“Back to life – more freedom, less caution?” The guests at “Maybrit Illner” discussed this question on Wednesday evening. Also on board: Karl Lauterbach and Hendrick Streeck. A battle of words developed between the two experts.
When do we get all freedoms back? And above all, how? This question was discussed on on ZDF. NRW Health Minister Karl-Josef Laumann (CDU), journalists Christina Berndt and Anna Schneider as well as SPD health expert Karl Lauterbach and virologist Hendrick Streeck were invited. A lively discussion developed between the latter two, in the course of which Streeck raised accusations against Lauterbach.
Shortly after the show began, the two disagreed on percentages. Streeck explained that the vaccines protected against serious disease progression, including the Delta variant. In addition, there is “sterile immunity”, meaning that the virus can no longer be transmitted so easily. Lauterbach refers to data from Israel, according to which the protection against severe courses in the Delta variant is 93 percent. “That was actually a bit of a disappointment,” said Lauterbach, because there was worse protection.
Streeck zu Lauterbach: You contribute to the division of society
Lauterbach further explains that the protection against serious disease courses has so far been 99 percent. Streeck then immediately throws in: “But that’s not true.” The studies had previously calculated values between 94 and 96 percent. Lauterbach explains that this related to a symptomatic course, i.e. a Covid disease that does not have to have severe symptoms. The protection against death or severe courses was higher.
After the first half of the broadcast there is another battle of words between Streeck and Lauterbach. During a discussion on how to speed up the vaccination campaign – especially among younger people – Lauterbach demands that children be offered a vaccination so that they can protect themselves from serious illnesses.
When it comes to the Standing Vaccination Commission (Stiko) to decide on child vaccinations, Streeck defends the Stiko. Then he attacks Lauterbach. Streeck accuses the SPD politician of contributing to the division of society by attacking the Stiko. “I find it extremely indecent how they suggest to me in interviews, for example, that I find lockdown superfluous.” Streeck said several times that there was no alternative to lockdown. Lauterbach is thus contributing to the split, which has an “election campaign style” that is not appropriate for a pandemic.
Lauterbach: “I will never get personal”
Lauterbach responded. It was not about Streeck personally, but about Stiko. He also did not attack them, but tried to derive scientifically that he was “not satisfied with the content of the decision” when the Stiko recommended child vaccinations. This is not a “lese majesty”. The Stiko do a good job. “If I like something at Stiko, I praise it, and where I don’t like it I criticize it. That’s how I do it with you,” Lauterbach then said in the direction of Streeck.
Lauterbach then further accuses Streeck: “I am actually of the opinion that you either did not demand one or the other lockdown that we urgently needed, where it should have been demanded, or even rejected it.” But where Streeck was right, he also agreed with him.
In the end, Lauterbach becomes forgiving. The SPD politician then appeased that he was not trying to divide. “I never get personal.” He appreciates Streeck’s qualifications and work. Discrepancies are purely technical, such as the question about the lockdown in winter. And at the end Streeck adds that “the common exchange, the common discourse is actually the most important thing in the pandemic”. It’s not about right or wrong.
