The Nazi regime was undoubtedly one of the most evil tyrannies in modern history and was directly responsible for the persecution and genocide of millions of Jews, Slavs, gypsies, homosexuals and disabled people. The atrocities of the Third Reich have been well-documented and the vast majority of people today are well aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. However, that's not to say that Nazi Germany wasn't also responsible for a number of impressive breakthroughs in the fields of science, medicine and engineering. This is not to excuse their appalling crimes, but nevertheless, it seems paradoxical that the Fascists who killed and maimed so many innocents have also advanced so many fields of human endeavour. Just look at how many Nazi scientists were cleared of war crimes and recruited by the United States in Operation Paperclip after the end of the war. Unfortunately for many people, Dr Otto Warburg was not one of them.
Since Nazi Germany was an autocracy, scientific research was dictated by the often-mercurial whims of Adolf Hitler, and one of the Führer's biggest fears was cancer. Indeed, Hitler himself was something of a health freak throughout his life. He was vegetarian and was ardently against smoking; not to mention the Nazis produced a nicotine-free brand of tobacco in the 1930s after Eberhard Schairer and Erich Schöniger observed that lung cancer patients were also likely to be heavy smokers. After the removal of a laryngeal polyp, Hitler became paranoid about anything cancer-related.
[caption id="attachment_15017" align="aligncenter" width="478"]
Credit: Getty[/caption]
As Robert Proctor, author of the medical history book The Nazi War on Cancer states, "The irony is that in this murderous regime, you also find the world’s most progressive anticancer policy. This has been totally ignored ... Health researchers feel uncomfortable citing Nazi sources, and historians are wary of stressing anything that appears 'positive' about the period. What has to be recognised is that good science can travel with bad politics."
Nowhere is this more apparent than the case of scientist Dr Otto Warburg, a pioneer in the field of physiology and cancer research, who even managed to win the Nobel prize in 1931 as a result of his research. Yet, when a shadow fell over Germany in the wake of the Great Depression and fascism seized the nation, Warburg was forced to collaborate with the Nazi party in order to preserve his research. For Warburg had loftier ambitions than most men. He was less concerned with the horrors of the second world war, and the institutional abuses of minorities perpetrated under Hitler's orders.
In his mind, the only war worth fighting was against disease, against malignant cells and inoperable tumours, which would kill far more people than the Nazi party ever would. Many of his peers treated his complicity with scorn, and yet despite once being one of the most famous researchers of his day, he is practically unknown among the former Allied powers, even though his contributions to cancer research were so vital. In another time, living outside a dictatorship, maybe Warburg could have cured cancer.
[caption id="attachment_15020" align="aligncenter" width="464"]
Credit: Getty[/caption]
Dr Otto Warburg was born in 1883 on the border between Germany and Switzerland and was a quarter Jewish on his father's side. As a young man he studied chemistry under the famous Emil Fischer, and later served in World War I in a cavalry unit, where he was awarded the Iron Cross for his feats of bravery. Although he did not deny his Jewish heritage, he was intensely patriotic. He was also a friend and contemporary of Albert Einstein, who convinced him to academia after armistice day.
By 1918, Warburg had been appointed professor at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Biology and by 1931 he was named Director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Cell Physiology. It was after the latter appointment that he first began his research into cancerous cells by investigating the metabolism of tumours and the respiration of cells, discovering that cancerous cells appeared to thrive in a low-alkaline, low-oxygen environment. He was awarded the Nobel prize for this discovery. But he was still dissatisfied: he had not yet discovered the primary cause of cancerous cells. What unknown factor caused them to divide wrongly? Warburg could not rest until the question was settled.
Warburg was known for being a very private man, sarcastic and biting yet also warm and caring. He could tax his research assistants to no end, kept a distance from his extended family, and had no contact with the Jewish community. He was a lifelong bachelor, and there were many rumours about the nature of his sexuality. Many people believed him to be a closeted gay man.
He was apolitical, and appeared to favour no ideology other than that which would further his research. There is no doubt that he was a Nazi affiliate, but he could be critical of the Nazi regime, and at one point his heretical comments even resulted a temporary dismissal from his academic post. He was reinstated not long after, despite Hitler considering his work far too critical.
