Covid Futures: Vaccine-Pusher Prof. Krammer on Pandemic Preparedness

Believe it or not, one of the Branch Covidian high priests is currently visiting Austria and shed some insights into the pandemicists' sick brains

Today, we’ll talk a bit more about one of the Covid experts™ who were, and continue to be, instrumental for the increasingly absurd push to answer ‘vaccinate!’ to virtually every question he’s asked.

Meet Professor Florian Krammer of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, now also a cross-appointed Professor at the Ignaz Semmelweis Institute at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria.

He’s such a charming chap—I met him once in 2018 at the Austrian UN Embassy/Consulate General in New York on the occasion of a reception hosted by the Austrian gov’t attending the UN General Assembly (which is an annual bonanza as many politicos™ get to spend a few days in NY)—that he virtually immediately blocks anyone who crosses him on X/Twitter with whom he disagrees (although, to his credit, he’s still on there):

I suppose once you saw his banner with the mask trope (proof-positive of a rigid mind and the doctrinaire nature of his stance that may not be altered by the fact that masks don’t ‘stop the spread’) and the number of modRNA poison/death injections he ostensibly took (five), you have enough information at your hands to categorise Prof. Krammer as follows:

He’s a true Branch Covidian who, once he went all-in (perhaps due to his singular attention to vaccine development), quadrupled or quintupled down on this madness; and, as the below exemplary social media postings indicate, he’s by far not done shoving needles into everything that moves:

Yet, if you thought that we know ‘enough’ about Prof. Krammer to go for the main course in this posting, I boldly declare: hold the wagons, there’s something else to note:

You see, back in 2022, The Scientist noted the following about a bunch of people, including Prof. Florian Krammer:

Needless to say, the original posting went ‘404’, hence here’s the archived version courtesy of the Internet Archive.

I thought you should know that the good professor of virology and vaccinology has some, well, shall we say, potential conflicts of interest?

Needless to say, these less-than-savoury details are omitted from the press release of his appointment at the Medical University of Vienna, and every time Florian Krammer appears in legacy media, they ‘somehow™’ also ‘fail™’ to mention it (see below).

And with these biographical markers sorted out, let’s turn to what the good professor is up to on the weekend (my translation, emphases, and [snark]).

---

‘The next pandemic will probably be caused by influenza’

An interview with Florian Krammer, a world-renowned virologist from Hirschegg-Pack, who is the keynote speaker at the Voitsberg Health Days on 15-16 February in the Stadtsäle Voitsberg. Why he describes the compulsory coronavirus vaccination as a mistake in hindsight [well, I suppose better late than never…]

By Andrea Kratzer, Kleine Zeitung, 12 Feb. 2025 [source]

You will be speaking at the Voitsberg Health Days as an expert on the topic of ‘What pandemics still await us’. What will they be?

Florian Krammer: I assume the next pandemic will be caused by influenza again. I say that because four of the six pandemics since 1900 have been influenza pandemics [were there such things before 1900?]. But we don’t know. [I’ll highlight Krammer’s answers in this manner and omit his name in the following]

What else will you explain to visitors in Voitsberg?

I will talk about Styrian viruses. The hantavirus, for example.

You are working on a super vaccination [orig. Superimpfung] against flu viruses that does not have to be administered annually [I doubt this will ‘work™’ because these viruses change so fast]. How far has the research on this progressed?

We are in early clinical trials. The concept works, but clinical development takes time [I doubt this will ever see the light of day as a one-off ‘super shot’ (their words, not mine) destroys Big Pharma’s de facto subscription model of annual jabs].

What was done right or wrong with Covid-19 in Austria?

Austria reacted excellently during the first wave and prevented a situation like the one in Italy or New York with many deaths [hard to evaluate if true or false as virtually every country did so—except Sweden, which had a way better outcome as measured in all-cause mortality since 2020…this is, by the way, the primary way ‘experts™’ obfuscate stuff by framing the ‘debate™’ in way that cannot be falsified (i.e., as per Popper and Kuhn, this is a non-falsifiable hypothesis, i.e., a matter of belief, not science): merely point to one time-limited aspect and deliver a value-judgement that cannot be disagreed with (‘a situation…with many deaths’) while omitting highly relevant information, such as the ventilator-induced deaths, remdesivir administration, no early treatment, etc.]. Many mistakes were certainly made—but that happened almost everywhere globally [except, largely, in Sweden, which is why that must not be mention]. We were poorly prepared for the second wave [get that: the world-renowned ‘expert™’ who works on flu viruses (that appear seasonally every winter (except for 2020/21) admits that ‘the scientific community’ was ‘poorly prepared’ for the subsequent winter 2021/22: I’m unsure about whatever credibility Prof. Krammer has left a moment or two into this interview, but these notions do not trouble the interviewer (nor Krammer, it would seem, who moves on to switch the subject)]. Compulsory vaccination, which I was also in favour of, was a mistake. It should no longer be done [better late than never, I suppose, but note that he could also have apologised for pushing this shit in the first place, which Krammer doesn’t do]. And perhaps measures could have been withdrawn more quickly [just revisit his X/Twitter profile (see above) with the mask up banner to know just how honest he is about this]. But I think the impression that many people have that everything was done wrong is incorrect. Austria has done well in this difficult situation [please peruse the search function in this webzine and search for ‘Covidistan’ to learn ‘more’ about how well Austria has done]. A pandemic is always problematic, will always cause great damage, and will always leave a negative impression. You just have to try to manage everything in such a way that you come through with as little damage as possible [who knew that Prof. Krammer was a totalitarian whacko, too? I mean, if I as a non-virologist and non-vaccinologist voice criticism about these things, I’m labelled a nut-job and told to ‘trust the experts™’, yet when Prof. Krammer wants to ‘try to manage everything’, he’s not even displaying a minimal amount of introspection about what he said: one must ‘manage everything’, of course, with no questions asked…]

