Waldorf News

Questions and Considerations on the Corona Crisis from a Medical Point of View

By Dr. Michaela Gloeckler

Dr. Michaela Glöckler, born 1946 in Stuttgart. 1965-1971 Academic Studies in the fields of history, philosophy, catholic theology, German Literature in Freiburg and Heidelberg Universities/ Germany. 1972-1978 Academic Medical Studies in Tuebingen and Marburg Universities/ Germany. 1979-1988 Specialty Training in Paediatrics and Publication of «Guide to Child’s Health» together with Wolfgang Goebel, director of Department of Pediatrics, Community Hospital Herdecke/ Germany. Medical practice and Adviser at Rudolf Steiner Schools, world-wide lecturing and seminar activities regarding to primary prevention, medical and pedagogical topics, lifestyle, healthy aging, self-management. Various publications.

1988-2016 Head of the Medical Section, Goetheanum/ School of Spiritual Science, Dornach/ Switzerland. International coordination of the Anthroposophic Medical Movement. Emphasis on research, training, public health and empowerment of the civil society. Co-founder of the Alliance ELIANT.

Editor’s Note: This article is 25 pages long in its entirety. That places it well outside the size of articles we can share in the newsletter. The best compromise was to take the first paragraph, or the first few paragraphs of each section. If you’re interested in this article, please read the entire article by clicking below. -Ed.

Read the entire article here.

How did the pandemic start?

On January 7, 2020, the novel coronavirus was already identified as SARS-CoV-2. The developmental steps at the outbreak of the pandemic were rapid: after the coronavirus probably infected a human being for the first time at a wildlife market in the central Chinese metropolis of Wuhan which, looking back, is said to have happened November 2019, the country reported 27 cases of pneumonia of unknown cause to WHO only on the last day of December.

It is not until January 1, 2020 that the authorities closed the Huanan market. During these months, 30,000 travelers still left the Wuhan traffic hub every day for destinations all over the world, until the city is sealed off on January 23. At the same time, Taiwan is arranging for travelers from the region to be checked on arrival. The democratic country has since been considered a model in the fight against the virus. Taiwan was also the first country to inform WHO even before China, but the disease control authority did not react at that time…

Why is COVID-19 more dangerous than a “normal” Virus-Flu?

Although the number of cases was not as large as feared, mortality was high in the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/SARS, which also originated in China in 2002 and was probably caused by bats. It infected 8000 people and 774 died, or 10%. The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome/MERS-CoV, transmitted by camels, also affected 1200 people killing 447 of them.

The Coronaviridae family is large and responsible for a wide range of diseases in humans and animals. Although they usually only cause a cold in humans, they can also cause life-threatening conditions. Even though the complication rate for COVID-19, as far as the statistics indicate so far, is significantly lower than in previous corona epidemics, COVID-19-associated pneumonia is particularly insidious…

What are Viruses?

The word virus comes from Latin and means slime, poison, drool. It wasintroduced into medicine by the Roman encyclopedist Aulus Cornelius Celsus (25 B.C. – 50 A.D.). His eight books on the medical disciplines were first printed and widely available in the 15th century. Many of his treatment suggestions – for example physiological fever treatment for inflammation – still make sense today.

As electron microscopes were not yet available at that time, it was possible to identify liquids containing poisons such as saliva and other secretions and excrements, or polluted water as cause of disease, but not the underlying perpetrators of the problem. Accordingly, virus research is a child of the 20th century.

We have known the coronaviruses since the late sixties. But it is only since the invention of cryo-electron microscopy, for which the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 2017 went to Jacques Dubochet (Switzerland), German-born Joachim Frank (United States) and Richard Henderson (United Kingdom), that the visualization of individual biomolecules has been possible. This method simplifies and improves the visualization of biomolecules to such an extent that a new era of biochemistry has begun…

Why do Human Beings react so differently to a Virus?

From the foregoing, there is already some evidence that helps to answer this question. It is not only “the virus” that causes disease, but the interaction of the individual constitution with this intruder.

We know exactly why a mother usually does not get the flu when the whole family suffers from it – at best she gets it when the family system is back in balance and she needs to sleep. Even the young assistant doctor or the nurse newly employed in the infectious disease ward often has an “initial infection”. The fear of possible infection does not stop even for medical professionals and, moreover, every new start is associated with the unfamiliar that makes people feel insecure, creates stress and can upset their own health balance, so that it is easier to become infected by a patient.