[[heroimage||http://cdn.junglecreations.com/wp/junglecms/2017/09/rsz_gettyimages-56461967-min.jpg||image]]
Indeed, Warburg was treated with an unusual amount of lenience by the authorities. Herman Göering demanded that he be reclassified as a quarter-Jewish, instead of half by the typical standards. He was protected from persecution thanks to his connections with the Reichwehr and Viktor Brack and Phillip Bouhler, two high-ranking SS and government operatives.
Furthermore, Warburg's sisters survived by marrying high-status Aryans and by converting to Christianity. Warburg’s biographer, the Nobel Laureate Hans Krebs, later wrote: "Warburg’s willingness to let his Jewish blood be diluted in this way, and thus to make a pact with the Nazis, incensed colleagues outside Germany."
By the year 1944, Warburg felt that he was close to a cure for cancer. He developed the Warburg hypothesis, a theory which remains as controversial as it is important in the field of cancer research. In it, Warburg used his Nobel prize-winning theory to advance his concept of a primary cause of cancer in cells. Warburg believed that oxygen starvation in cells was the key to everything.
If a cell was deprived of oxygen then it would rely on fermentation instead of respiration in order to gain energy. The cells would depend on glycolysis to achieve this, and thus would produce a more acidic environment as a result of the fermentation process; the pace of cancer cell growth and division is quicker than the production of non-cancerous oxygen-supplying blood vessels, and thus cancer soon overtakes the body and causes a number of adverse health effects ... or so Warburg claimed.
[caption id="attachment_15022" align="aligncenter" width="800"]
Credit: Getty[/caption]
His study of "hydrogen transfer of cell enzymes" earned him a third Nobel nomination, but the publication was highly politicised, and a number of fellow-scientists were content to shun him and his contributions as a result of his political affiliations. It could be argued that Warburg was only working with the Nazis out of necessity, and to preserve work that could save millions of lives.
But the fact that he was offered a position working for the Rockefeller Institute during WWII, which he himself turned down, seems to contradict this. After the end of the war, he applied to work in the United States, but was refused a Visa and struggled to gain exposure for his work during the war. Warburg was convinced that he was right about a complete theory of cancer and that the increasing rates of cancer diagnosis in the western world were down to pollution and exposure to toxins.
Warburg died of a pulmonary embolism in 1970 and did not live to see his theory confirmed. Today, a number of other prime causes of cancer have been advanced besides sugar fermentation, although nearly 18,000 publications have been published on the Warburg effect in the period 2000 to 2015 and thousands of publications claim to have determined its functions or causes. Yet we still have approximately 8 million people suffer from cancer each year.
[caption id="attachment_15023" align="aligncenter" width="800"]
Credit: Getty[/caption]
The moral of this story is that science can never truly be apolitical. Like it or not, science is dictated by political aims, and the ideology and morality of the scientist has a direct effect on the public reception of their findings. As Warburg himself once wrote: "The prevention of cancer will come there is no doubt, for man wishes to survive. But how long prevention will be avoided depends on how long the prophets of agnosticism will succeed in inhibiting the application of scientific knowledge in the cancer field. In the meantime, millions of men must die of cancer unnecessarily."
Warburg's complicity with the Nazis directly impeded the results of his inquiries. Who knows what he might have achieved otherwise? But we cannot remain complacent to the health crisis facing us.Please donate to Cancer Research UK to end the pain of countless people around the world.
