I was alerted to an interview published in an anthroposophical journal with Prof. Dr. med. Harald Matthes. He is the clinical director of the ‘Gemeinschaftskrankenhauses Havelhöhe‘, a hospital of anthroposophic medicine in Berlin where apparently some COVID-19 patients are presently being treated. Anthroposophic medicine is a medical cult created by the mystic, Rudolf Steiner, about 100 years ago that lacks a basis in science, facts or common sense. Here is the two passages from that interview that I find most interesting (my translation/explanation is below):

Es gibt bisher kein spezifisches Covid-19 Medikament aus der konventionellen Medizin. Remdesivir führt in Studien zu keinem signifikant verbesserten Überleben, sondern lediglich zu einer milden Symptomreduktion. Die anfänglich große Studie vor allem an Universitätskliniken mit Hydrochloroquin und Azithromycin erbrachte sogar eine Steigerung der Todesrate. Daher haben anthroposophische Therapiekonzepte mit Steigerung der Selbstheilungskräfte eine große Bedeutung erfahren. Wichtige anthroposophische Arzneimittel waren dabei das Eisen als Meteoreisen oder als Ferrum metallicum praep., der Phosphor, das Stibium sowie das Cardiodoron® und Pneumodoron®, aber auch Bryonia (Zaunrübe) und Tartarus stibiatus (Brechweinstein). Die Erfolge waren sehr gut, da in Havelhöhe bisher kein Covid-19 Patient verstorben ist, bei einer sonstigen Sterblichkeit von ca. 30% aller Covid-19-Intensivpatienten…

100 Jahre Bazillentheorie und die Dominanz eines pathogenetischen Medizinkonzeptes haben zu der von Rudolf Steiner bereits 1909 vorausgesagten Tyrannei im Sozialen geführt. Der Mensch hat ein Mikrobiom und Virom, das unverzichtbar für seine Immunität ist und von der Quantität mächtiger als der Mensch selbst (Mikrobiom 1014 Bakterien mit ca. 1200 Spezies z.B. im Darm bei nur 1012 Körperzellen).

Matthes explains that, so far, no medication has been demonstrated to be effective against COVID-19 infections. Then he continues: “This is the reason why anthroposophic therapies which increase the self-healing powers have gained great importance”, and names the treatments used in his hospital:

  • Meteoric Iron (a highly diluted anthroposophic remedy based on iron from meteors),
  • Ferrum metallicum praep. (a homeopathic/anthroposophic remedy based on iron),
  • Phosphor (a homeopathic remedy based on phosphor),
  • Stibium (a homeopathic remedy based on antimony),
  • Cardiodoron (a herbal mixture used in anthroposophical medicine),
  • Pneumodoron (a herbal mixture used in anthroposophical medicine containing).

Matthes also affirms (my translation):

“The success has so far been very good, since no COVID-19-patient has died in Havelhöhe – with a normal mortality of about 30% of COID_19 patients in intensive care…

100 years of germ theory and the dominance of a pathogenetic concept of medicine have led to the tyranny in the social sphere predicted by Rudolf Steiner as early as 1909. Humans have a microbiome and virom that is indispensable for their immunity and more powerful in quantity than humans themselves (microbiome 1014 bacteria with about 1200 species e.g. in the intestine with only 1012 somatic cells)…”


The first 4 remedies listed above are highly diluted and contain no active molecules. The last two are less diluted and might therefore contain a few active molecules but in sub-therapeutic doses. Crucially, none of the remedies have been shown to be effective for any condition.

The germ theory of disease which Matthes mentions is, of course, a bit more than a ‘theory’; it is the accepted scientific explanation for many diseases, including COVID-19.

I have cold sweats when I think of anthroposophical doctors who seem to take it less than seriously, while treating desperately ill COVID-19 patients. If I were allowed to ask just three questions to Matthes, I think, it would be these:

  1. How did you obtain fully informed consent from your patients, including the fact that your remedies are unproven and implausible?
  2. If you think your results are so good, are you monitoring them closely to publish them urgently, so that other centres might learn from them?
  3. Do you feel it is ethical to promote unprovn treatments during a health crisis via a publicly available interview before your results have been formally assessed and published?

