Together, they oversaw the implementation of the COVID-19 regulations at Goethe University Frankfurt during the pandemic: René Hummerich and Heike Körber, from the Departments of Occupational Safety and Biological Safety respectively, look back on an extremely intensive, at times burdensome, but also highly productive and insightful period.
UniReport: Dr. Hummerich, Dr. Körber, five years on, when you now look back on the pandemic: was there a particular moment that stood out for you?
René Hummerich: I still vividly recall the beginning of the pandemic: At the turn of the year 2019/2020, the coronavirus outbreak still seemed very far away; it entered our living rooms only via the TV screens and other media. By the end of January, it became clear that we would also be affected – and not just marginally – even though we didn’t yet know exactly what this would mean for our lives. It was only the first lockdown, instituted in Germany on March 22, and the frightening images from Bergamo, Italy, and other countries that made both the scope and the impact become somewhat clear.
Heike Körber: I especially remember a feeling of helplessness in spring 2020: neither the transmission routes nor the environmental stability of SARS-CoV-2 were yet fully understood, risk groups had not yet been defined, and effective protective measures were also still under development. The mere act of discussing whether and how masks could help also resulted in a lot of uncertainty. At that time, the Coronavirus Update podcast by Berlin-based virologist Christian Drosten, broadcast almost daily from late February 2020 onwards, gave me a lot of hope and helped keep me grounded in scientific facts. Later, I was personally very moved by cases of severe infection and by people who struggled to cope with the contact restrictions and quarantine.
Both of you saw your workload increase exponentially during the pandemic period.
Hummerich: It was like a three-year work tunnel that we, and my deputy Ms. Sylvia Richter, were sucked into. After Germany declared a pandemic situation of national significance, the university’s executive board set up a dedicated crisis management team. That’s when it really began: endless phone calls, countless emails – until the national and state regulations were finally issued.
Körber: Countless COVID-19 regulations were enacted during that time, many of which changed weekly – some even daily. We had to process them and prepare the information for the university leadership; the resulting directives were then posted on the university website. Apart from that, there were also countless inquiries to handle.
Hummerich: When we weren’t working, we were at home following the latest news on TV or the internet, trying to stay updated on both infection rates and the latest political measures. Despite a consistently heavy workload – in excess of 70 hours a week – what kept us motivated was the swift and successful implementation of protective measures to safeguard university members and maintain academic and research operations.
In your view, what went well and what didn’t?
Körber: With its well-functioning crisis team, Goethe University was able to respond very quickly to new regulatory requirements. Thanks to the enormous commitment of everyone involved, social distancing and hygiene concepts for essential on-campus activities – especially in the natural sciences, medicine, and for exams – were implemented surprisingly fast. Technical solutions, such as online meetings and work-from-home arrangements, were rapidly made available by the university’s computing center. The more flexible working hours are something we continue to benefit from today. One thing that didn’t work so well was that due to technical constraints, we were unable to notify all university staff by email about changes in real time. The only thing we could do was to ask people to check the website, which meant a lot of information either got lost or didn’t reach its recipients in time. This gave rise to a very high number of consultations and discussions.
Did either of you personally contract COVID-19?
Hummerich: I caught it in 2022, just as the restrictions were being relaxed. I probably got infected on a crowded, poorly ventilated bus on my way home from work, surrounded by people who were already partying at full force again in my hometown of Darmstadt. It was a time when people were getting very careless, even when it came to wearing masks in public spaces, and that although it was clear the pandemic wasn’t over yet.
Körber: I got infected relatively late – in January 2024, at a demonstration against right-wing extremism. I spent quite some time outside in a large crowd, and thought I had been cautious enough. I ended up being ill for three weeks and experienced lingering taste irritations afterward.
Do you believe the closures of educational institutions were necessary?
Hummerich: At the start of the pandemic, lacking any precise knowledge of transmission routes and with inadequate protective measures and resources (such as insufficient masks and tests), closures and lockdowns were a necessity to protect the population, including university staff and students.
Later, once hygiene concepts, protective gear, and testing were in place, closures weren’t strictly necessary anymore. As for the closure of schools: from today’s perspective, the assumption at the time that children were pandemic drivers cannot be upheld. It would be appropriate to critically review school closures and other measures for future pandemics and incorporate those lessons into new pandemic plans and action catalogs.
Körber: Based on the knowledge available at the time, I do understand the decision to close schools. People were reminded of the Spanish flu, an early 20th-century pandemic that claimed millions of lives, and one also caused by an airborne pathogen. In this case, school closures had helped reduce infection rates – although of course living conditions were very different.
Outgoing federal health minister Karl Lauterbach later said that a general vaccination mandate (had it been adopted by parliament) would have been a mistake. What do you think?
Hummerich: Here it’s important to differentiate: the facility-specific vaccination mandate, introduced in March 2022 for medical and care institutions, aimed to better protect patients and people in need of care from COVID-19. At the time, politicians and experts saw it as the only way to protect vulnerable groups.
Whether a general vaccination mandate would have impacted the pandemic’s course is pure speculation. If a general mandate were to be considered in a future pandemic, it would require thorough scientific – and, more importantly, societal – evaluation. Such a measure must be broadly accepted by the majority of the population; otherwise, severe societal upheaval could result.
Körber: Ultimately, these questions boil down to the kind of society we want to live in. Should vulnerable groups be protected through collective action – like hygiene measures, reducing contact, quarantine, and vaccination – or should we prioritize the “freedom” of the majority, accepting that vulnerable individuals may have to isolate themselves, fall ill, or even die? I’d like to highlight the so-called prevention paradox (“There is no glory in prevention”, Geoffrey Rose, epidemiologist), which posits that measures whose success is not immediately visible or only partially provable are often questioned afterward. On the whole, however, it must be said that Germany managed the pandemic very well.
Questions: Dirk Frank
Dr. René Hummerich heads the Occupational Safety Department at Goethe University Frankfurt. Dr. Heike Körber heads the Department of Biological Safety at Goethe University Frankfurt.