How would you convince vaccination sceptics? [note how, like in the NZZ interview with psychologist Holger Richter, the subject is quickly changed by the interviewer who should have asked, e.g., ‘hey, prof. Krammer, you’re not an economist, teacher, child psychologist, etc., please explain why you think that we should ‘manage everything’? What’s your justification for making such statements as your expertise is clearly limited to a small sub-field of infectious diseases?]

Basically with education and a personal dialogue [which is exemplified by the fact that Prof. Krammer has ‘blocked’ me on X/Twitter; I doubt I’m the only one]. But I think you have to start here before scepticism arises [ah, enter the thought pre-crime police: eliminate and censor every bit of information that might make ‘vaccination sceptics’, well, sceptical], with more knowledge transfer about infectious diseases, immunity, and vaccinations—and that starts at school [now the expert™ notes that such ‘education™’ should start in school, perhaps already in kindergarten?]. If people know their stuff, they are less sceptical [this is such an incredibly stupid and totalitarian comment, it boggles the mind: the more one learns, the more informed one becomes (hopefully), and should new information arise, one may then change his or her mind accordingly—yet Prof. Krammer (now also an expert in early childhood education, by the way) wants to convey certain messages in schools that set a person on a lifelong journey towards blindly trusting everything that ‘the science™’ divines, aided and abetted by the Big Pharma consiglieres: this is the literal opposite of learning and education].

How can each individual best protect themselves from infection in an emergency? [none of this, once more, troubles the interviewer who, once again, changes the subject]

At the beginning of a pandemic with a virus that is transmitted via the respiratory tract, with a mask. Later, when they are available, with vaccines and therapeutic medication [see, Prof. Krammer has apparently learned, from Covid, I surmise, that basically everything that was mandated was a good idea]. Masks are also very helpful in the winter season, when many people are coughing and it is otherwise easy to catch all kinds of respiratory diseases [this is insane, as humans have never done that in all of history; yes, one might catch a cold or the flu, but there’s so many things one can do to prevent or remedy these ailments, incl. exercise, sleeping well, making sure one gets enough sunshine (vitamin D) or ingests food rich in vitamin C), etc.; it’s telling, I think, that Prof. Krammer doesn’t mention any preventive actions but immediately suggests mandates like during Covid plus the products he’s developing (vaccines)].

How are things going setting up the Semmelweis Institute in Vienna and what exactly is being done there?

Good, we are making progress. Our plan is to establish the Ignaz Semmelweis Institute as a leading international research institution in the field of infectious diseases and pandemic preparedness [check it out yourself: there’s one news item, four other staffers apart from Krammer, and not much more yet; career opportunities are said to be forthcoming in mid-2025]. We have a great team, will now recruit some young researchers, build up structures, and integrate ourselves into international networks. We will be working on global problems such as influenza and bird flu, but also focussing on local problems. In the case of hantaviruses, which are a problem in Styria, there is neither a vaccine nor therapies. We want to develop these [of course you do].

How often do you commute between the USA and Austria?

Currently about once a month [as a side-note, Prof. Krammer is also occasionally hyped by Austrian ‘climate change ambassador’ Marcus Wadsak (a former newscaster/weather reporter on state radio Ö3; no comment came from the latter with regards to the carbon emissions of this kind of ‘commute’].

What else connects you to your home district of Voitsberg?

A lot. I grew up there. Most of my family lives there and I am firmly rooted there. And I still enjoy being at home with my parents on the Pack [mountain range].

You are married and live in New York: do you still have time for family and hobbies in your job, and if so, which ones?

A little bit. I like hiking and running, I like looking for mushrooms and I also love fishing.

---

Bottom Lines

Thus we learn of such great minds who are able to come to the conclusion that forcing people to partake in medical experiments is wrong.

The world knew that at least since 1945, and while many countries continued to do so for decades thereafter (e.g., the Tuskegee experiment in the US or Denmark forcibly seeking to sterilise Greenland’s indigenous women until the 1970s), this is a position to which Prof. Krammer acceded, finally, in 2025. Better late than never, I suppose.

Let’s note, though, that he never offered an apology for his previous stance.