40 Responses to COVID-19 and ‘the tyranny predicted by Rudolf Steiner as early as 1909’

  • Yep, it’s all true. Back in 1909 Steiner predicted that the Anti-Christ would appear and force people to cover their nose and mouth when they get on the bus or go to the supermarket. If only we had listened!

  • “Panpsychism is the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world. The view has a long and venerable history in philosophical traditions of both East and West, and has recently enjoyed a revival in analytic philosophy. For its proponents panpsychism offers an attractive middle way between physicalism on the one hand and dualism on the other.”

    “Neuroscience has made great progress in uncovering the mechanisms in the brain that underlie our cognitive and behavioural functioning. But this form of scientific investigation has not produced anything approaching a satisfying explanation of why it is that a person has subjective experience,…”

    • Pompous pontifications by postmodern prats.

      Though it explains why science changed its name away from “natural philosophy”: excruciating embarrassment.

  • “His habilitation thesis deals with the EvaMed superproject of his own superclinic, which revealed that anthroposophic medicines have very few side effects”. Hmmm, very few side-effects, because no effects, because negligible or no active ingredients……

  • The general anthroposophist response to SARS-CoV2 seems to be adhering firmly to the adage that “evidence that is inconsistent with dogma or preconceptions must be discarded” This blogpost on Covid-19 vaccines (and the comments afterwards) illustrates this very well, I think: Note how the author trots out the long-discredited antivaxxer tropes.

    I also found the mention of Meteoric Iron as a remedy to be “interesting”. I recall anthroposophists scouring roofs and gutters with magnets immediately after the Leonid meteor shower (I have no idea why they favoured that one, but I could make an informed guess 🙂 ) , oblivious to the inconvenient fact that much of the iron found in “gutter-muck” is of terrestrial origin, and not necessarily micrometeorites, or that the micrometeorite fall (about 60 tonnes a day over the globe) is not that strongly correlated to meteor showers.
    (Or, alternatively, that all terrestrial iron is meteoric in origin anyway, delivered during the Late Heavy Bombardment after Earths original iron had ended up in the core as it cooled and differentiated.)

    • Name one “trope” that was trotted out in the article you link to. Its a trope to feel that you have a right to decide what is injected into your own body? That is the main argument that is presented. You dont feel that govt and industry should have to prove the safety and efficacy of the products they require us to use and be liable for any harm they cause? Requiring a vaccine after a couple months of testing when it might have long term consequences is criminal. The consequences of this epidemic do not justify the radical measures being taken. These measures are not being taken with the consent of the governed. Seems like you are in favor of this medical fascism.

      • Name one “trope” that was trotted out in the article you link to

        I’ll name four:

        * preservatives like thimerosal (which contains mercury) – Thimerosal contains ethyl mercury. Ethyl mercury is no more “mercury” than table salt (sodium chloride) is “chlorine”. Ethyl mercury is metabolised and excreted; it does not accumulate in body tissue.
        * aluminium – Again, it’s not aluminum; it’s aluminium compounds. Specifically, aluminium salts. It takes only a few seconds of critical thinking to realise that compounds have entirely different properties to the elements of which they are composed. Consider the compound HCN. A few grams will kill you. Ingesting the component elements separately will not. In fact, your body contains several kilograms of each in various compounds.
        * manufactured using human embryonic kidney cells – This one is actually corrected in the comments, but since you obviously didn’t read that far: they don’t use “human embryonic kidney cells”, which makes it sound like vaccine manufacturers habitually macerate aborted foetuses. They use cell lines that were artificially cultured from a spontaneously (if you don’ t know what that means, GIYF) aborted foetus from the early1970s. Why? Because viruses grow better on the type of cells that they normally infect.
        * formaldehyde – In the time it takes you to read this sentence, your body will have created, and your liver will have metabolised, far more formaldehyde than anyone ever received in a vaccine.