Why do we speak of a cold? Because hypothermia or too much draft also disturb the fragile health balance, as well as through too little sleep, irregular or unhealthy eating, etc. In large cities and urban centers, air pollution adds to this and is anyway a great challenge for the respiratory tract, and will remain so as long as we do not orientate our mobility and industrial production processes towards a more human friendly ecology. Every organism has to deal with damage of all kinds on a daily basis…

Why do humans have different problems and possibilities in dealing with disease than animals and plants?

In the natural world outside, diseases hardly ever occur, they appear only as “regulators” for ecological balance. Even wild animals do not know the problem. Because when an animal falls ill or has an accident, it is quickly eaten or dies, because it can no longer feed itself. Or plants and animal species fall ill and become extinct because their habitats have been changed by humans, and they cannot adjust themselves anymore and their ability to exist is endangered or extinguished. The fact that this is different for pets is due to their symbiotic life form with humans and the veterinary medicine associated with it. Because living with illness is something specifically human. Why?

What is the “right way” to face the Pandemic?

There are two strategically different approaches to deal with the corona-pandemic, both recommended by leading epidemiologists: building up so-called herd immunity by more or less controlled – i.e. slowed down by certain measures – immunization of the population, while life goes on as normal, while at the same time recommending protection for the risk groups.

Between Panic Scenarios and Trivialization: Where do we stand?

Where do we stand? Obviously in the middle of it! Both sides, “panic and neglect” as the WHO puts it, have good arguments, and we can learn from both sides to look more closely at what is at stake. But what can we learn from those who want to see the Corona pandemic integrated into the normal flu season?

They point out to see the Corona pandemic integrated into the normal flu season? They point out that there have not been more deaths than in other influenza winters as well.

The infectious disease specialist and director of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Dr. Ansgar Lohse, demanded a quick end to curfews and contact bans. More people should be infected with Corona. Daycare centers and schools should be reopened as soon as possible so that children and their parents can become immune through infection with the Corona virus. The continuation of the strict measures would lead to an economic crisis which would also cost lives, said the physician…

The image of the human being and the mindset in medicine – does this also need a “turnabout” in thinking?

The concept that is represented by medicine oriented to natural science, is based on the idea that diseases are errors of nature that can be eliminated to the extent that the mechanism of their development is known.

As beneficial as it is to be able to treat diseases efficiently, it seems so naive – if we know the different levels from which disease- and healing processes can emanate – that we think we can control everything physically right through the final stage of illness. Not to mention the fact that the man-made changes of our living spaces and the horrendous contrasts between rich and poor, none or the best education opportunities are responsible for most diseases and early deaths – and not just any pathogens.

Anthroposophic Medicine – an Integrative medical approach

Anthroposophic medicine was founded by the Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner (1861 – 1925) and the Dutch physician Ita Wegman (1861 – 1943) in 1920 in Dornach, Switzerland. In the year of the Corona pandemic it is celebrating its 100th birthday.

It is interesting to note that Steiner’s foundation course of 20 lectures at Easter of 1920 not only deals with the then still virulent Spanish flu and critically sheds light on the one-sided model for understanding infectious diseases. On April 7, 1920, in a public lecture, he also warned that there was a danger that health and hygiene issues would be removed from democratic control, and the decisions would be made in a strictly authoritarian manner by the prevailing scientific opinion and politics:

“The undemocratic nature of this belief in authority contrasts with the longing for democracy (…) Shouldn’t it be possible to strive for more democratization than is possible today under the present circumstances in such an area as public health care that concerns every human being so closely, so infinitely closely, and therefore it concerns the whole human community?”

What Possibilities does Anthroposophic Medicine offer for the Prevention and Treatment of COVID- 19?

The anthroposophic hospitals in Berlin/Havelhöhe, Herdecke/Ruhr and the Filderklinik near Stuttgart are part of regional care. Right at the beginning of the crisis, Berlin/Havelhöhe set up a Corona outpatient clinic, and all the hospitals have expanded their intensive care capacities. In addition to the possibilities of conventional medical treatment, supportive medicines from anthroposophic medicine are also used there to support the self-regulation of the body.

In Geneva, at a WHO online meeting on COVID-19 in which the experiences of various complementary medical systems were exchanged, anthroposophic physicians were able to present the treatment concept for COVID-19 patients which has so far been coordinated in the clinical context. This revealed interesting parallels with the treatment concept of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TMC), which is currently widely used in China.

What is important for Children in this Crisis?

The good news is that, according to the experience gained so far, children and adolescents do obviously not become seriously ill, but rather harmless or not at all. Prof. Drosten also noted on April 16, in the NDR podcast that apparently only a few people become infected in households. Perhaps there is some up to now unnoticed background immunity from cold related corona viruses.

