Reiner Fuellmich Fact Checked and Exposed as a Covid Conspiracy Con

The worlds largest class-action money-making scam exposed

Reiner Fuellmich Covid Con? In a recent video, Reiner Fuellmich suggests everyone who fact checks his Covid conspiracy theory is in the pocket of big pharma or large corporations. He also states again that PCR tests don’t work and cannot be used for detecting anything. He then attacks vaccines, calling them genetic experiments and hints at sterilization, population control, and plain outright murder. 

I’ve linked to the video below as we are going to address his fairy tale piece by piece, so you’ll need to refer to the video from time to time for context. It’s an interview conducted with Fuellmich by Marta Gameiro Branco on the 11th of April 2021. The actual interview is in English.

Fact-Checking Reiner Fuellmich for profit

Fuellmich claims that people are out to discredit him for profit, that it’s all a glorious hatchet job, orchestrated by Davos members and big business. For an attorney, his apparent inability to grasp just how messed up we are from an organizational stance, as evidenced by our haphazard pandemic responses, is concerning. We’re just disorganized Reiner, get over yourself, no one is really that bothered with you.

Contrary to what you and your supporters would like the world to believe, not everyone seeking to call out your fairy tale is actually in the employ of, or financially incentivized by big pharma and/or other nameless corporations. Medika Life and its authors/owners/publishers and related associates can assure you we are not expecting Ferrari’s parked in our driveways in the morning. Pfizer, if you’re listening, I’m leaning towards black, rather than red.

- Advertisement -

Our services are provided for free for the simple purpose of protecting the public against misinformation. It’s called providing a community service without the expectation of remuneration, it’s altruistic and it’s liberating, you should try it. What this means, in effect, Mr. Fuellmich is that we call out your bullshit for free, How annoying is that!

Reiner Fuellmich Fails in Canada

The Canadians arent having any of it either. Despite claims on social media by Fuellmich supporters to the contrary, Canada’s top court is not hearing the case about Covid-19 ‘crimes’. 

“Canadian Supreme Court has accepted the case for Crimes Against Humanity presented by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, R.F. Kennedy Jnr, & Dalores Cahill,” reads the title of a May 5, 2021 article published on a website called Philosophers Stone. It was shared more than 1,500 times on Facebook, according to the social media monitoring tool CrowdTangle.

According to the AFP Fact-Checking article, this statement of claim clearly indicates that it was filed in Ontario’s Superior Court, a provincial judicial body, which is not Canada’s Supreme Court. Contacted by the AFP, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed there is no such case before it.

“ After conducting some verifications, I can confirm that this file does not exist at the Supreme Court of Canada and that the Court has not issued any decision in this regard,” a spokesperson for the Ottawa-based judicial body told AFP.

The Ontario Superior Court confirmed to AFP that the case had been dismissed under Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that “the court may, on its own initiative, stay or dismiss a proceeding if the proceeding appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.” Lies, misinformation, and more lies.

Score: Common Sense 1 — Reiner Fuellmich 0

PCR Tests. Really? Again?

At the risk of putting everyone to sleep with this very tired part of Fuellich’s pandemic conspiracy, we have to address it as Fuellmich states publicly in the video that their whole argument is based on the PCR tests not working. It is, in his own words, the foundation stone in the precariously balanced pile of nonsense he’s built up. Proving PCR doesn’t work, proves his argument. 

By the same logic, showing PCR does work will make him go away, as his whole argument, as acknowledged by him, pivots on the efficacy of the PCR test. So let’s make him disappear as magically as he appeared. I’ll examine the statements made in the video, one at a time. The figure in brackets preceding each transcript is a time reference for the segment to save you having to endure the whole video. 

Fuellmich has constructed his own logic chain and constructed an event sequence from an unconnected series of facts and misrepresentations. It’s devious and ingenious at the same time. You cannot disprove his story because it doesn’t conform to established scientific facts, rather it subsists on the legal glue he’s used to cobble together nonrelational information, so we aren’t going to play his game. 