        Now, a question for you: Which of those four tropes apply to the Pfizer vaccine?

        You dont feel that govt and industry should have to prove the safety and efficacy of the products they require us to use

        HMG is not requiring anyone to use the vaccine.

        Requiring a vaccine after a couple months of testing when it might have long term consequences is criminal.

        Again, no “requiring”. (Where do you get these silly ideas from?) The rapid development of this vaccine is something that normal human beings would celebrate as what humans can achieve when obstacles to achievement are removed. The obstacles that usually exist include the necessity to make (usually repeated) funding applications and a shortage of willing volunteers (that quality of human decency).

        Now, I’ll tell you what I call criminal: Advocating against the use of a vaccine which may have some as yet unknown side effects, but which has been shown to protect a majority of people against a virus that has already killed nearly two and a half million people in less than a year.

        Seems like you are in favor of this medical fascism.

        Not sure where you get that idea from – another leap in the dark? Or just a gratuitously snide innuendo? What I am is against the sociopaths who are willing to put others at risk in the name of their own “freedom”. If people like you don’t want to take the vaccine when it’s offered, that’s fine by me. But if you make that choice, you don’t get to compromise other people’s freedom to determine what is best for their well-being, and if that means excluding you from situations where your “freedom” may put them at risk, that’s absolutely fine by me as well. When decent people make decisions, they accept the consequences.

        • “When decent people make decisions, they accept the consequences.”

          What about pants-wetting hysterics like ol’ Rog?

        • Fast forward to today! As of June 5, 2021, there have been tens of thousands of deaths from the COVID “vaccines”, which are not vaccines in the literal sense, but Experimental Gene Therapy and clinical trials are due to end 2023. Humans ARE the clinical trials and the data will be collected 2024. Depopulation is the goal.

          • do you seriously consider the article you linked to to be evidence?

          • @Edzard

            do you seriously consider the article you linked to to be evidence?

            Mrs. Chadwick appears to believe in all sorts of silly things – just clicking her name is quite revealing.

          • Was it your numerology or your astrology that told you that? Because sure as hell nothing with sufficient neurones to form a synapse would take that link you posted seriously.

          • Well done, Anne! It takes quite some effort to make a post containing so many demonstrably and provably false assertions. It is quite startling sometimes to realise the stupendous levels of self-delusion that antivax loons have to embrace in order to contort reality in order that it conforms to their delusions.

            Any more points you want to make? Will all vaccinated people be dead within two years when the 5G activates the killer microchips?

      • To me, the tropes in the article include: the mention of tyrrany, and the material in each of the bullet points.

        Another trope, I think, is the absence of any other useful treatment suggestion as a response to a global pandemic.

        I had my first-ever ‘flu jab’ today, for free, and was glad to get it.

      • “Its a trope to feel that you have a right to decide what is injected into your own body?”

        Antivaxxers already have that right. What they demand is the right to endanger other people, free from criticism or censure. Because they’re spoiled entitled overgrown children; malignant narcissists who get off on their own delusion of power.

        You don’t want to get vaccinated? Fine. As you say, your choice. But you continue wearing a mask and social distancing until the disease is well and truly nobbled. Because your right to swing your fist does not end at the back of our skulls.

  • I social distance and have worn a face mask at work for years so the supermarket is also fine by me.
    What is fantastic is that you has have an opportunity to now show the likes of me just how fantastic modern medicine is. All the great Science minds have given us several vaccines . Hopefully you and a few million others will have at least one of the covid vaccines and show those of us asking questions just how safe it is and how well it works.
    Congratulations on taking place in one of the largest ever trials in history.

  • Asking a few wider pertinent doesnt make anyone anti vaccination.

  • One thing I find disturbing is the idea pedaled at Rudolf Steiner Archive that people should follow Steiner’s “indications” on flu. This isn’t a flu. So the entire approach there is laughably offbase from the first thought. Not to mention what amounts to blaming sick and dead people for getting sick and dead, as we see from the Anthroposophical Society. (Clearly, there was something wrong with the astral fields of the sick and dead! Oh, dear.) These pitiful and grotesque, and frankly sad, maneuvers in illogic should discredit these folks forever. But the cult followers are too mentally eviscerated by now to contend with reality. Fantasy is just so soothing.

