The documentary Schweizer Coronadenkmal (recheck.ch, 2025) by Serena Tinari and Katharine Riva raises a question no Swiss mainstream outlet has asked: who controlled the research agenda during COVID-19 — and who was simultaneously distributing the money to fund it?
One answer is Marcel Egger.
Two Chairs, One Person#
From 2017 to 2024/25, Marcel Egger was a member of the Research Council of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) — the body that awards research grants and selects which projects receive public funding in Switzerland. From April 2020, he simultaneously served as Chair of the Swiss COVID-19 Science Task Force (NCS-TF) — the body that provided scientific recommendations to the Federal Council on pandemic policy.
This is documented. Evidenced on snf.ch, ispm.unibe.ch, and ncs-tf.ch. Not disputed.
The question is not: did Egger do anything illegal? The question is: what does it mean structurally when the same person simultaneously determines which research gets funded — and which scientific guidelines emerge from it?
The Structural Problem#
Whoever controls the research funding decides which questions get researched in the first place. Whoever chairs the task force decides which findings count as the basis for policy recommendations.
When both roles rest with one person, no ill intent is required — a selection mechanism emerges on its own. Funded research tends to ask questions that stay within the existing consensus. Guidelines built on funded research reinforce that consensus. The loop is self-referential and needs no external steering to produce systematic bias.
This is not a conspiracy theory. It is the sociology of science.
What the Film Shows#
Schweizer Coronadenkmal (recheck.ch, 2025)
Serena Tinari and Katharine Riva built Schweizer Coronadenkmal as an inventory — one that needs no editorializing, because the structure speaks for itself. Who awards research grants, who sets the guidelines, who gets heard by the Federal Council: that is a list of names, not a theory.
Egger’s dual role is an example of a system that does not require bad faith to produce one-sidedness. It only requires concentration in the right place: the same person on the funding committee and on the policy advisory committee.
The question no mainstream journalist has asked: would an SNF Research Council without a Task Force mandate have made different funding decisions — and would different voices have reached the Federal Council as a result?
We don’t know. That is the problem.
Sources: snf.ch (Research Council mandates), ispm.unibe.ch (Egger profile), ncs-tf.ch (Task Force composition).
