COPY LINK

For members

OPINION AND ANALYSIS

ANALYSIS: Are Germany’s Covid rule changes backed up by science?

Over the last few weeks, there have been some impactful rule changes dictating who counts as vaccinated, recovered and boosted in Germany. We delved deeper and spoke to an expert to see what the scientific evidence is behind them.

Published: 26 January 2022 16:09 CET

A person gets their vaccination certificate checked in Bad Homburg. Hesse. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Sebastian Gollnow

What’s the background?

On January 14th, a new regulation came into force in Germany which gave the country’s top health authorities a lot more power. Decisions about how long the period of protection offered by vaccines and infections can now be taken directly by the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) and the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI) without the need of approval from the Bundestag.

The reasoning behind this – according to Health Minister Karl Lauterbach – is that it will allow the health authorities to react more quickly in response to the latest scientific findings.

So, what are the scientific findings which are guiding the most recent rules? We took a closer look at the available information and spoke to Professor Dr. Ralf Bartenschlager – President of the German Society of Virology and Head of the Department of Molecular Biology at the University of Heidelberg – for some scientific insights.

What counts as being ‘recovered’ from Covid in Germany?

On January 15th, an announcement on the RKI website reduced the duration of the validity of the ‘recovered’ (genesen) status from six months to three months.

The official scientific basis for this reclassification, which has affected millions of people, is – according to the RKI web page – a recommendation from the German Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) and two scientific studies.

The two studies are relatively limited in scope and were both carried in the UK. Though one of the studies demonstrates a larger risk of breakthrough infections with Omicron, it also shows that risk of hospitalisations is much lower.

But none of these sources indicate any reason why three months should be the cut-off point for protection from infection.

People queue for a Covid test in Laatzen, Lower Saxony.

People queue for a Covid test in Laatzen, Lower Saxony. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Julian Stratenschulte

Dr. Bartenschlager also couldn’t point to a specific source that advocated for a three-month deadline, though he told us that this much shorter period was probably decided on the basis of “the significant reduction of neutralisation of the Omicron variant by antibodies induced by current vaccines and, therefore, the need to keep immunity as high as possible”.

He added: “What isn’t clear however, is that the level of protection will be different for people who, for example, were fully vaccinated before getting infected, compared with those who had no vaccination and have only been infected. There is a clear difference in these two cases.”

We approached the German Health Ministry, asking them to the reasoning behind the shortened times.

A spokesman told us: “Scientific studies show that after recovering from Covid, people are not protected from infection with the Omicron virus variant for as long as before with the other variants.

“For this reason, shortening status times is necessary to effectively protect those who have recovered.”

But again, there was no clarification offered as to why the time period of three months had been chosen as the cut-off point for protection.

Further adding to the confusion, reports surfaced in the German media this week showed that the recovery certificates of German MPs continue to be valid for six months – not three – when they are attending debates in the German Bundestag.

Do the changes to the Johnson & Johnson jab requirements stand up?

Also on January 15th, the Paul Ehrlich Institute changed their assessment of the efficacy of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine – meaning those who had received only one dose would no longer be considered as fully vaccinated.

The downgrading was based on studies which showed that a severe course of infection caused by the Delta variant was reduced by only 70 percent with a single vaccination from Johnson & Johnson, while the other licensed vaccines proved much more effective. Additionally, most vaccine breakthroughs occurred in patients who had just had one Johnson & Johnson jab.

A German Health Ministry spokesman previously told The Local that, due to more vaccination breakthrough infections affecting people who’ve had the J&J vaccine, extra protection was needed.

On this subject Dr. Bartenschlager said: “The immunity with Johnson (J&J) doesn’t trigger the same level of protection as two doses of the mRNA vaccines.

“It may have been effective with the type of virus we were dealing with in the earlier stages of the pandemic, but for Delta it proved to be less effective and it could be even less with Omicron.”

What counts as boosted?

There has also been much debate over what counts as being boosted. This is important to know in Germany at the moment because of the 2G-plus rules, which mean entry to many public places is limited to people who are vaccinated/recovered with a booster shot or a Covid test.

Dr. Bartenschlager who told us that, in his view, “being boosted, or having a higher level of protection from the virus, is best achieved after three contacts with the viral antigen. (This means how many times the immune system has come into contact with the virus – either through infection or a vaccination).