When you hear someone called an 'anti-Semite' your mind immediately jumps to Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich - and there's nothing wrong with that. It's worth knowing however that anti-Semitism runs a lot deeper than the history textbooks may have you believe. Hating Jewish people is not new, nor is it confined to ideological lunatics like Herr Hitler.Anti-Semitism comes in many forms and guises. René König, a German sociologist, mentions social antisemitism, economic antisemitism, religious antisemitism, and political antisemitism as key examples. The differing nature of each of these manifestations means that some people may slip under the radar, and go unchallenged.Here are 10 pretty famous people from world history that you probably didn't know where anti-Semitic.1. Charles LindberghKnown for piloting his plane "Spirit of Saint Louis" in a non-stop flight from New York to Paris in 1927, Charles Lindbergh was also famously a white supremacist. How did you get into it all? Nazi Germany of course! He developed an affinity for the Nazi party while visiting Germany in the 30s, and became a supporter of eugenics (a set of beliefs and practices that aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population).2. Roald DahlSad to see Dahl's name on here, as he is one of my favourite childhood authors. In a 1983 interview Dahl was quoted as saying: "There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews. I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn't just pick on them for no reason. I mean, if you and I were in a line moving towards what we knew were gas chambers, I’d rather have a go at taking one of the guards with me; but they [the Jews] were always submissive.”3. Coco ChanelFamously a Nazi collaborator when the Germans invaded France, Coco Chanel also held close ties to anti-Semitic illustrator Paul Iribe, and helped fund his publications. Still want that perfume for your birthday? Thought not.4. Henry FordDespite being the inventor of the motor car, Henry Ford let himself down by being a vocal anti-Semite, and blamed Jewish people for World War I due to their influence in the financial industry. I don't think you can get away with that Henry...5. Winston ChurchillWhile I'll always have a soft spot for the greatest Briton to have ever lived, anti-semitism is a black mark on his copybook. Churchill openly associated Jewish people with Bolshevik conspiracies, and once said they were partly to blame for anti-Semitism. Harsh much?were partly to blame for anti-Semitism. Harsh much?[sc:MPU1]6. Walt DisneyCreator of countless brilliant films and godfather to an amazing movie legacy, Walt Disney was constantly accused of being an anti-semite throughout his career. Say what you want about his films; prior to the start of World War II, Disney was known for his support of some pro-Nazi organisations. The jury is still out on this one for me.7. Franklin D. RooseveltSurely an American President wasn't an anti-semite? Never one to openly criticise Jewish people, privately it was a different story. The president expressed condescending views toward Jews, with some historians believing it contributed to the weak response from the United States toward Jewish refugees.8. Fyodor DostoyevskyDespite expressing blatant anti-Semitic views in his diaries, the Russian author advocated for equal protection of Jews under Tsarists Russian law (an unpopular stance in Russia). So where did he actually sit on Jewish people? Critics have claimed that Dostoyevsky was a product of his time; meaning he made antisemitic remarks, but was not entirely comfortable with these views.9. Ezra PoundOne of history's most acclaimed poets, Ezra Pound had a dark anti-Semitic past. During World War II the American was vocal in scapegoating Jews as the cause of both World Wars. Thankfully though he realised the error of his ways and renounced his beliefs in later life. Smart move Ezra.10. T.S. EliotFamous for epic poems such as "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and "The Waste Land", T.S. Eliot expressed anti-Semitic views in a number of his works. In a 1933 lecture on cultural homogeneity he wrote, “What is still more important is unity of religious background, and reasons of race and religion combine to make any large number of free-thinking Jews undesirable.”While I'd definitely heard some of these names labelled as anti-Semitic (such as Walt Disney, cheers Family Guy...), I wasn't prepared for all of them. I mean, who'd have thought that an American President could be labelled anti-Jewish? The mind boggles. You just like think that if they'd have been living in a more enlightened age then they'd have made a different choice.
Anyone who has visited Auschwitz will remember the feeling of passing through the gates, knowing that over a million people walked to their death in the exact same spot. Reading the history books is one thing, but seeing the physical evidence of the largest genocide in history is hard to put into words; seeing the human hair that was used by the Nazis to produce socks, the small worn out children’s shoes, rusty pocket watches and a multitude of other personal belongings that are the only physical representatives left that people were once there. Yet, something that is even more difficult to comprehend is why Holocaust deniers claim that it never happened.
How did denial of the Holocaust start?