We will simply point out his lack of understanding of some key and basic issues and the flaws in his individual statements.

[4:15] It (the PCR test) cannot be relied upon as it cannot distinguish between live and dead matter, meaning whatever tests positive to could very well be the fragments or remnants of your bodies own immune systems fight against the common flu or the cold and it cannot tell whether a virus, and you need a whole virus, not just a fragment, whether a virus has entered your cells and is replicating because that’s the only way for you to become contagious. 

There’s a whole lot going on here. Fuellmich isn’t a doctor or virologist or epidemiologist and it shows. The first and most obvious flaw in his statement above is this. You can spread the virus till the cows come home simply by having it in your nostrils. You don’t, Mr. Fuellmich, require active replication in your cells to be a vector for spreading a virus. 

Whether the matter detected by the PCR tests is either alive or dead has no relevance to the test’s ability to detect the material in the first place. In fact, this statement would seem counterintuitive on his behalf. If he’s suggesting the tests don’t work, why is he then complaining about the condition of the material they identify? You cant have it both ways Mr. Fuellmich.

Another key issue here is that the purpose of widespread testing was not to determine how infectious everyone was, but rather to ascertain the prevalence of the virus among general populations. It’s the only way we have to actively gauge how many people are or were infected and gives us a reasonable indicator of the virus’s spread and capability for transmission, particularly where patients are asymptomatic.

It may also be worth mentioning at this point that every single laboratory that does work on coronavirus strains — the so-called gain of function experimentation, where shrews or ferrets are given the human ACE2 receptor and then exposed to the coronavirus — do tests on the animals to see if they have been infected. Anyone care to hazard a guess as to which test they use? PCR. Why would they use this test if it’s so useless, Mr. Fuellmich? 

You’re welcome to leave a reply in the comments or are you going to plead the 5th. 

[5:38]…you have to put this into a machine and then magnify it. This is called cycles of amplification, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and everyone agrees in the meantime that anything beyond 24 is unscientific. Apart from the fact, these tests cannot tell you anything about infection because they can’t distinguish between live and dead matter, but, if, if you go beyond 24 cycles, if you go for example to 34 cycles of application then you end up with at least 97% false positives, that’s what Mike Yeadon, former vice president of Pfizer told us.

Let’s deal with Mike first, should we? Mike Yeadon is exactly the sort of person you’d be expecting Fuellmich to quote and his representation of Yeadon is horribly misleading. Yeadon did work for Pfizer. He was vice president and chief scientific officer for Pfizer’s United Kingdom-based allergy and respiratory unit until that unit shut down in 2011, not Pfizer’s actual VP as Fuellmich insinuates. 

The very fact that Fuellmich is consorting with Yeadon and regards his opinion as valuable is in my honest opinion enough reason to immediately discredit anything else Fuellmich has to say, but we’ll persist, should we?

For a more detailed dissection of the life and decline of Mike Yeadon, I highly recommend this enlightening piece from Kelly Hawes in the Herald Bulletin.

On to the cycling issue. Yet more conspiracy and misinformation. Amplification cycles vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, a fact Fuellmich conveniently omits to mention. He assures us he’s read the packaging insert, so he must have stopped short of the actual instructions. Depending on the sensitivity of the test and what is being tested, laboratory technicians need to adhere to the relevant test manufactures instructions. 

There is no such thing as a standard number of cycles as each test differs. Yes, it is true that if you don’t adhere to the prescribed number of cycles, you’ll ruin a particular test, but that’s human error and not a conspiracy. I would assume, given the assurances he continuously offers on the depth of his knowledge regarding PCR testing that he is all too well aware of this fact and has chosen to omit it as it doesn’t play to his storyline. The following explanation will help you understand the process in simpler terms.

The cycle threshold (Ct) value is the actual number of cycles it takes for the PCR test to detect the virus. It indicates an estimate of how much virus was likely in the sample to start with — not the actual amount. If the virus is found in a low number of cycles (Ct value under 30), it means that the virus was easier to find in the sample and that the sample started out with a large amount of the virus. 