“What kind of contact that is – vaccine or recovery – appears to be relatively comparable, at least according to currently available data,” he said.

A sign for the 2G-plus rule at a bar/restaurant in Bad Homburg, Hesse.

A sign for the 2G-plus rule at a bar/restaurant in Bad Homburg, Hesse. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Sebastian Gollnow

But as far as the rules are concerned, the type of virus contact matters very much.

In North Rhine-Westphalia, Schleswig-Holstein and Bavaria, for example, those vaccinated with Johnson & Johnson also must have two additional mRNA shots to qualify as boosted. But in Bremen, Hamburg and Lower Saxony, the optimisation dose (the second dose) has so far been sufficient for 2G-plus rules.

The states also deal very differently with vaccination breakthrough infections: while in Bavaria, Hamburg and North Rhine-Westphalia, a Covid infection after two jabs leads to a “boosted” status, in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse, Saarland and Thuringia those who have recovered after a vaccination breakthrough must also receive the booster vaccination in order to be granted the “boosted” status.

This can cause issues as doctors often require people to wait at least three months after an infection before getting an additional Covid jab.

Dr Bartenschlager told us: “It isn’t clear why boosted people (those who’ve had three jabs) are treated differently compared to the fully vaccinated (two jabs) having had an infection on top.”

Yet another uncertainty is from what point the booster jab is considered as coming into effect. In some states it is from the day of the booster, in others people only count as boosted two weeks after the jab.

Dr. Bartenschlager said: “From a scientific point of view, the booster coming into force immediately is questionable. The body usually needs one or two weeks to re-gain sufficient antibody levels.”

On the question of why the rules differ between the states, a German Health Ministry spokesperson said: “People who are fully vaccinated and who have had an infection are considered boosted. In this context, the definitions of the RKI and PEI apply nationwide.

“But it is up to the states to specify how to deal with 2G-plus access regulations in their state ordinances.”

Why is there so much confusion?

Some of the confusion may be a result of the new regulation – which gives power to the RKI and PEI to decide the length of time vaccines or recoveries are seen as offering protection.

It means that the RKI and PEI now effectively have the power to determine some of the restrictions on freedom – because access to many aspects of public life in Germany is permitted only to those who are fully vaccinated or recovered.

The way in which the rule changes have come into effect have also caused a lot of confusion: the regulation changes were mentioned only on the websites of the RKI and PEI, which are not regularly checked by millions of people.

There appears to have been no information campaigns or press release sent out by the government updating media on the changes so they could let people know.

A person gets vaccinated against Covid-19 in Berlin.

A person gets vaccinated against Covid-19 in Berlin. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Fabian Sommer

The difference in rules across different German states is also another source of confusion. What is not clear, is why the scientific definition of what counts as “boosted” isn’t something that’s applied automatically to all states. Instead it’s up to the local governments to decide.

Dr. Bartenschlager told us: “Even for us specialists – it’s sometimes difficult to keep up with all the different rules and how they are locally applied.”

When is Germany likely to ease the rules?

Other European countries, like the UK and Ireland, are starting to ease restrictions. So what about Germany?

“The situation in Germany is not directly comparable with other countries,” Dr. Bartenschlager told us.

“In South Africa, the Omicron wave came and went very quickly – but they have a much younger population and a much higher percentage of people having had the infection; plus, they had the Beta variant, which we did not have.

“In Germany, we have around three million over 60s who are unvaccinated.”

Bartenschlager said if Germany “lifts restrictions and let the virus take its course,” there could be a lot more deaths.

But he is hopeful that things will change soon.

“Based on the data, we are expecting the peak around mid-February, and hopefully in late spring/early summer the situation should relax again,” Dr. Bartenschlager said.

READ ALSO:

Member comments

Anonymous - 26 January 2022 at 17:18 CET

So our dear health minister has given unelected people the power to decide ultimately on peoples freedoms. How will these scientists be held accountable? They probably won’t be. They’ll resign next year and stroll into high paying jobs in pfizer.

These scientists have not produced the studies its just what they say? Show the evidence. If there is any.
Its like a carry on film. Would be funny if it wasn’t real and so tragic.