Rebuttal of the Holocaust finds its roots in the Nazi Party. Hitler, entrenched in the knowledge that his operation would warrant an unfavourable reaction, is said to have covered up the killings, ordering that the extermination not be spoken of in German documentation or public statements. Instead, heavily euphemistic language was used when speaking of the hushed operation, as well the careful cremation of victims’ bodies.For those who wonder why people choose to deny the Holocaust, it’s hard to say whether they're adamant Nazi supporters, brainwashed, or if they can honestly look themselves in the eye in the morning and assert that it never happened. Most historians determine that post-war Holocaust denial goes back to Paul Rassinier, a European writer who came to the defence of the Nazi regime after the war, asserting that the gas chambers were nothing but an invention of a "Zionist establishment." Astonishingly, Rassinier himself had been a victim of the Hitler’s regime, arrested by the Gestapo in 1943 for smuggling Jewish refugees over the Franco-Swiss border. Having never seen the gas chambers, he used his credibility as a survivor to disparage reports of the chambers, describing concentration camp literature as “a collection of contradictory pieces of ill natured gossip”.After the first specks of Holocaust denial became visible, it was inevitable that more would follow. The following years saw the uprising of widespread Holocaust denial with people like Heinz Roth, David Irving and Ahmad Hussein arguing against the mass murder of roughly six million people. But the question we have to ask is, how? How can anyone possibly deny the unshakeable evidence that narrates the worst homicide in history?
Different groups of deniers
There are countless forms of Holocaust denial, but most variations tend to be based on four principles; that the number killed by the Nazis amounts to a few hundred thousand rather than six million, that the gas chambers were not used to kill and that Hitler merely intended to deport Jews to Eastern Europe and that the event was a myth invented by Allied propaganda during the war and has been sustained since by Jews who use it for political and financial gain.The most important thing to remember about these people is that, true to their name, they are in denial. Although they prefer to call themselves "revisionists", it's crucial to distinguish them from historians who challenge the past with a methodologist approach. Rather than looking at the facts in front of them and connecting them to reality, Holocaust deniers ask questions like “is there a written order from Hitler telling his people to exterminate?” and “why didn’t the Jews fight back?” They demand autopsy reports concluding that Jewish prisoners died from gassing and sneer at the many thousands of testimonies from prisoners, guards and allied soldiers, not to mention the secret wiretaps made of German prisoners of war where they freely discussed the extermination policy.
Over the years it became clear that they could be categorised into three camps. The first group strongly believe that the “Final Solution” was faked by both the Allies and the Jews in order to gain sympathy; calling death camp witnesses “insane” or “liars,” they claim that the Nuremberg testimonies were extracted under torture and are therefore unreliable. The second sub-category group simply claims that the Holocaust was not genocide, but merely a forced labour program with the ultimate aim of excluding all Jews from Germany. Finally, the third group of Holocaust denial asserts that any evidence found is weak and death counts are “over-exaggerated”. A novice sceptic may be deceived by the attention to detail in any of the groups’ claims, but look closely and you’ll see that they simply aren’t true.
Holocaust deniers often base their theories on so-called “scientific evidence”. In an effort to disprove the use of gas chambers, they cite the lack of Prussian Blue on the gas chamber walls and insist the chambers were used for nothing but delousing. They ignore the solid scientific fact that it takes a much lower concentration of HCN to kill a warm-blooded creature over a cold-blooded insect.
The object that Zyklon B couldn’t have been used for killing in the gas chambers because it is explosive and was near to furnaces. They turn a blind eye to the fact that the concentration of HCN necessary to cause death is nearly 200 times lower than necessary to cause an explosion.
They affirm that the Nazis couldn’t have possibly gotten rid of the ashes of the dead, estimated at one shoebox per person. They pay no attention to testimonies from concentration camp staff stating that remnants of human bodies were used as fertiliser and thrown into nearby rivers and swaps, as well as the belongings that have undergone forensic examination.They use the killing of six million people as a weapon against Israel, stating the Jews used the “hoax” to bring about the country. They forget the fact that Israel was not a direct result of the Holocaust and most of the institutions of a Jewish state were in place when Hitler rose to power. They ask why the eyewitnesses to the gas chambers not killed. They disregard the fact that there are few of these survivors and that they are merely lucky, having escaped through the rebellion of October 1944 or at the very end when the camps were liberated.They question the reliability of Anne Frank’s annex diary, among other war texts, claiming that the text written by the 13-year-old year is simply a forgery, forcing the Anne Frank Museum to investigate the authenticity. They turn a blind eye to the forensic document analysis and handwriting comparison that took place, bringing researchers to the conclusion that the young girl did in fact write the diary.
Why is Holocaust denial relevant today?
So, if Holocaust denial is nothing but false claims, made by a deluded group of individuals, why are we still giving them the time of day? The awful truth is that Holocaust denial is alive and well right at this very moment. As hard as it is to believe, as we speak there is a whole new generation of Holocaust sceptics being inspired. Recently, David Irving, who has dismissed Auschwitz as “Disneyland”, stated that he regularly gets messages from people as young as 14 who have watched his Youtube videos. His claims highlight the fact that the rise of the internet has allowed these claims to resurface and thrive.
The dangers of the online world were called to public attention again in 2016 when it was revealed that the top ranking Google search site for “did the Holocaust happen?” was Stormfront, a white supremacist Neo-Nazi site. In addition, many have speculated over the Trump administration’s flirtations with Holocaust denial, with deputy assistant secretary Teresa Manning praising an ally of the group. Not to mention, amid the recent Charlottesville rallies, it came to light that nearly 10 per cent of Americans believe it’s fine to be a Neo-Nazi. The truth is that, more than 70 years later, Holocaust denial is damningly relevant to our society and it is something that is not going away anytime soon. But by allowing people to even entertain the notion, we disparage the innocent people who suffered; Holocaust denial is an insult to all sufferers and their surviving relatives, and by letting it continue, we risk the resurgence of Nazi ideology. The Nazis are the very people who wanted us to believe the mass murder never happened and by accepting those who do so, we lose our compass that directs us to a better future. No matter what warped way they deny the events of the 1940s, the fact of the matter is that the Holocaust happened. However, those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it and we're overdue in reasserting the truth in a world full of lies.
Featured illustration by Egarcigu
Elon Musk has once again landed himself in controversy, this time for sharing a post that appeared to downplay the role of infamous dictators in the deaths of millions.
Credit: Jared Siskin / Getty
The billionaire, who remains highly active on Twitter (now X), retweeted a message suggesting that Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong were not directly responsible for the mass killings under their regimes.
The post read: “Stalin, Mao, and Hitler didn’t murder millions of people. Their public sector workers did.”
Credit: X
Outrage on Social Media
Musk’s decision to amplify the message sparked immediate backlash, with many condemning him for what they saw as an attempt to shift blame away from the leaders behind some of history’s most devastating atrocities.
One Twitter user wrote, “Is this the—seriously disturbed and flawed—reasoning why Elon thinks Hitler is so cool? Sieg Heil, Elon—enjoy your burning swasticars…”
Another added, “Elon Musk is a disgusting POS. I hate him & I hope he starts receiving what he deserves.”
A third person commented, “On. Their. Orders. These men were dictators. They ORDERED massacres. You can add Putin to that list.”
Credit: Jared Siskin / Getty
Union Leader Slams Musk
Musk’s tweet also drew criticism from prominent figures, including Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
Saunders responded directly on X, saying, “America’s public service workers—our nurses, teachers, firefighters, librarians—chose making our communities safe, healthy, and strong over getting rich. They are not, as the world’s richest man implies, genocidal murderers.”
He continued, “Elon Musk and the billionaires in this administration have no idea what real people go through every day. That’s why he’s so willing to take a chainsaw to people’s jobs, Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare.”
Previous Controversies
This latest controversy follows previous accusations that Musk made a Nazi salute during Donald Trump’s inauguration. In response to those claims, Musk posted a series of jokes and puns referencing Nazi leaders, which only fueled further criticism.
Musk has not yet addressed the backlash over his retweet. However, given his history of engaging with critics online, many are expecting him to weigh in sooner rather than later.
A former Nazi death camp worker dubbed the "Secretary of Evil" has spoken out for the first time during the trial for her role in 10,000 deaths in the camp during World War II.
Irmgard Furchner, 97, is the first woman in decades to be tried within Germany for crimes related to the Nazi era, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Prosecutors have stated this could be one of the last trials related to crimes committed during the holocaust, due to the aging population of those who were around during the atrocities of the Holocaust, between 1941 and 1945.
Furchner was a teenager when the alleged crimes took place, and has therefore been tried at a juvenile court.
Speaking about the events for the first time in 14 months, the 97-year-old said: "I'm sorry about everything that happened. I regret that I was in Stutthof at the time."
