Is not to save: Top virologist Kekulé’s criticism of Drosten-study

Is not to save: Top virologist Kekulé’s criticism of Drosten-study

After the dispute between the “image”newspaper and the Top virologist Christian Drosten smolders still, there is now a new Row created. His virologist colleague, Alexander Kekulé published a guest post in the daily mirror that didn’t like Drosten apparently don’t. The day after Kekulé to put once again.

Compared to the "Deutschlandfunk" Kekulé reiterate his criticism of Drostens children’s study: He was quite sure that the Berlin’s Top virologist, and will drag his study “back and re-write”. The core question of whether children are just as contagious as adults had not yet decided, it is also the result of Drostens study will not change anything. The data and the analysis would be too weak. "When I got the study for the first Time on the table, on 30. April, it was immediately clear that, on the evaluation side, a few question marks sind&quot there;, so Kekulé. Since the study Drosten defended again and again, he reported with a bit delay word. "The study is not to save, as you dasteht", Kekulé explains.

Kekulé criticized Drosten-study: a Scientific basis is missing

In the guest post for the "Tagesspiegel" had Kekulé previously the controversial Drosten-study on the Virus load in children is criticized, which is also behind the dispute between Drosten and the "Bild" is. His displeasure with the guest post Drosten made on Thursday morning via Twitter kund.

“Kekulé makes mood. His presentation is biased. He doesn’t know our data, and cited incorrectly. Kekulé himself, one could criticize, he should publish something.”

Christian Drosten

  • Reading tip: for More on the Background of the dispute between Drosten and the "Bild"-Newspaper you can read here.

In his guest article, Kekulé had called the statistician’s Hero, the have pointed out several methodological errors in the study. The amounts of sample on which the study is based, are not comparable, so Kekulé. The quantity purchased is different too often, in addition, samples were taken at different stages of the disease. In addition, the sample was very small: So Kekulé criticised the fact that only 49 of the Under-11-Year-old were tested for the study, but quite relevant.

  • Alexander Kekule: Age, Female, Income

  • What they did not know probably still on Lothar Wieler

  • Christian Drosten: he Would have had to study to pull back?

    Kekulé also indicates that the not the found difference on the basis of the used method was not a long no proof that there was the relevant difference. Overall, the Drosten study lacks the scientific basis. Drosten had to pull the study back, so Kekulé.

    Shortly thereafter, Drosten to put:

    “The Kekulé tried Leonhard Hero himself says about his statistical analysis of our study, that this is konklusiv. Kekulé is no matter, he fires anyway. Thank you for that. We will provide an Update of our data and statistics.”

    Christian Drosten

    Basically, Drosten agreed with a Twitter User, however. Had written: "Now, if the scientists are bashing publicly successive wins at the end of the image."

    • Reading tip: follow All the News on Corona pandemic, see the Live Ticker of FOCUS Online

    Criticism of Hendrik Streeck

    The Bonn virologist Hendrik Streeck had joined in the criticism of the study of his colleague, Christian Drosten of the Berlin Charité. “The method has been criticized by five statisticians, and this criticism is no accident,” said the scientist in an Interview with the editor-in network in Germany (RND).

    However, it is difficult “to separate between legitimate criticism and what is then made medial to it,” he said with a view on a controversial report of the “image”newspaper about the criticism of the Drosten-study on the virus load in children. “The type of reporting I would distance myself.”

    Drosten in "unangenehmener Situation"

    Ultimately, would Drosten, and he would have just published as those of a statistician, the critical remarks on the study of the Charité, “in a Team, in Team science”, said the head of the Heinsberg study, which had even been strong public criticism. To said the current debate on the Drosten of the Director of the Institute for Virology at the University hospital of Bonn, the RND: “I feel for him, this is a very unpleasant Situation in which he is located.” As a scientist, one is sometimes “not clear, in which political and media situation, one goes there.” The had fared with him even in the course of the Heinsberg-study similar.

    Streeck missing according to its own information, at the time, a similar level of support from colleagues and the Public, as witnessed currently, the Berlin virologist Drosten. “It is a question that really bothers me: Why there are on the one hand, in spite of the justified criticism of a lot of support from the media and otherwise, while on the other hand, no one jumps to the side. The substantive criticism of our study – and it is at the end – has certainly stood the test.“

    Drosten gets the backing of the world medical President Frank Ulrich Montgomery

    Without the support Drosten is despite everything since. Frank Ulrich Montgomery, the Chairman of the world medical Association, took the virologists in protection. In the RBB broadcast "Talk Berlin" he said: “I think it’s so great how this man who I incidentally admire for what he does, how he communicates that open to the outside.” From a scientific point of view, it is perfectly in order, that a researcher be corrected again and again.

    Montgomery also stated that the scientific discourse patterns in a high speed. He complained: “is That because some Prime Ministers and some Newspapers don’t come in the speed of their thinking, is their Problem, but not the Problem of Mr. Drosten.”

    Surf tip: pension, Hartz-IV, tenant protection, – financial assistance: the Changes in June