Skip to main content

Disappointing outcome of Bardens vs. Lanka: measles proven to exist, but anti-vaxxer Lanka keeps his money


It seems that after three years of struggle in court, the Ravensburger Measles process has finally reached its endpoint. Extremist anti-vaxxer Stefan Lanka, who denies the existence of harmful viruses, had set out a reward of 100,000 euros for scientific prove that there is such a thing as a virus that causes measles. The young doctor David Bardens provided Lanka with six articles that show this, but Lanka denied that this evidence met the criteria of his challenge.

Bardens took Lanka to court to have him pay and at first this seemed to be succesful. The court appointed an expert to judge the evidence and this person, professor Andreas Podbielski, was quite clear that the the articles Bardens had sent in should be considered sufficient to meet the material criteria of Lanka’s bet and so the court ordered him to pay. Lanka appealed this decision and won on formal grounds. The higher court ruled that Lanka was free to judge whether any evidence sent in for his bet, was good enough in his opinion.

Now Bardens tried to get this ruling revised, but unfortunately (in December 2016) the court saw no reason for that . Case closed it seems. According to DAZ Online (Bundesgerichtshof hält sich aus Masernstreit heraus ) Lanka is now telling his followers that this outcome means that there is no prove of the existence of measles and that it is now established that there is no legal ground for the vaccination programmes worldwide. Podbielsky has harshly criticized this interpretation of the court rulings and stated that Lanka has only won because of semantic and legal subtleties. None of the six articles alone are enough to prove that measles exist, but together they prove this beyond any reasonable doubt.

See also:

The Proof in Bardens vs. Lanka – Measles in Court

8 thoughts on “Disappointing outcome of Bardens vs. Lanka: measles proven to exist, but anti-vaxxer Lanka keeps his money

    1. Mr. Lanka, do you acknowledge that the court decision in this matter had nothing to do with scientific evaluation of the evidence Bardens had brought in or your position on the existence of the measles virus? And if you don’t agree to this view, can you quote from the court’s documents the exact sentences which state that measles has not been proven to exist according to the court?

  1. Measles virus was NOT proven to exist, and this was not because of semantics. These photos are not the isolated measles virus, as implied. They are typical cells with typical endogenous particles in them.

    1. The courts accepted the testimony of Podbielsky that the articles given by Bardens were good enough to prove the existence op the measles virus. Podbielsky also stated that there are numerous other articles which Bardens could have used. The problem for Bardens is that the courts decided that this proof does not necessarily fulfill the criteria Lanka had stated in his bet (i.e. all parts of the proof in one article). This of course has nothing to do with the science of the measles virus, only with the peculiar way Lanka looks at ‘proof’.

      1. Tis the problem with modern virology, when paired with modern medicine. Scientists don’t have to provide proper, and reproducible viral isolations, due to viruses being a lucrative business. Most of these modern viruses don’t hold up under scientific scrutiny. HIV has been getting shredded, and exposed as a fraud, in court cases over the last few years. The vast voluminous amount of data allegedly supporting it’s existence, quickly dissipates into thin air, when experts are questioned under oath. You find out a lot of eye opening facts when you read the court transcripts.

        1. Scientific facts and scientific consensus are not established in court rooms. Judicial evidence is not the same is scientific evidence, it’s serves a different purpose. I don’t know which court cases you mean, I’m not going to search for the links myself, you could drop them here.
          There is no serious scientific doubt on the existence on hiv. Of course some research on viruses might be not very good, but that’s to be expected considering the vast amount of research which is being done in this area.

Leave a Reply

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