Think about it like the zoom button on your computer, if you only have to zoom in a little (zoom at 110% — fewer cycles), it means that item was big to start with. If you have to zoom a lot (zoom at 180% — more cycles), it means that the item was small to start with.

Public Health Ontario has this to offer on the PCR test they use. You’ll note Mr. Fuellmich that your golden number of 24 is never mentioned here.

We have developed a PCR test in our lab, with positive and negative cutoff points. The cutoff point for a positive result for PHO’s developed lab test is 38 cycles. This means that if the virus is found at or before 38 cycles are completed, then the test is considered positive. The cutoff point for a negative result is 40 cycles. If the virus is detected between 38 and 40 cycles, we call this an indeterminate or inconclusive result. 

We’ll move on now, but if you prefer a more scientific explanation of the points raised above, we’ve provided one right here

Vienna and Fuellmich’s big game-changer

Following a complaint lodged by the FPÖ (Austrian populist party), the administrative tribunal of Vienna ruled on 24 March that PCR tests could not be considered as a reliable way of diagnosing an illness or the level of contagiousness of an individual. Our response. Way to go for stating the obvious.

PCR tests are simply an aid to doctors, enabling them to confirm or dismiss a possible diagnosis in conjunction with visible symptoms and other factors. In other words, as all doctors are aware, you treat the patient, not the test. Fuellmich obviously isn’t aware of this annoying medical habit of clinicians using diagnostic tools to assist them in confirming a diagnosis, leading him to claim rather brashly that the court decision in Vienna is a game-changer.

Sorry, Reiner, that’s a silly own goal and not your first.

Conspiracies r us

From around the 7th minute onwards in the video Fuellmich simply abandons any appearances of sane discourse and invokes almost every known conspiracy theory circulating on the internet. Davos is out to get him, there is a “great reset” underway, covid vaccines are compared to genetic bio-experiments, mass sterilization experiments (you can almost see Mike Yeadon typing Fuellmich’s script in the background). Even the Jews are dragged into and he has the audacity to compare the pandemic response to the holocaust.

It’s at this point that any credibility the man may have built up, based on his questionable earlier pseudo-science-based statements, flies out the window, and I feel comfortable closing with the following. Reiner Fuellmich is simply another one-trick pony and not a very impressive one. A con artist with delusions of grandeur and ambitions way above his station. 

If you can seriously entertain either the man or the sham he presents as actual fact, then you can consider your indoctrination into the ethereal world of conspiracies complete. You haven’t been flummoxed, you’ve been Fuellmiched. 

Hmm, think I may get T-Shirts printed. Pfizer, where’s my cheque?

Where is the Grift?

It’s there, we can assure you. Contibutions pouring in to support this world class “liberation” con. It’s the Normandy beach landing, except this time the beach is empt and no one’s home. Fuellmich has convinced the more gullible among us, and there are many, that the beach is crawling with enemies. I can see how he arrived here and the holes in his narrative provide a road map of sorts. If you’ll indulge me my fairy tale, you’ve listened to Fuellmich’s, so you can spare me five minutes.

He, or his office, began examining Covid or the lockdowns or masks or PCR tests, possibly for a client or simply out of his own financial interests. What he found overwhelmed him, both in terms of scale and sheer possibility. It was a lawyers wet dream, people falling over themselves to present evidence against the accused, one theory crazier than the next, but the list was as endless. 

The world was pissed off, at Covid, at being confined and just generally pissed off. Its our default setting of late, just hang out on social media for a while. 

There has to be a scape goat, a guilty party and a reason for our misery. Reiner Fuellmich understands this mindset or need all to well. He’s used to dealing with crime and the legal constructs dividing the world into the guilty and the innocent. Fuellich continued interviewing and continued collecting evidence. In the back of his mind, a plan was formulating. An ambitious one. Who better to blame than “the man”, the system and all its corrupt appendages. Who better as a client than the all the innocents. Fuellmich protects the world.

