Hessian Reply to Dr. Hamer

Hessian Provincial Investigative Board for Health Matters

Adickesallee 36

60322 Franfurt am Main

Processor: Mr. Schäfer

Dr. med. Ryke Geerd Hamer

Apartado de Correos 209

E-29120 Alhaurin el Grande

Date: August 10, 2007

Reinstatement of your Approbation as Physician

Your objection of 08.04.07, received on 16.04.07 in reply to the refusal notice of 15.03.07

Dear Dr. Hamer,

Concerning your above-named objection, which we received within the stipulated period, the following decision has been reached:

Your objection has been rejected

This notice carries a fee in the amount of EUR 150.00 which has been established according to the attached administrative cost notification. Your costs will not be reimbursed.

Substantiation:

On 10.04.1962, you received your Approbation as physician.

The District Administration of Koblenz revoked your Approbation in writing on 08.04.1986.

The revocation was founded on your delusional conviction that your scientific discoveries were sacrosanct and you were therefore deemed to be no longer capable of aligning your medical conduct with established medical practices. Your legal efforts with respect to the revocation remained fruitless.

Your subsequent application for reinstatement of your Approbation in 1992 was rejected with the notice dated 12.01.1993. Your objection as well as your legal proceedings against the revocation proved both unsuccessful.

With the resolution of 13.12.04, the Hessian Administrative Court (VGH) rejected the application of your appeal against the verdict of the Administrative Court of Frankfurt/Main dated 22.10.03 - 12 E S91/03 (2).

You justify your renewed application for the reinstatement of your Approbation, dated 05.01.07, with the argument that new aspects have to be taken into account.

First you refer to a judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court (1 BVR 347/98) concerning the freedom of therapeutic treatment, and you also point to the paper of Rabbi Prof. Dr. Joav Merrick of the Ben Gurion University Beer-Sheva in Israel who confirms that "at least the first two Biological Natural Laws have general acceptance".

Furthermore, you argue that the reasoning of the verdict of the Administrative Court of Frankfurt, which states that it is not guaranteed that you would integrate all possibilities of the standard medical practice into your therapeutic considerations, is an allegation and a legal lie.

With the notice dated 15.03.07, the application for reinstatement of your Approbation was refused.

It was essentially stated that in your case there exists an inadmissibility for the practice of medicine based on § 3 Para. 1st sentence 1 No. 2 BÄO and that this consequently justifies the withholding of the Approbation. The verdict resulting from the investigation of your reliability came to the conclusion that, because of your comments during the course of the previously-mentioned Administrative Court Proceedings, you cannot guarantee that you would treat your patients according to the established state-of-the art medicine.

This namely implies that among other things a physician has to regard the basic principles and developments of medical science. That is why it is essential that you are willing to treat your patients based on standard academic medical knowledge and not to rule out these therapeutic methods in advance.

The following is the essence of your protest of 08.04.07

As justification for your dissent you essentially repeat and enlarge upon your arguments from the Application Procedures. Then you rely on the attached expert opinion of Prof. Ulrich Niemitz dated 18.03.2004 which in your opinion substantiates ”German New Medicine".

With regard to further extensive written pleadings concerning the appeal process we refer to the dossier.

II.

I am unable to follow your deliberations.

Nothing has changed since the last review by the Approbation Office and the Administrative Court. You still cannot offer a guarantee that you will treat your patients in line with the established state-of-the-art-medicine, i.e., that your professional conduct will be in compliance with the whole spectrum of medical knowledge. Thus, there is still inadmissibility on your part regarding the practice of medicine with the consequence that the reinstatement of your Approbation is rejected.

With respect to diagnosis and therapy of cancer patients, you continue to accord absolute preference to the teachings of "German New Medicine" and you dismiss off-hand other basic approaches and methods of treatment. It is therefore not certain that your patients would have access to a comprehensive treatment.

You are quoting the expert opinion written by Prof. Niemitz’, who identifies standard medicine as a "collection of hypotheses", hence ”unscientific“, and, as far as anyone can judge, as ”incorrect“. This makes your statement that it is a hypothetical lie when someone claims that you would, in case the Approbation would be returned to you, never consider any standard medical therapy, a convenient lip service. This assessment is also supported by numerous writings in which it is claimed that the treatment of cancer patients by academically trained physicians is equivalent to mass murder, and that, just in Germany alone, millions of patients are killed because of that.

This clearly shows that you maintain an irreconcilable attitude concerning other therapeutic methods. Your position is further exemplified by your claim of the exclusivity of ”German New Medicine“. This is not compatible with the deontological code (BÄO) German physicians are required to follow. It is therefore not a question of the correctness of your theses, but of the alignment of your (anticipated) medical conduct in all medical situations - and this is where, according to the served assessment, you are lacking.

As a consequence, the notice of 15.03.2007 is legitimate, and you protested in vain.

Administrative Costs Notice

The administrative costs, as established, are as follows:

Administration fee as per § 4 III S. 2 HvwKestG

In the presently valid denomination: 150.00 EUR

Total of Administrative costs: 150.00 EUR

Reference number: 07 0642 600 48 00008

The payment is to be made within 4 weeks following receipt of this notice using the enclosed remittance form and made out to the designated beneficiary. Should the payment not be made within the period stipulated, I advise you that collection proceedings will be initiated against you by the Hessian Competence Centre (HCC), and this will incur additional costs.

Information regarding legal remedies

Within 30 days after receipt of this notice, you may raise objections, either in writing or verbally, against this refusal notice of the Hessian State Investigative Board for Health Matters dated 15.03.07 in the form of the present refusal notice as well as against the present payment notice, to the office of the:

Administrative Court Frankfurt am Main,

Adalbertstraße 18

60486 Frankfurt am Main

The petitioner must present his grievance to:

The Director of the Hessian State Investigative Board for Health Matters

Adickesallee 36, 60322 Frankfurt am Main

And he must also state the subject matter of the grievance which should contain an application.

To be added are: Facts and evidence serving as substantiation, the contested notice and the dissenting notice, as original or a copy.

With best regards,

By order,

Schäfer

To download as a PDF file - click here.