The interviewer is quite unprepared to ask pointed question or to follow-up on insane comments (I’ve highlighted a few of them above), and likewise, Florian Krammer’s answers are incredibly tone-deaf, so to speak.

The most shockingly insane aspect of Prof. Krammer’s worldview—such as it exists—however is his totalitarian vision of what to do in the event of another ‘pandemic™’: one must simply ‘try to manage everything’, he argues, yet his own blind spots—in his very own field of expertise—are so glaringly obvious:

Bacterial Pneumonia Caused Most Deaths in 1918 Influenza Pandemic

Via NIH [!!!] News Releases, 19 Aug. 2008 [source]

The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection. The pneumonia was caused when bacteria that normally inhabit the nose and throat invaded the lungs along a pathway created when the virus destroyed the cells that line the bronchial tubes and lungs.

Note the underlying studies:

• D. Morens et al. (co-authored by none other than Anthony S. Fauci), ‘Predominant role of bacterial pneumonia as a cause of death in pandemic influenza: implications for pandemic influenza preparedness’, J Infect Dis. 2008 Oct 1;198(7):962-70; doi: 10.1086/591708.

• J. Taubenberger, ‘The Origin and Virulence of the 1918 “Spanish” Influenza Virus’, Proc Am Philos Soc. 2006 Mar;150(1):86–112.

Both papers underscore the patent absurdity, esp. as these things were ‘fact-checked’ by none other than Reuters in autumn 2020—and play a game of fact-checkers with me—here’s the money paragraph from Morens et al. 2008 (as cited above ad note that J. Taubenberger and one Anthony S. Fauci were Morens’ co-authorys):

Results: The postmortem samples we examined from people who died of influenza during 1918-1919 uniformly exhibited severe changes indicative of bacterial pneumonia. Bacteriologic and histopathologic results from published autopsy series clearly and consistently implicated secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory-tract bacteria in most influenza fatalities.

Conclusions: The majority of deaths in the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory-tract bacteria. Less substantial data from the subsequent 1957 and 1968 pandemics are consistent with these findings. If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs). Prevention, diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of secondary bacterial pneumonia, as well as stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, should also be high priorities for pandemic planning.

And this is what Reuters made of the above findings:

Fact check: Fauci study did not attribute 1918 Spanish flu deaths to bacterial pneumonia caused by masks

Via Reuters, 28 Oct. 2020 [source]

Social media users have been publishing a screenshot of a tweet, which erroneously claims that during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, people died of bacterial pneumonia from masks and that Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and a key member of the White House coronavirus task force, knew this and wrote about it in 2008. In fact, the study that Fauci co-authored in 2008 does not mention masks and found that bacterial pneumonia led to most deaths in the Spanish flu pandemic when it had been preceded by “viral damage,” or influenza infection.

Yes, that paper does exactly what the quoted paragraph says—and please revisit the header at a time of your choosing.

The best take I’ve ever come across the inane pandemic preparedness scam with respect to the pandemic potential of influenza is by

Brian Mowrey

, specifically his awesome post about—the 1918 Spanish Flu:

1918, I Love You

It’s long, it’s dense, and it’s certainly worth your attention.

The penultimate word here goes to the NIH News Release accompanying the release of Morens et al. 2008 (cited above):

The published reports ‘clearly and consistently implicated secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory flora in most influenza fatalities’, says Dr. Morens. Pathologists of the time, he adds, were nearly unanimous in the conviction that deaths were not caused directly by the then-unidentified influenza virus, but rather resulted from severe secondary pneumonia caused by various bacteria. Absent the secondary bacterial infections, many patients might have survived, experts at the time believed. Indeed, the availability of antibiotics during the other influenza pandemics of the 20th century, specifically those of 1957 and 1968, was probably a key factor in the lower number of worldwide deaths during those outbreaks, notes Dr. Morens.

The cause and timing of the next influenza pandemic cannot be predicted with certainty, the authors acknowledge, nor can the virulence of the pandemic influenza virus strain [good luck, Prof. Krammer, with your super vaccine vs. the flu]. However, it is possible that—as in 1918—a similar pattern of viral damage followed by bacterial invasion could unfold [yep, it could, yet we’re talking masks (not available in 1918) and vaccines instead of, say, antibiotics vs. bacterial pneumonia], say the authors. Preparations for diagnosing, treating and preventing bacterial pneumonia should be among highest priorities in influenza pandemic planning, they write. ‘We are encouraged by the fact that pandemic planners are already considering and implementing some of these actions’, says Dr. Fauci.

What a bummer, eh? That is, if you’re someone like Prof. Krammer and his ilk.

Let’s be honest—did you expect anything ‘more’ or ‘better’ from either legacy media ‘journos™’ or ‘experts™’ like Prof. Krammer?

Last but not least, let’s not forget Prof. Krammer’s totalitarian delusions ‘to manage everything’. We’ve already seen and experienced first-hand what these people are willing to do from 2020 through the present.

There’s but one last quote I’ll add (it’s not by Albert Einstein but, so sayeth Nature, by Rita Mae Brown, but that’s not relevant here):

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.