All he then needed was to formulate a construct, a backstory or plan that showed clear intent to harm his client (you and I, the innocents), a complex web that would prove sufficiently difficult to comprehend and equally differ to decipher. The chaos of the pandemic and the mixed messages presented the perfect fertile soil to plant his seed of doubt and the scientific materials he was about to twist out of shape to conform to his narrative abounded. And so, his “legal document” was created.

Nothing fits as it should in his convoluted tale. Bits poke out awkwardly everywhere, pushed into spaces they weren’t designed for. In places, as we’ve noted, he’s had to resort out of desperation to blaming things like Davos and completely ridiculous conspiracies. Yes, the worlds out to screw you, but so what. It didn’t need the pandemic for that. If you’re honest with yourself, his story just doesn’t feel right, does it. It feels forced.

What these conspiracy fans all typically tend to forget is that the overlords they complain about rely on their subjects for their existence. Without the one, the other ceases to exist. Its the same relationship flaw Fuellmich suffers. Without you, without your support, he ceases to exist. 

- Advertisement -

Reporting a Healthcare Professional

In the U.S: The American Medical Association lists a very clear and distinct set of guidelines or Code of Conduct for doctors and healthcare professionals. If you feel this code has been breached, or if you have concerns relating to your healthcare provider, you need to get in touch with your state’s licensing board. You can find contact details for all the state boards on this page, The Federation of State Medical Boards

Medwatch is a brand of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and they have teeth with which to bite. You can access their online form for registering a complaint by following this link. At the moment, they’re really hot on fake covid-19 products and treatments and the individuals and websites selling the products or spreading misinformation.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is an excellent place to register your covid related complaints as they have a task team set up specifically to protect consumers against charlatans and quacks. Fill in their online form or call their dedicated National Helpline number. They are also the place to report price gouging and hoarding.

In the U.K: Direct your complaints to the GMC (General Medical Council) via their website, which also makes allowance for Welsh speakers.

The article lives hereReiner Fuellmich Fact Checked and Exposed as a Covid Conspiracy Con
Dr Robert Turner
Robert is a Founder of Medika Life. He is a published author and owner of Cre8tive Digital Media. He lives between the Philippines and the UK. and is an outspoken advocate for human rights. Access to basic healthcare and eradicating racial and gender bias in medicine are key motivators behind the Medika website and reflect Robert's passion for accessible medical care globally.

More from this Author


  1. History will tell. Dr Robert Turner’s opinion on the matter, and the reasons for it will either be scrutinised in detail, or lauded accordingly.

  2. I think your arguments about Reiner Fuellmich‘s misrepresentation of PCR tests are at the very least disingenuous. Whether or not your claim about the intended technical reasons for PCR tests are correct the fact is that this is not how the tests were used by governments and the media. There is an explicit and implicit mesh of consequences for any who disregard regulations or the threats issued by governments in regards to PCR results. That is the reality about the meaning of a COVID PCR test result. I’m genuinely confused as to why you pick this point of contention if as your bio states you are an “outspoken advocate for human rights”. It may be that you have stated this elsewhere, but I assume you agree that PCR results have and are being used to violate human rights. Do you agree?

    Did you create a trap for yourself by using the following argument?

    “The very fact that Fuellmich is consorting with Yeadon and regards his opinion as valuable is in my honest opinion enough reason to immediately discredit anything else Fuellmich has to say, but we’ll persist, should we?”

    You cannot avoid contracting yourself when using this type argument. The trap will close on you when there is only one point on which you and Fuellimch agree. This might explain why you went sideways on the human rights issue with PCR tests.

    The following is a contradictory statement from your article where I think your trap caught you again.

    “Yeadon did work for Pfizer. He was vice president and chief scientific officer for Pfizer’s United Kingdom-based allergy and respiratory unit until that unit shut down in 2011, not Pfizer’s actual VP as Fuellmich insinuates”

    You can have a get-out-of-fallacy-trap-free card if you can explain how a “vice president” is different from an “actual VP”

    It is not a problem to dislike someone, but your emotions about Fuellimch got in the way this time. For now, I recommend not writing “debunk” articles about him in the future. I don’t think he is worth your time.