Stutthof was a concentration camp established in Gdansk, Poland, by the Nazis in 1939. Over 100,000 people were transported there. The camp was swept by a typhus outbreak in 1942 and again in 1944, as conditions were brutal, per the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
The prisoners - largely consisting of both non-Jewish and Jewish Poles - who were deemed too weak to work would be killed in the gas chambers, or by lethal injection. More than 60,000 people lost their lives in the camp.
Furchner's role within the camp was as a secretary, working within the command block. During her trial, she alleged that due to the nature of her work, she was unaware of the murderous regime, per the Daily Mail.
It was later revealed that her husband was an SS officer during the second world war, and in 1954 he testified he was aware of what took place during the Holocaust.
Her role was to take dictation of the orders from the commander of the camp - Paul Werner Hoppe - and handle his correspondence.
Survivors from Stutthof testified during the trial and gave harrowing accounts of the horrors that took place there.
Speaking via video link, Risa Silbert, 93, explained: "We had cannibalism in the camp. People were hungry and they cut up the corpses and they wanted to take out the liver." She added that her father and brother were murdered by the Nazis in 1941, while she and her mother were placed in a ghetto before being transported to the camp.
She also stated that the prisoners would be forced out of bed at 4:00 or 5:00 AM each morning, and those unable to stand still were whipped by the SS guards.
Furchner's prosecutors claim she was complicit in 10,000 deaths during her time at Stutthof, and want the judge to hand down a two-year suspended sentence. Her lawyers claim the evidence presented "had not shown beyond doubt" that she had full knowledge of the atrocities.
The 97-year-old attempted to flee from her retirement home as the trial was due to start in September 2021, but law enforcement caught her several hours later in Hamburg.
The verdict as to whether she is deemed to be complicit with the killings will be announced on December 20.
Joe Rogan has sparked backlash online after sharing a controversial video that compares Covid vaccines to the Holocaust.
The podcast host shared a video on Instagram of himself making the comparison, and in it, he discusses the concept of "freedom" and how the US represents this ideal, Indy100 reports.
As he discusses freedom in relation to Covid vaccines, Rogan plays footage that adds a whole new context to what he is saying.
Watch the controversial video below:
Rogan makes his point by showing footage of Jewish ghettos in 1940s Europe, Adolf Hitler, the SS, and a concentration camp in Majdanek, Poland, which Indy100 reports was the site of the mass murder of at least 78,000 people.
"As soon as you give politicians power, any kind of power that didn’t exist previously, if they can figure out a way to force you into carrying something that lets you enter businesses or lets you do this or lets businesses open, historically, they are not gonna give that power up," Rogan says.
"They find new reasons to use it. We have to protect those freedoms at all cost, whether you agree with people's choices or not, because it is the foundation that this country was founded on: freedom."
Rogan doesn't explicitly mention the Holocaust or Nazis, however, the images coupled with the context or what he is saying make the metaphor clear.
The video sparked instantaneous backslash on social media and people were quick to take to Twitter to express their distaste.
Reacting to the footage, one Twitter user wrote: "This may be the most ignorant and insensitive thing he has ever done. And that's a big ask!!"
A second added: "This isn't about freedom. Freedom has limits, we don't all need to do what ever we want. Why ? Because we all live here together, and we want different things as individuals. 'Freedom' doesn't mean putting others in danger or make them sick, knowingly or not. [sic]"
A third wrote: "Jesuschrist joe rogan, holocaust analogies ten seconds in [sic]."
A fourth questioned: "Can one of Joe's previous, intelligent guests come back and talk some sense into him?"
Indy100 reports that Rogan has been open about his anti-Covid vaccine stance and even encouraged "healthy 21-year-olds" to not get vaccinated, despite the jabs being recommended by CDC.
.jpg_I4Ebof?tr=cr-0.338.2730.3068,f-webp,q-70,w-100)
.webp_SmgFsc?tr=cr-292.0.1244.952,f-webp,q-70,w-100)
.webp_QQJmGo?tr=cr-345.0.1535.1190,f-webp,q-70,w-100)
.jpg_I4Ebof?tr=cr-0.338.2730.3068,f-webp,q-70,w-1024)
.webp_SmgFsc?tr=cr-292.0.1244.952,f-webp,q-70,w-1024)
.webp_QQJmGo?tr=cr-345.0.1535.1190,f-webp,q-70,w-1024)