Carry on jabbing.
1. Anonymous - 28 January 2022 at 08:42 CET
  
  Good to note here, I think, that Switzerland honors natural immunity from infection for 1 year. I think it’s pretty clear who is running the show in Germany. Sad times for us all.
Anonymous - 26 January 2022 at 21:32 CET

None of these scientists who make recommendations and rules have said a single word about all the other ways to protect yourself from infection. Get enough sleep, reduce stress, reduce the alcohol, stop smoking, regular exercise, supplement vitamin D during winter, make sure your zinc levels are good, etc.
Also, there’s no move to use ivermectin to provide some short term protection or early treatment for the vunerable and/or unvaccinated.
There’s plenty of recommendations they could make, on a voluntary basis, before putting in place all these confusing rules about vaccine and booster passes.

This brilliant video from John Campbell provides a better protection guide for covid-19 than anything I’ve heard from any government authority during the entire pandemic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZAa1BsB2ZI
Get vaccinated, sure, but don’t act like that alone will help.

Peace out!
1. Anonymous - 28 January 2022 at 08:40 CET
  
  Oh, John Campbell is fantastic. Everyone should take a look at the above.

Become a Member to leave a comment.

OPINION: How bureaucracy is slowly killing Germany

In the summer of 2022, I attended a Q&A session that Olaf Scholz held with members of the public in the city of Magdeburg. Coming only a few months after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, most of the questions centred on sanctions, energy costs and Berlin’s response to the war.

But the response I found most revealing was on the dull topic of tax reform.

An audience member asked Scholz why the VAT rate on dog food is seven percent but on baby food it is 19 percent. Parts of the system “don’t seem very coherent to me,” the man said with obvious understatement.

“I don’t think you’ll find anyone who understands the list of VAT exceptions,” Scholz replied with a grin, adding that “at any rate I don’t understand it.”

“But I can tell you that all attempts to change it have ended in a massive disaster,” he continued. “If we were to lay an empty table today, we would definitely do differently. But the system is there now and I think we will have to live with it for a while yet.”

It was a fascinating answer. Essentially, Scholz admitted that there are some regulations that are so complex that no one really understands them anymore. But trying to simplify them just isn’t worth the effort.

It reminded me of a story I once heard about Cairo’s famously dysfunctional traffic system.

Legend has it that Egypt invited a group of Japanese planners to come up with a way to fix it. But the Japanese were so befuddled by what they found that they advised the Egyptians to leave things exactly as they were. The system was so confusing that any attempt to tamper with it might only make things worse.

A similar thing could be said of Germany’s regulatory system. It can be contradictory and infuriatingly slow, but open the can of worms of trying to simplify it and you will probably live to regret it.

private pension plans spain

VAT is just one more confusing piece of German bureaucracy. Photo: Mathieu Stern/Unsplash

Summer snow and other oddities of German red tape

VAT serves as a notorious example. But, wherever you look in German life, you will find egregious cases of sprawling and overlapping regulations.

A few amusing examples:

In August 2022, the town of Esslingen in Baden-Württemberg wanted to organise a summer fête to help local restaurants get back on their feet after Covid. The idea was to build temporary food huts that restaurants could rent cheaply. But planning authorities insisted the huts be built to take the weight of heavy snowfall – during a month with average temperatures of 19C. The fête went ahead, but the eventual costs were “exorbitant,” city officials said.

Last winter, the town of Tübingen acted on an appeal from the federal government to cut gas usage. They decided to switch off street lights between 1 am and 5 am, something that would cut energy costs by 10 percent. Shortly afterwards though, they had to backtrack. The measure contravened a regulation on providing light for pedestrians. In the event of an accident they could have been sued.

A landlord in Hanover recently recounted her efforts to turn an empty attic into student housing. Her planning application was first rejected by fire authorities who said that the branches of a tree were blocking an escape route. Their proposal to cut the tree back was then turned down by the city authority for green spaces, which argued that trees form “a vital part of the city scenery” and “must be protected at all costs.”

Flood of new rules

It is not as if politicians aren’t aware that over-regulation is having a stifling effect on society’s ability to function and adapt.

In its coalition agreement, Scholz’ ‘traffic light’ government committed itself to cutting bureaucracy 63 times. There is an entire section in the agreement on how they planned to cut down official paperwork.

But changing such a deep-seated German mentality is a different matter.

In a withering report published in November, the government’s own bureaucracy watchdog, the Normenkontrollrat, concluded that under the current government the costs of bureaucracy “have reached a level that we’ve never seen before.”