What is this Crisis doing with us?

In the report of the Ethics Council of the Federal Government (Bundesregierung) by Prof. Peter Dabrock and Prof. Steffen Augsberg, we read among other things: “For a body whose statutory task is to advise the Bundestag and the Federal Government, but also to stimulate public discourse, the continuation of a thoroughly controversial debate is of course, no cause for concern.

Debate can and should be welcomed by everyone, including the politicians, as an expression of the open society. For: If people already show an admirable degree of solidarity and accept sometimes very drastic restrictions of freedom without complaint, then we should not deny them their rights to reflect on the unprecedented challenges of the present, even to complain about them, to point out what burdens they experience in themselves and in others, or to question whether the measures taken are proportionate.

Against this background, it is not only legitimate, but also necessary to consider how to proceed and under what conditions opening perspectives are justifiable, perhaps even necessary. ‘The Corona crisis is the hour of democratically legitimized politics’.

With this sentence we close our statement – understood as an invitation and a request that the determination of the acting policy is strengthened if it – the longer the more – seeks the resonance of the public. The citizens who are the public must, for their part, be asked to be patient, because we obviously still have the peak of the crisis ahead of us. It is too early to carry out openings now. But it is never too early to think about criteria for openings. Anything else would be an authoritarian state thinking that should not be entangled in our system and that would not strengthen the trust of the population, which is so necessary. (…)

We must move away from an all-or-nothing thinking and acting. The longer the crisis lasts, the more voices are allowed, yes, must be heard. We should not be afraid to let many people with different competences but also legitimate interests have their say.

One such courageous voice is that of the Hamburg pathologist Prof. Klaus Püschel, head of the forensic medicine institute at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. On April 2, he told the Hamburger Abendblatt newspaper about the examinations he conducted after the death of the people who died there with diagnosis COVID-19.

He had not had a single case that was not burdened by serious pre-existing conditions. He therefore severely criticizes the Robert Koch Institute for not recommending the autopsy of the so-called corona deaths for hygienic reasons because of the suspected danger of infection. One would have to learn from the dead for the living. According to his assessment, it would then turn out to be typical old-age coronary events that occur in every flu season. Even in the few known individual cases that died at a younger age, one would have had to investigate what would have led to their death.

When I read this, I thought of Rudolf Steiner’s call for a democratization of the health system – there is no better way to reiterate this call in the current crisis. And to counter the fear of the digital surveillance state that is now being tested everywhere, I would like to quote Joseph Weizenbaum, Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology/MIT. He was one of the most influential and innovative co-developers of this technology in the USA in the 20th century. In an interview in the Orwellian Year 1984, when asked whether the total surveillance state was coming, he said:

“Of course, that’s what we’re working towards. But when it really comes, this
state, it is much more a consequence of the fact that people no longer defend their freedom than that the computer is to blame for it.”

He then cites the Stalin and Hitler regime as examples of how total surveillance is possible without computers, and how much a prosperous future for humanity depends on the development of morality and humanity. But this is the most important challenge for the educational system of the future.

Anyone who thinks that digitalization will provide the decisive support for this is certainly incorrect. Morality cannot be taught – just as little as value consciousness – and most certainly not digitally! They can also not be downloaded via an app. They can only develop in concrete interaction with people. This requires real people who can set an example and live and work together with children and young people in a committed manner…

How will it continue after Corona?

Albert Einstein said,

“The purest form of madness is to leave everything as it is and at the same time
hope for change.”

Somehow most people have felt for years that a fundamental cultural change is needed: In the way we do business – when will the limits of growth on our limited planet be taken seriously? At some point in time, even the last virgin forest will have been cleared, the largest areas of land will have been permanently damaged by over-fertilization and even become infertile, and the climate crisis will be unstoppable.

In return, however, our kitchen appliances can communicate with each other in a smart home, Alexa and similar electronic helpers join in the routine housework and communicate with the providers on the internet. You don’t have to unlock the front door yourself anymore, your favorite music plays when you enter, you only have to work a few hours, you can arrange everything yourself and your own home becomes a world in which all information is constantly available.

On the other hand, the unemployment figures have risen further, and mass misery in war and crisis regions has increased. Even if the ‘bedingungslose Grundeinkommen’ (unconditional basic income) were to be established – the money is available, it would only need to be redistributed a little – it would then ensure sufficient consumption competence to keep the economy running, but if the way of thinking and doing business were not to change fundamentally, the very development that brought us into this crisis would continue.

Read the entire article here.

Translated by Astrid Schmitt-Stegman