Did Stefan Lanka cheat? The facts say yes.

Did Stefan Lanka cheat?  The facts say yes.

Many people follow and support the false idea that viruses don’t exist and they use the false understanding of Dr Lanka winning his case when he actually lost it and was ordered to pay 115,000 Euros to David Bardens. 

The details of the “award” can be found on Lanka’s blog page and it states that the question of diameter of the measles virus must be asked of PD Dr. Annette Mankertz who works at the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin.
 

Therefore, Stefan Lanka had the original court ruling overturned on appeal at the Higher Regional Court. This later ruling did not consider the existence of measles virus in any way whatsoever. It ruled solely on a technicality concerning the competition rules. Stefan Lanka changed the criteria of the competition from being a competition to an award. Under the rules of an ‘award,’ he alone gets to decide the winner. The court did not consider the facts but only Stefan Lanka’s ability to have the last word as the organiser of an ‘award’ based competition. The Higher Court noted that “the defendant does not consider the evidence to be provided, in particular not under the conditions set by him, and has refused to pay the prize money.”

In additional Court documents, under the section marked 20^th, it is noted that, “the submission of a single publication was required, in which both the evidence for the existence of the measles virus and its diameter is determined, so that it is not sufficient if - as the expert claims - only the combination of the scientific statements in the six submitted Technical articles prove the existence of the measles virus and at least two of these articles contained sufficient information on the diameter of the measles virus.”  

Lanka is demanding that not only must all of the requirements be met from one study but that study must be published after 2001 and come from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI). Regarding this, the Court says under section 20, “the work presented is unsuitable because, without exception, they came from the time before the IfSG came into force on 01.01.2001 and did not constitute a publication by the RKI.”

Under section 74 of the court ruling, the attitude of Lanka’s closed mind regarding the existence of measles virus and his attack on Dr. Annette Mankertz is discussed and it is noted that Lanka “is clearly not interested in refuting his allegation that the measles virus does not exist.”

Under section 76 of the court ruling, it is noted that Lanka’s “restrictive requirements must be observed, because this is not interested in the detection of the measles virus” and the criterion that the evidence must come from a single scientific publication is repeated in section 77.

Under section 87 of the Court ruling it is again reiterated that “this is ultimately a matter for” Lanka “who alone determines what he is willing to pay a reward for.” It is also noted that Lanka “does not want to make it easier for the possible applicants for the prize money to provide the proof that a measles virus exists.”

Under section 89 of the Court ruling, it is noted that “it is not against good faith if the person who awards EUR 100,000 uses his / her own ideas as the yardstick for the award” which confirms, in law, Lanka has sole rights over his own award. 

For me, this is saying that Lanka should be considered a cheat but he is cheating within the confines of the law which only makes him a clever cheat, nothing more.

Under section 91 of the Court ruling, criterion 2 is discussed, which states the science studies used cannot be reviews and must be “original works.”

Under section 93 of the Court ruling, the third criterion being the “publication must come from the RKI" is mentioned.

Under section 95 of the court ruling, criterion 4. Which states the scientific paper must comply to the “DFG (deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft) criteria from 1998.”

All of these criterion, 1 only one study may be used, 2 must be original work, 3 publication must come from RKI, and 4 study must comply with DFG criteria from 1998, are all designed to restrict the possibility of supplying evidence for the existence of measles virus down to the point of it being impossible. Lanka fixed the rules of the award in a way to not only make it an impossible task but to also give him ultimate control over the outcome.

A review of the case titled “Success for vaccine opponents in measles bet” explains that the decision of the High Court was “purely legal” and regarding the six papers submitted, the presiding judge said to Bardens "but you could have submitted 600, Lanka would not have accepted any." 

Under section 23 the Court quotes from the appointed expert, “according to the expert's statements, they (the 6 publications) did not prove in each case for themselves, but in their overall view the existence of a virus that was the cause of measles. When viewed together, they also fulfilled the Koch’s postulates which the defendant raised to the standard of proof in the course of the legal dispute.” 

This means that the court experts assessment was that the 6 papers submitted proved the existence of measles virus and confirmed that Koch’s postulates had been satisfied.

Under sections 104-107 of the court ruling, the regional court decision was upheld regarding the existence of the measles virus and their interpretation of the expert witness statement was correct and supported by the High Court.

Under section 116 of the court ruling, it is noted that the court expert “states that the necessary data and control experiments to exclude cell artifacts instead of the measles virus are in the Technical articles are included.”

The 6 publications proved the existence of the measles virus but Stefan Lanka was the only one who decided anything concerning the ‘award’ and it is the view of this author that he cheated in order to save his money and fame, but he still cheated. 

Stefan Lanka has himself worked on 3 science studies that have isolated viruses and investigated their genome sequences. One titled “Genome Structure of a Virus Infecting the Marine Brown Alga Ectocarpus siliculosus”  in which he isolates a plant virus using the regular passage through a suitable growth medium, plants, after exposing it to many pharmaceuticals and toxins. Contrary to the ideals set by virus deniers.

Stefan Lanka’s second study is titled “Single-Stranded Regions in the Genome of the Ectocarpus siliculosus Virus” investigates the single strand sections of the DNA code. He degraded the DNA of the virus using endonuclease and treated it with a steroids and used polymerase to initiate strand displacement in the genome. The results of this study were dependant on the destruction of the target genome by chemicals, which again is contrary to the ideas set by virus deniers.

Stefan Lanka’s third study is titled “Coat protein of the Ectocarpus siliculosus virus” and it uses virus particles that were subjected to treatment using polyethylene glycol and other chemicals contrary to the ideology of virus deniers.

Virus deniers use Stefan Lanka as their night in shining armour but he has published science studies using similar techniques to isolate viruses as every other published science study. Additionally, Stefan Lanka understands the peer-review system that interrogates and tests science papers and although he has published 3 studies in peer-reviewed journals showing how he isolated and genome sequenced viruses, he chooses to publish his work titled “Dismantling the virus theory” which claims the measles virus doesn’t exist and viruses are not pathogenic, in an art blog owned by Bonnie Lee Turner and Charles C. Clear III and the magazine wissenschafftplus.de both of which are not peer-reviewed. 

Why would Stefan Lanka choose to have his ideas about viruses not existing published in magazines and art blogs, and why does he not retract his 3 studies if he now thinks they are in error? 

Lanka devised strict rules for his competition that made proving the existence of the measle viruses an impossibility and made his competition an award so that only he would have control over the pronouncement of a winner. Thereby allowing him to be the sole judge, right or wrong, he decided, not any court.

Please do not get bogged down with lies that are spread on social media platforms by people who have not checked into the facts. It has been shown here that the court experts examined the evidence from the 6 publications and announced that they proved the existence of the measles virus.

Viruses are real and Koch’s postulates for measles are satisfied every day when millions of measles vaccines are given to young children. The vaccine companies have isolated the measles virus, purified it, grown on a culture and then inoculated the virus into millions of children who, more often than not, show symptoms of the original disease.