Far from cutting back paperwork, the traffic light coalition has loaded companies, administrators and citizens with a whole raft of new rules, the watchdog said. “Ever more regulations have to be observed and implemented in less and less time,” it concluded.

The frustration is being felt most acutely by local administrators, who say that they just don’t have enough staff to cope anymore.

An open letter sent to Scholz by town councils in Baden-Württemberg pleaded that “things can’t go on like this. Ever more laws and regulations, all too often containing mistakes …are simply resulting in an unmanageable flood of tasks.”

Meanwhile, Germany’s revered Mittelstand, or small and medium sized family businesses, has warned that over-regulation is the single biggest threat to their future viability. A survey among middle-sized companies last year showed that they were far more concerned about regulation than energy prices. Other surveys have shown that a majority of companies don’t understand the regulations they are expected to follow, while two thirds say they make no sense.

“Enormous bureaucratic burdens are combining with labour shortages, lengthy administrative procedures, permanently high energy prices and high taxes in a blow to the future of our business location,” warns Marie-Christine Ostermann, head of the association of family business.

Stuck in the analogue era

For some though, the problem isn’t the regulation itself, it is the fact that there are not enough bureaucrats to deal with it all. After all, they argue, the rules are there to ensure that everyone’s concerns are accounted for.

“An unbureaucratic administration would be a nightmare,” protested economist Georg Cremer in a recent article for Die Zeit. “Sure, there can be too much of a good thing… (but) a prosperous social life is absolutely dependent on the government and administration being bound by law.”

Germany’s welfare system, Cremer points out, requires an army of bureaucrats who assess each claimant’s case based on things like the age of their children and their specific rental needs. “Undoubtedly, the welfare system is over-regulated”, he admits, but we also shouldn’t forget that any attempt to simplify it would make it less fair.

The Deutsche Institut für Wirtschaft, a left-wing economic think tank, has therefore argued that the answer to Germany’s woes is not to strip back regulation, but to employ more staff and push on with the digitisation of key services.

That sounds good in principle. But, when it comes to modernising Germany’s ossified public institutions, it is easier said than done.

A law passed in 2017 obliged local administrations to offer close to 600 of their services online by the end of 2022. A year past that deadline, just 81 of the services have been made available across the country.

The reason for the delays? Local governments are using software that is incompatible with the services developed by the federal government. Meanwhile bureaucrats often display a “grievous” lack of knowledge of how to use a computer, a recent analysis by consumer website Verivox found.

Bürgeramt

A man walks to the Bürgeramt, one of the many centres of German bureaucracy. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Martin Schutt

A German Javier Milei?

In September of last year, Scholz appeared to have finally recognised that things have gone too far.

Doing a good impression of an anarcho-capitalist then running to be president of Argentina, the chancellor gave a rousing speech to the Bundestag in which he called on the country to unite against the scourge of excessive regulation.

“Only together can we shake off the blight of bureaucracy, risk aversion and despondency that has settled over our country for years and decades,” he said. “It is paralyzing our economy and causing frustration among our people who simply want Germany to function properly.”

Two months later, Scholz announced he had reached a “historic” agreement with the federal states to speed up planning processes and to make life “palpably” easier for German citizens.

The agreement, since praised by the Normenkontrollrat as “having a lot of potential,” will mainly muzzle environmental agencies, thus allowing LNG terminals, wind turbines and motorways to be built through sensitive natural environments.

The jury is still out on whether it will simplify your everyday life.

At the start of this year more new laws came into force, including the government’s now notorious gas heating ban.

One that passed with less attention was a decision to abolish child passports. Under the old system you could take your child to your local Bürgeramt and they would give you a Kinderpass on the spot for €13.

Now, all children are required to have proper documents that are valid for six years. The hitch? The passport (which costs €40 and takes six weeks to arrive) is only valid as long as your child’s face remains recognisable.

“The new system makes absolutely no sense for children under six,” the lady at the Bürgeramt told me when I applied for my newborn baby’s first passport this week. “A baby’s face changes so much that you’ll have to get a new one after a year anyway.”

This article originally appeared in The German Review, a twice weekly newsletter full of analysis and opinion on German politics and society. You can sign up to read it here.

SHOW COMMENTS

Url copied to clipboard!