  • Germ theory is actually only a theory, which is why its called germ theory. There are any number of books out there which show germ theory to be built on junk science, while terrain theory is much more plausible. I am unable to find a good short video covering this topic (it was probably censored, like most things that run contrary to the mainstream narrative these days) but maybe start with a more lengthy video like this:

    Also, you realize you are mocking a treatment approach which as you stated, has not resulted in a single death from “covid-19” instead of being critical of the allopathic approach which is conversely resulting in many deaths?

    Anyone who believes in the supremacy of the conventional allopathic approach to medicine simply has not done their research. Perhaps look into the influence the Rockefellers have had on modern day medicine?

    I genuinely recommend you thoroughly research alternative approaches to health and wellness before you write an article like this and show your ignorance.

    • thank you!
      excellent recommendation.
      I have done that for the last 30 years.
      now it’s your turn.

    • You are clearly not aware of the technical usage of the word theory in the context of science. I would suggest that you look it up. Or do you similarly doubt the atomic theory of chemistry, the tectonic theory of geology, the evolutionary theory of biology, quantum theory and Einstein’s theory of relativity in physics?

    • What ignorant impertinence to come in here and accuse Professor Ernst of not doing research. Probably no-one in the world has done more research – Primary and Secondary – into so-called alternative medicine.

      Anyone who claims otherwise is either woefully ill-informed, or deliberately deceitful.

    • Cameron, when you have occupied a Professorial Chair for longer than Professor Ernst, and of a bigger department, at a university researching alternative medicine;
      when you have been Professor of Rehabilitative Medicine in venerable European medical institutions longer than he, when you have had more papers published in respected journals than he, and written more books in more languages on alternative medicine, THEN come back here and talk about research.

    • Germ theory is actually only a theory, which is why its called germ theory.

      In which case, “the theory of gravity is actually only a theory, which is why its called the theory of gravity”.

      Given the certainty with which you waded into this, I’m sure you’d be willing to verify your “actually only a theory” proposition on your own behalf by taking a long walk off a short pier.

      • @Steve Tonkin

        In which case, “the theory of gravity is actually only a theory, which is why its called the theory of gravity”.

        Well, some aspects of this ‘gravity’ thing in relation to human health have never been tested in proper randomised controlled trials:

      • Steve,

        the theory of gravity is actually only a theory, which is why its called the theory of gravity

        I am not sure what you mean by “the theory of gravity” as I am aware of two that are commonly used. Newton’s theory of gravity is very simple, and states that there is an attractive force between any two massive bodies which is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centres of gravity. Einstein’s theory of gravity (general relativity) is fundamentally different and mathematically more complex, basically stating that massive bodies produce a curvature in space-time, so that the shortest path is no longer a straight line. In most situations they produce the same answers when predicting the behaviour of bodies in motion, but relativity predicts that gravity also acts on particles with no mass, such as photons, and this has been demonstrated as gravitational lensing in astronomical observations.

        • I am not sure what you mean by “the theory of gravity” as I am aware of two that are commonly used.

          Yes, Julian, a tad “loose” there, wasn’t I? 🙂 I was thinking in terms of Newton, since long walks and short piers don’t experience sensible GR effects unless located on Mercury (or closer to the Sun).

          Merely hoping that Cameron might make the connection. Gravity; theory – yet gravity exists. -> Germ; theory – maybe germs exist.

          • Steve,

            Yes, Julian, a tad “loose” there, wasn’t I?

            Sorry to have called you out there. I think really we were making the same point.

            I remember reading the parachute study when it first came out in the Christmas edition of the BMJ.

          • Sorry to have called you out there. I think really we were making the same point.

            No apology necessary; I was less precise than I could have been. And yes, I believe we are.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Recent Comments

    Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

    The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.