  3. Dear Doctor. Is it true that Dr Fauci or his department funded research into gain of function corona viruses at the Wuhan lab? No explanation required. Just a yes or no. Many thanks. Also, is Ivermectin now recognised in the effective treatment of covid 19 and variants?

  4. Much as I appreciate the education about PCR, and agree with much of what you say, I think you would help your case if you were a little less snarky and sneering about other peoples genuinely held opinions, even if they might be wrong. That kind of attitude just comes over as the slightly insecure geeky kid at school who got bullied a lot and could only get his own back by being cleverer than everybody else and rubbing their face in it. Very irritating.
    The man clearly has concerns about how ‘science’ is being used to influence, inappropriately in his opinion, public policy, and how that might relate to a much wider agenda. Give the man respect, show him factually whet he is wrong, and engage in debate. Stop all the posturing.

  5. Afternoon Dr Turner,
    Your comment below regarding Ivermectin:

    “It would undoubtedly have saved lives so it’s very frustrating but these companies are above the law and our reliance on them leaves us compromised. It is what it is”

    I find very concerning, that you feel that big pharma are above the law and that: IT IS WHAT IT IS, we should all accept this!
    Don’t you feel that nobody is above the law and normal people have the right to state this?

    • Stephen it doesn’t simply apply to big Pharma but all large corporates who engage in lobbying. They overcome legal hurdles by simply having the laws changed, moving the goalposts. I published an article recently pointing much of this out. Let me justify my comment further.

      It is what it is means that trying to change enshrined systems is an almost hopeless endeavour and beyond your reach or mine. By all means call out transgressions, but if you’re setting about doing this, make sure your arguments are based in fact, scientific or otherwise. Not fanciful fictions and misinterpretation.

      We are regularly accused of being in the pocket of Pharma. Even occasionally of being in their employ. Nothing could be further from the truth. We simply try and keep the public honestly appraised.

    • Misinterpretation and manipulation of statements. Everyone agrees with Kary’s statement. PCR won’t tell you if someone is ill. It is a test to detect viral material, depending on which test is used. It’s able to accurately distinguish between Coronavirus and influenza. It’s not a doctor, it’s a test.

  6. Dear dr Turner,
    allow me to pick out one of your comments on Reiner Füllmich that, in my opinion, needs to be nuanced. As you write

    “Vienna and Fuellmich’s big game-changer
    Following a complaint lodged by the FPÖ (Austrian populist party), the administrative tribunal of Vienna ruled on 24 March that PCR tests could not be considered as a reliable way of diagnosing an illness or the level of contagiousness of an individual. Our response. Way to go for stating the obvious.”,

    you do not seem to be aware that, as far as my personal experience goes, at least in Belgium, Germany and Austria the PCR-test is being promoted as an extremely accurate tool in order to detect a Sarscov2-infection and that every person with a positive test-result, NO MATTER THE SYMPTOMS is “a case”.
    For months these tests have been used massively, mostly on people with no symptoms at all, except the one instilled by their daily TV-news: worry ( to say the least). The number of these “cases” has been actively used ( daily, time and again for months on end) to pour yet more unrest ( I am indeed using a euphemism again here) among the population.
    I can assure you that the mainstream media, with the vast majority of the medical world silently standing by, equal a positive testresult with yet another patient, without any regard of symptomacy and do all they can – extremely successfully in Belgium, I can assure you – to silence those doctors that point out, EXACTLY AS YOU DO IN YOUR FACT-CHECK, that a PCR-test should be used as a diagnostic tool that may or may not confirm a presumed diagnosis and not as a laboratory judge whose verdict decides whether we can have a coffee at a café terrace or not ( let alone whether kids can go to school or not).
    You state the obvious indeed, as does Rainer Füllmich. You’d have a hard time making your point in the Belgian and most of the German and Austrian press.
    Yours sincerly

    • Hello Lode

      Thank you for comment.
      People seem to be really struggling with this issue. It’s actually relatively simple. Testing “positive” suggests one of the following scenarios.

