files” be a substitute for it and establish the new “vaccinations” through the back door as a “compulsory event”?
By the way: If you are interested in such information, then you should definitely request my free practice newsletter “Independent. Naturally. clear edge.” to:
All in the interest of the patients, of course!?
The master himself speaks about this. In a publication on the website of the Federal Ministry of Health. None of the usual explanations are given here. Rather, an interview with the FAZ is printed as an “explanation”.[3]
It may seem strange that the website of the “Federal Ministry of Health” reproduces interviews, which is to be expected from a newspaper, since this interview should also have been published in the FAZ. At first I blamed Lauterbach’s penchant for self-portrayal for this format, but then had to realize that the publication of interviews on the website of the Federal Ministry of Health is nothing new.[4]
The first thing we learn here is that there are already electronic patient files, but only too “less than one percent of patients” be used. And he wants to change that. Then: “At the end of next year, the electronic patient file will be mandatory for everyone”according to Lauterbach.
And why all this?
Then Lauterbach talks about the extraordinary advantages of the electronic patient file, which should consist in the fact that the patient “finally master of his data” becomes.
Oh I see! By making patient data easily accessible electronically, are patients becoming “masters of their data”? How come? Oh yes! The professor instructs the reader on this as follows:
“He gets an orderly overview of doctor’s letters, findings, medication. And then the file also helps with his treatment. His doctor can quickly see which medication he can also prescribe and whether there are any interactions.”
Does that mean that the frequent ignoring of interactions on the part of conventional medicine is only based on a missing digital patient file?
And are “ordered overviews” only possible electronically? Admittedly, electronic data is easier and quicker to access and therefore more practical, which is certainly an advantage. But, as it turns out, this e-data can be viewed more quickly not only by the patient or the attending physician, but also by institutions that have nothing whatsoever to do with the patient’s treatment.
The transparent patient?
In the interview, we also learn that the electronic patient file is nothing new, because many doctors have their patient data stored on their computer. What is supposed to be new is “easier access”.
Easier access? For whom? For the doctor? I thought he had his computer in his office? Or will access be easier for patients? If so, does a regulation need to be created specifically for this? Couldn’t the patient simply go to their doctor and request their data directly from them?
Or is it about something completely different?
And then a data protection officer comes into play who, according to the interviewer, “has already raised concerns”. So it seems to be about more than just the patient being able to get “easier access” to their data from their doctor.
And then the cat jumps out of the bag: The patient data, which is stored in electronic form, is intended for “research” that seems to be pushing for “easier access”. Of course, according to Lauterbach, everything is quite harmless here too, since the data in “pseudonymized form” be passed on to research = primarily the pharmaceutical industry.
Clear! We can and must trust our Federal Minister of Health that this pseudonymization will also take place. This is the same Federal Minister of Health who has fooled us for a long time into believing that the gene injections against Corona have no side effects and are highly effective with an effectiveness of 95 percent.
It is to be feared that the alleged pseudonymization is also nothing more than propaganda and the pretense of false facts.
Worse still, as he puts it in this interview, it seems that this data collected from what he calls “separate silos” (hospitals, health insurance companies, cancer registries, genome databases and digital health records) serves no purpose other than to replace expensive and time-consuming randomized clinical trials. But the pharmaceutical industry saves a lot of time and money, thanks to Professor Lauterbach. Great!
In addition, data collected in this way would give the pharmaceutical industry excellent insights into which area of diseases it is worth throwing more products onto the market. Or in other words: rare diseases become unworthy of therapy because no money can be made from them. Perhaps this is left as a niche for alternative treatment methods, which it is also important to push back.
By the way: If you are interested in such information, then you should definitely request my free practice newsletter “Independent. Naturally. clear edge.” to:
And another back door
Indeed, discussions about electronic health records are not new. As early as November 2022, “tkp – blog for science and politics” published an article on this topic.[5]
Even at this point in time, it was suspected that the introduction of electronic patient files across Europe should serve as a basis for a Europe-wide “vaccination card”. And in addition, the electronic patient file should be created automatically for all insured persons, regardless of whether those affected agree to it or not.
Something like this seems to have existed in Austria since 2020, an electronic “vaccination pass” from which those affected can no longer unsubscribe. And according to statements from TKP readers, they themselves, but also “Hinz und Kunz” have the opportunity to access the data. If this is implemented with the electronic patient file in Germany and the European “vaccination pass”, then a dream of all control freaks à la Lauterbach will come true.
TKP’s comment on this:
“The data storage of the vaccination card is apparently also carried out against the will of those affected. After the opt-in comes the opt-out and then mandatory participation.”
And why do you need the “European vaccination card”?
Of course, once again for health, supposedly. Because there are so many nasty diseases against which “fortunately” new modRNA “vaccinations” are being created or have already been created. A central vaccination pass helps here in Europe with an overview of who has been “vaccinated” and who has not. In addition, there is still no “vaccination obligation”, which then forces everyone to become a customer of the pharmaceutical industry, whether it suits them or not.
In this context, the example of “cancer” is cited. Moderna and BioNTech have been working on modRNA preparations that are said to protect against cancer for about ten years. These are the same companies that seem to have accelerated the development of turbo cancer with their “corona vaccinations”. In any case, more rapidly developing forms of cancer have been observed after the modRNA “vaccinations”.
The “corona vaccinations” would have created a new market for the two companies mentioned, where you can then cash in heavily again. What is still missing here is the guarantee that the addressees will also take advantage of the offer – not only the cancer patients, but also man and mouse. And that is the task of the “vaccination obligation” to ensure this.
Quick question by the way: How can modRNA drugs that cause cancer protect against cancer? Apparently this is a new intelligence test for the population.
What to do?
A sample letter, which can be downloaded from the MWGFD and which represents an objection to the electronic patient record, is pointed out on Twitter:
Here you can object to the creation of an electronic patient file. I consider this to be an important first step towards the realization of a mandatory electronic patient file.
By the way: If you are interested in such information, then you should definitely request my free practice newsletter “Independent. Naturally. clear edge.” to:
Sources:
[1] Digitization: Lauterbach: Introduce e-patient files for everyone in 2024 | TIME ONLINE
[2] Lauterbach: Introduce e-patient files for everyone in 2024 – WORLD
[3] Lauterbach: Electronic patient files will be mandatory for everyone from the end of 2024
[4] Archive of interviews from the 19th legislative period – Federal Ministry of Health
[5] Electronic patient file in Germany for recording the health data of all citizens