Case 40, Last case (test case) at Kiel University Women’s Hospital, 3/2/82.

Present: Dr. Hamer

1.) Name:

Prof. Gertrud Savelsberg, born. 3.2.1899

2.) Diagnosis:

Collum-Ca III (highly advanced)

3.) Histology:

Squamous cell Ca, Stad. III


End of Nov. 81 bleeding (noticeable. Man. time),

5.) Time period until diagnosis:

20 to 22 months, pre happened: Until then, the heaviest blow of destiny

6.)Conflict Summarization (in keywords):

The patient has had only one genuine sorrow in her life, and that was the grief over the death of the man she calls her husband and lover, but to whom she was never married: a professor of economics and world economy, like herself. With him, as a young student, she did her doctorate, habilitated, and worked with him as a lecturer for 15 years. It was a very hot love, platonic only about the very last, but otherwise highly sexual.

The first stroke of fate was the death of this professor in Nov. 1971. It was the worst blow in her life up to that time. In March 1973, she had, she thinks, come to terms with the death of her “husband” to some extent. The patient was not examined at that time. However, there could not have been a collum-ca at that time because there were no sexual conflict symptoms. Her “husband” was 78 years old at that time. It also seems to have been more of a blow of destiny felt by the patient since she had nothing to reproach herself for. However, it seems to have been the most severe blow of destiny up to that time for the patient. But a conflict event does not seem to have taken place at that time.

In January 80, the worst conflict event ever suffered by the patient took place: Professor Mettke, her “husband,” who had died without children, unmarried, had appointed the patient, his “wife,” as executor of his will. He had bequeathed his extensive collection of pictures to the Husum Museum. And although he had been dead for almost ten years, the matter had only been partially settled. For the purpose of appreciation and understanding of his personality, his correspondence was also to be made available to the Husum Museum. In December 79, all of the professor’s letters were sent to the patient so that she could choose which letters were suitable for the Husum Museum and which were not. Among them were all her love letters from almost 60 years ago, which the widow, who had been secretly married, now had to remind her of everything again, of the most beautiful time of her life.

She remembers very well that she left the letters delivered in thick bundles, lying around for a few days until the New Year 1980, because she did not dare to do so. Then she opened these bundles of letters and said: “Doctor, it was the worst thing I have ever experienced in my life, far worse than the death of my husband. I cried not for weeks, but for many months, from morning to night, crying over and over again, stunned. The morning I read through the first – my own – love letter from 1922, I was struck by lightning. All the things I reminded him of in my letter were alive again before my inner eye. For except for the “very last thing,” which was not allowed for officially unmarried people at that time, we naturally gave each other everything that one could possibly give to each other as lovers and then secretly married. I experienced all this again quite clearly – and at the same time it hit me like a blow of a club that my beloved was dead! Terrible! Horrible! And yet I couldn’t get away from it, it had caught me and wouldn’t let me go.”

7.) Psyche:

Differentiated, introverted, very intelligent personality, somewhat slowed down by age. However, a typical scientist and even perfectionist, one of the rare people, has a rich but completely internalized emotional life. Only one (her husband) or no one (after his death) can take part.

8.) Social Anamnesis:

Unmarried professor emeritus of economics, no children, lives in seclusion, has nephews and nieces, but only a very loose connection to them. She is considered a friendly oddball.

9.) Illnesses:

1953 Abrasion because of myoma
1974 Tooth suppuration
1977 shingles, painful and prolonged
otherwise never been seriously ill.

10.)Conflict Summarization (detailed): Preface:

This case had a particular dynamic, the character of a “test case” with the help of the representative of conventional medicine, Prof. Semm in Kiel, believed to lead the whole Hamer system ad absurdum. Afterward, as I learned later, Hamer was to be “fired” from the clinic in disgrace as a proven nonsensical heretic against orthodox medicine.

Prof. Semm in Kiel had read about a letter addressed to me by Prof. Holzmann, a medical employee of the Thieme publishing house. They did not want to publish my submitted article about “THE IRON RULE OF CANCER,” but first wanted to hear what Prof. Semm had to say about it, i.e., whether Hamer was right. “For God’s sake,” he said to me later, “I will not make enemies of all conventional physicians and certify to you that you are right! If I had known from the beginning that this was a habilitation and what complications could come up, you would never have been allowed to examine only one case in the local clinic!

The following day, after learning of the “Dr. Halzmann letter,” Prof. Semm visited his “private rooms.” An 83-year-old professor emeritus of economics suffered from cervical carcinoma III (stage 3), not married, virgin (virgo intacta), living alone.

He asked her during the visit if she had any contact with a friend or acquaintance in the last two years. The old lady answered truthfully in the negative and said that she lived alone and had no quarrels or conflicts with anyone, nor did she have any friends or acquaintances, all of whom she had known had died more than ten years ago.

Prof. Semm then said to his assistant Dr. Grillo outside the door: “Then Hamer should now examine or question the old lady. He will probably not be able to find a conflict. Then we tell him that it’s all nonsense and garbage what he’s doing there and we expel him from the clinic. Then, thank God, we finally got rid of him in a very elegant way. They wait for him in the ward room and then tell him to come to me immediately, that I have something to tell him.”

When I came to the ward an hour later, my colleague Grillo said to me – too kindly – “Oh, Mr. Hamer, today you may examine a private patient, the boss has expressly allowed it, even requested it, do you want to?”
Hamer: “Oh, I’d be happy to, private patients also have a soul like health insurance patients and in principle the same kind of conflict events and conflicts, what should be different? What’s wrong with the lady?”

Grillo: “Collum-Ca III, but you are not allowed to look at the medical chart, the boss has forbidden that.”

Hamer: “That is not necessary, but the histological diagnosis seems to be unquestionable, if it is even more advanced.”

Grillo: “That it is, undoubtedly. But now we want to specify already beforehand exactly what they postulate for this case according to the “IRON RULE OF CANCER.”

Hamer: “Agreed, that is correct.”

Grillo: “So, when must the lady have had, as you say, the worst conflict of her life?”

Hamer: “When did she notice the first symptoms?”

Grillo: “At the end of November 81.”

Hamer: “And did she not notice it until stage III?”

Grillo: “Yes.”

Hamer: “If the patient is young – it would be somewhat unusual – the conflict should be looked for in May or June 80, depending on how far advanced the process is. But if the patient is older or even old, one must date the time of the conflict event to the beginning of 80, because in an old person such processes run somewhat more slowly.”

Grillo: “All right, so let’s say early 1980, January or February. And as a Collum-Ca, she must have had a sexual conflict event, right?”

Hamer: “Exactly right.”

Grillo: “Good, I’ll make a note of that. How long must the conflict have lasted?”

Hamer: “In all probability the entire period up to the discovery of the disease at the end of November 81. For the time after that I can make no further statement.”

Grillo: “Yes, that’s fine, I’ve noted it all down very carefully. Mr. Hamer, now my colleague and I wish you good luck with your examination. Because the lady is an 83-year-old, already richly cerebral-sclerotic professor emeritus, single, living alone, has no boyfriend or acquaintance, virgo intacta, – and has also had no conflict in the last 2 years, we have already assured ourselves of that.”

Hamer: “I have noticed from the beginning that you want to trick me, but I laugh at you, the lawfulness inherent in the system laughs at you, you cannot trick them. On the contrary, I even politely invite you to go with me to the old lady, so that you don’t have to believe in witchcraft later.”

Grillo: “No, that’s not necessary, we can always ask the old lady later if anything is unclear. We’d rather wait for you here, because we have something to tell you from the boss afterwards.”

Hamer: “Well I already know what. But there I also laugh about it. Because your boss seems to have understood just as little of it as you yourself, namely that this is not a fad of Hamer’s, which can be manipulated at will, but an “iron law,” which Hamer can influence just as little as you! But the histological diagnosis is really correct?”

Grillo: “Yes, word of honor.”

Hamer: “Good, but then let’s put something in writing right away beforehand, namely: that an 83-year-old patient should have had the worst conflict she’s ever had in her life about 20 to 22 months ago, we can probably assume the probability to be about 1:1000?”

Grillo: “Agreed, is very unlikely, is noted.”

Hamer: “2. That an 83-year-old female patient – virgo intacta – should have a sexual conflict at that age, can probably only be assumed with a probability of 1:1000 at most?”

Grillo: “Correct, rather even lower, quasi zero.”

Hamer: “3. That a conflict should last so long in such an old woman has at most a probability of 1:100 rather even less?”

Grillo: “Also agreed, that is very unlikely. All noted.”

Hamer: “It is clear to you that the probability that all 3 criteria of such improbability should meet now still coincidentally all as it were in a point, is a probability of less than 1:10 000 000. To make calculations beyond that is nonsense. So, out of 10,000,000 female patients of this age, you would be able to find at most “by chance” one single one where this would be true “by chance,” is that right?”

Grillo: “Exactly right, so practically none.”

Hamer: “If now nevertheless – which is quite improbable, since you have already inquired about it – against all expectation the patient should have had a conflict event of sexual kind at the postulated time, which would also have kept exactly the postulated duration, then you personally would also kindly certify to me in writing that my system, respectively THE IRON RULE OF CANCER is true with a probability of 10 000 000:1, even more probable, if one takes into account that you have supposedly already convinced yourself of the opposite before”.

Grillo: “I can promise that with a clear conscience, since that won’t happen anyway. 100,000,000 times as likely is that we will subsequently give you the message from the boss, which you already seem to suspect.”

Hamer: “So let’s wait and see!”

Questioning of the patient:

The questioning of the patient was very strenuous for both of us. But this was not because the patient was cerebral-sclerotic, as the colleagues suspected. But because she was very introverted and closed, distrustful and anxious not to reveal her inner life, which under her somewhat brittle shell was capable of extremely rich and differentiated sensations, feelings, and an unusually strong commitment, to any stranger!

I immediately understood that this patient, despite her advanced age, grasped every last nuance of my questions and, with increasing confidence in my person, she answered them precisely and with nuance.

The story is quickly told: In 1922, as a young student in economics in Aachen, the patient met a young lecturer with whom she earned her doctorate, later habilitated, and with whom she worked at the university in Aachen until 1939. In 1939 she was appointed to Kiel. There she worked with another professor at the Institute for World Economics. She also got along well with the professor in Kiel, who died in 1969 at a ripe old age.

Patient: “It was very sad but not to be changed, for me also not so bad, because Professor M. lived in Aachen?”

Hamer: “When did Professor M. die in Aachen?”

Patient: “In 1971 at the age of 78, that was very bad for me.”

Hamer: “Was it the worst stroke of destiny for you up to that time?”

Patient: (agitated) “Yes, the worst, it was quite terrible for me.”

Hamer: “You met your colleague as a young student, he was an assistant or young lecturer, only a few years older than you. Isn’t that right, Professor, he was more than just a colleague to you?”

Patient: (very excited) “Doctor, you ask me as if you could read my soul like an open book, yet I have never told a single word about it to anyone. Yes, it is true, he was my husband! It was a beautiful secret between us. And we were faithful to each other, almost 50 years until his death. At that time, after the 1st World War, one was not allowed to do everything and leave everything like today. We gave each other as secret spouses everything that spouses can give each other, only we were not allowed to have children. And we could not marry, poor as we were.

But we loved each other immensely, even later over the great distance, wrote to each other every day, talking on the phone, and frequently visited each other. It was beautiful between us, much more beautiful than most married people. His death turned me from a happy wife to a lonely old widow.”

Hamer: “I believe you, Professor, it must have been the worst blow of your life. How long did it take you to come to terms a little with your husband’s death, to let the very worst pain subside?”

Patient: “A good 1 year, then I got over the worst. Since then I have kept to myself and withdrawn.”

Hamer: “Professor, I think I can read your soul like an open book. Everything you have told me is true, but you have concealed the most important thing from me! I don’t know whether this Professor M., your husband, has risen from his grave again, but 1 ½ to 2 years ago something quite terrible must have happened with regard to his person, a conflict event such as you have never experienced so badly and over which you have not yet got over!”

Patient: (with eyes widened in shock, pale and trembling all over, straightening up bolt upright in bed as I have never seen a patient tremble before): “Doctor, how do you know that, for God’s sake! I have never spoken to a human being about it, never has a human being seen me cry! Yes, it is true! It’s only too true even, it was the worst thing I’ve ever experienced in my whole life, beautiful and terrible and cruel. And you’re right, I still think of nothing else, incessantly day and night, when I can’t sleep, which is very often.”

Hamer: “Professor, it is good that you and I are talking about this. Hopefully, we will have the opportunity to do so more often. Once you can talk about it with someone who understands you, it’s only half as bad. You’ll see.”

And then the patient tells. She was able to date the conflict event precisely to the day, indeed to the hour. Her husband had an extensive collection of pictures – also many self-painted pictures – all of which he had bequeathed to the museum in Husum. Since he was also “unmarried” and had no children, the patient had been appointed executrix of his will. The pictures had already come to Husum even after his death. But to honor his personality, his essential correspondence, publications, manuscripts, etc., should also be given to the museum. At the end of Dec. 79, large bundles of tied-up letters were sent to the patient’s apartment: among other things, her own love letters, which her husband had neatly stored in order.

The patient clearly remembers that she left all the bundles of letters lying around for a few days. Then, however, she was magically drawn – she still remembers the exact hour – to her own love letters from almost 60 years ago, and she says: “Doctor, I remember exactly how I opened the first bundle, they were the very first love letters from me to my husband. I was paralyzed! It was beautiful and ghastly, happy and bleak at the same time, simply awful!

Doctor, not for weeks, but for many months, day and night, I just cried, cried, cried! Cruel, cruel! And yet I could not get away from the letters; they attracted me magically: Everything came to life again before my inner eye in the months from January 3, 1980. Each letter reminded me of all the tenderness we had exchanged, of the most beautiful and carefree time of my life. I was so happy then and gave him everything that a lover can give her idolatrously beloved husband. And I experienced everything anew. I literally felt all the tenderness again, as if my husband were still alive.

And then when I had to think that my beloved was already dead after all, I had to cry, cry, just cry all the time … that has hardly changed until today.”

I comforted the patient as best I could and promised to come and talk to her every day. Then, deeply ashamed, I slipped out of the room. The ardent, self-consuming love of this 83-year-old patient would have been a credit to any Juliet. I admired the old lady like a heroine and at the same time felt pity for this wonderful lonely person. I thought about how I could get permission from the hospital director to help this old lady.

Outside, my colleagues were waiting for me, grinning maliciously.

Grillo: “Well, it took you a long time, you must have squeezed out all the corners of your soul in vain?”

Hamer: “God knows I’m not in the mood for joking. I will tell you …”
After finishing my “anamnesis,” the colleagues were very quiet.

Grillo: “Hm, such a coincidence, is there such a thing at all with such an old person, strange, strange. It must have been a very stupid coincidence! And exactly on the month and exactly a sexual conflict content, of course, the very first love, if that is not sexual! And until today this still continues? But, Mr. Hamer, this can be actually only a gigantic coincidence, otherwise everything would be wrong which we have made so far in the medicine! I just can’t believe that!”

Hamer: “Mr. Grillo, we had noted that chance would have a probability of 1:10 000 000 and less. You wanted to certify me now kindly in writing that my system has a probability of 10 000 000:1. Please do so! I will have the boss countersign it. The boss himself has determined the test case. It is now no more than the cheapest duty of colleagues to certify to me what the truth is: that my system and THE IRON RULE OF CANCER contains an absolute regularity which, after reproducible verification on now 500 cases. Must be regarded as proven according to the causal-logical rules of thought of conventional medicine.”

Grillo: “I must say that is striking. The case seems as clear as day even now. It’s strange that the patient didn’t tell the boss or us about it. We asked her if she had had any conflicts with anyone in the last few years.”

Hamer: “She has not had any conflicts with anyone, not even with the dearly beloved dead person, her husband. The discrepancy between first heavenly love and death, togetherness and loneliness was her conflict, a Julia at 83! It takes a little kindness as a doctor to understand another poor person, Mr. Grillo! What else did you have to tell me from the boss?”

Grillo: “No, that’s not applicable now, which means I don’t know what the boss is going to do now. I just can’t believe it.”

Hamer: “Mr. Grillo, then we can now only continue to talk theologically, about faith in general and about their unbelief in particular. But in the field of natural scientific medicine, which is oriented according to causal-logical categories of thought, you are no longer an interlocutor for me.”

Professor Semm learned about this terrible “flop” the same evening. Since it concerned a professor, one could also not say that the Hamer had wheedled her or had asked something into her. Because which professor would let ask something “into herself.” The whole story became even more sinister for Prof. Semm. That’s why he summoned me to his office the following day and said: be that as it may, there was nothing but trouble in the matter for him, and I had to disappear immediately or stop with my investigations. He would not certify me anything at all, and if I had hundreds of such cases, it would only bring trouble!

I told him: Prof. Semm, I don’t think you are aware of what you are doing. You could not bear the responsibility for what you are doing if you knew what you were doing. But if Hamer is right with his system – and the probability is infinitely high – then you will make a mockery of yourself for all physicians of this world.

11. Course:

The conflict is highly active. The patient says she dreams about it almost every night. It is simply the center of her life around which her thoughts revolve.

12th comment:

In my 500 cases so far, I have only once seen a person so devastated but also so grateful that for the first time, she had found a person with whom she could “talk it out.”

13. prognosis:

Cannot yet be assessed. The patient belongs to a qualified psychotherapeutic treatment.

14. suggested therapy:

Only psychotherapy by a very qualified psychotherapist.
Immobilization of the ovaries by radium or X-ray irradiation should not be used in this case since it can be assumed that the ovaries are hormonally immobilized at this age anyway.


Both the HAMER SYNDROME (dramatic, datable to the hour, completely spatially and socially isolated) and the two remaining criteria of the IRON RULE OF CANCER are precisely fulfilled. In this case, a probability of about 10 000 000:1 had been calculated before. So only among 10 million cases with Collum-Ca and at the age of 83 years, there could have been “by chance” such a unity with the IRON RULE OF CANCER.

Dr. med. Mag. theol. Ryke Geerd Hamer
Camino Urique 69, partido de Fahala
E-29120 Alhaurin el Grande
Tel: 0034 952 595910
Fax: 0034 952 491697

October 21, 2001

P.S.: At that time, I did not know to distinguish between right- and left-handedness. This patient must have been left-handed. She suffered this conflict as a territorial conflict with sexual content on the left side of the brain.

But I have not seen a territorial conflict of this severity in an 83-year-old lady (Collum-Ca stage III) among more than 30 000 cases.
I assure on my honor that this protocol is written on the same day when I was expelled from the Kiel University Women’s Clinic because of the coherence of the IRON RULE. I had interned there. Not a word is added; not a word is omitted. It was the “favorite case” of my friend, Count Antoine D’Oncieu, who, as he says, has read through “Case 40” at least 100 times.

Since the old lady should probably be dead soon 20 years, the mention of her name comes to her honor and is not a violation of medical secrecy.

Dr. Hamer

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Subscribe to my newsletter to be regularly informed about experience reports, events and other current topics.

I do not send spam and do not pass on your data!