      A. A false positive. These aren’t actually that common despite what you’ve been led to believe. People can also test negative when they’re actually infected or have had the infection. So let’s ignore this for the purposes of this argument.

      B. The person is actively infected and is exhibiting symptoms.

      C. The person is asymptomatic. Infected but doesn’t exhibit fever etc.

      D. The person has recovered from an infection and is now well, but the infection was recent enough, say within the last six months for the test to detect material.

      So this is why we test. Everyone. Are those figures accurate. No, probably not, but it’s the best tool we have to keep track of the pandemic as it moves through our communities.

      What governments choose to do with this data is determined by each individual country and people with issues relating to this should be addressing their politicians and stop trying to blame science.

      It isn’t at fault here and neither is the test.

  7. Richard, I enjoyed your spirited debunk. I too have reservations about his angle of attack (PCR). However I do think there is a conspiracy because of “surgisphere”, the covering of HCL and IVM to project a prepared VAX programme. You may have any explanation but these omissions in treatments defeat me.

    • Hi Paul.

      Okay so to the other two painful issues. First off, HC hasn’t actually shown much benefit. It’s widely admitted now even though quacks like America’s Frontline Doctors insist it does. They sell it, so surprise surprise. It may help one patient in a hundred but it comes with serious risk.

      Ivermectin has really annoyed me and I agree 100% that the drug has been suppressed by Pharma. The manufacturers have even gone to lengths to try and discredit their own drug as being unsafe for human consumption. Crazy and transparently obvious PR by Merck. I’ve actually written articles supportive of Ivermectin and sadly in most Western countries it has been widely ignored.

      It would undoubtedly have saved lives so it’s very frustrating but these companies are above the law and our reliance on them leaves us compromised. It is what it is.

      Fuellmich’s strategy is doomed to failure. It’s based on clear misinterpretations of science and these aren’t little finance houses.

  8. Hi, I’ve been looking for info regarding this man’s previous career. His success against Deutchebank give him credibility in the eyes of his adherents for instance. I’d like to know more about his role in these high profile litigations but haven’t found much. Anyone have links to resources?

  9. The PCR is useless because I cannot say that what it found is actually an ongoing infection. It could be an old infection that already was defeated, or even another coronavirus. So is that useful? Of course not.

    If you say that “the scientists used the PCR to detect coronarivus infected animals” in laboratory, that does not mean they work in a real world environment.

    • Daniel you still don’t understand the purpose of the PCR. It’s not a magical tool for diagnosis. No one has EVER claimed this accept people trying to discredit it. It is very specific if used correctly and CAN determine which strain of Coronavirus it’s detected. It can also distinguish between influenza and coronaviruses. Fact. We use these tests to monitor the spread of the virus in the population and as an aid to diagnosis, not to establish if an individual is infectious.

      Can the tests be wrong? Absolutely. No medical test is foolproof and every doctor and scientist is aware of this which is why a second and sometimes a third test is requested. The whole PCR controversy is a non starter but people insist on pursuing it as its all they have to clutch to.

      The pandemic happened, we managed it terribly and we’ll learn. It’s everyone and no one’s fault at the same time, but it is most certainly not a global conspiracy. That is is utter nonsense.

Leave a response to this article


Exposing the Dark World of Predatory Health

Predatory Health is the greatest challenge modern healthcare faces. Practitioners of predatory health are undermining trust in vaccines and proven medical practices.


Nobel-Winning Virologist David Baltimore Eats Wuhan Crow

Nicholas Wade suggested the Wuhan laboratory was a possible source for the coronavirus. He used David Baltimore smoking gun comment to validate his theory.

Now Medika has you covered for online health retailers. Our Rotten Retailer list will warn you about scammers, dangerous products, and "potential cures" that could kill you. This list is part of Medika's MOBILIZE™ HEALTH project to encourage consumer awareness and safety. Click on the image above to view or contribute to our list of Rotten Retailers



%d bloggers like this: