There is another important thing to understand about the "concept" of viruses - as opposed to actual viruses.
The "concept of viruses" and of viruses as causes of disease - is a viral concept.
We naturally think of diseases we don't understand as being caused by malevolent spirits. Spirits are invisible, so malevolent spirits are invisible. The more we look, the less we see. But they still attack us because they are "bad."
We understand scurvy and arsenic poisoning - so we know how to prevent them and to cure them. We know that Vitamin C and arsenic are not malevolent, they have no "spirits of life," no intentions, therefore no intentions to harm. Scurvy, although mysterious for decades and often referred to as an evil spirit...is now understood. However, we might notice if we look closely, that today - no authoritative medical reference documents a "cure" for scurvy. The "disease" is still treated like an evil spirit, not an understood concept.
But we cannot find "a non malevolent cause" of the common cold, influenza, or measles. Modern medicine, with it's "one disease, one cure" model cannot comprehend the reality of a disease with multiple causes. There must be a single cause.
So we blame a malevolent spirit, and we give it a name, and a classification - virus - thus we have the influenza virus, the measles virus, many common cold viruses and more.
Once we name the cause as a "virus" the path to a solution, to preventatives and cures becomes clear: avoid the virus to prevent the disease; eliminate the virus to cure.
The viral theory gains momentum as we learn to use it effectively. The theory is passed from doctor to doctor, from researcher to researcher. It, the theory, becomes viral. It gets passed to patients, and to drug manufacturers, who can manufacture and market "virus preventatives": vaccines.
The viral theory has other factors in its favor, other factors that make the theory "viral." Viruses are invisible. This enhances their mystical malevolent powers, like an evil spirit that cannot be seen. Viruses exist, in theory, on the border between life and death. They are not alive, but they invade and reproduce by eating our cells. They are a perfect scapegoat. And the perfect tool for fearmongering. Mystical powers are enhanced by the fact that we cannot see them, cannot touch them, cannot kill them. We might see shadowy images with our powerful microscopes, but in real life, they are as invisible as malevolent spirits.
The "virus theory" produces sales. Sales of virus preventatives, vaccines, have powerful marketing advantages over medicines. The product can be sold to anyone - even people who are not sick. In addition, they are not expected to work every time. There are a myriad of excuses for vaccine failure - and all of them can be leveraged to sell more vaccines - boosters. Sales of virus preventatives are viral.
And, of course, "Preventatives sell better than cures."
Cures for virus diseases can only be sold when the buyer is sick. Their powers are easily discounted - the patient would have got better anyway. Most people who are sick with "virus causes" recover quickly.
It's much more (sales) effective to sell a preventative product when no disease is present. The concept of using vaccines to prevent disease is "viral." It succeeds by success (ful sales). Who can argue with sales success?
But, life, and the virus theory is not so simple.
To quote Taleb, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
This goes both ways.
1. The absence of evidence of a "virus" is not evidence that the virus does not exist.
2. The absence of evidence that the disease has another cause does not prove that other causes do not exist.
However, the "virus theories" are viral. They feed themselves and grow over time. They make money, so they gain powerful support from those who pursue money over health.
On the other hand, "there are no viruses" theories are not viral. There are many "viruses don't exist" theories - but they are not profitable. In addition, having no single "cause" proponents are required to jump from one disease to another, with whack-a-mole efforts to eliminate hundreds of proposed viral causes and variants for a growing number of diseases labelled viral.
Is there a solution to this question? Yes there is. And the solution is quietly avoided by the "viral theorists." It is a solution barely studied - except in a few clear cases like polio, by "there is no virus" theorists.
Cure.
If the viral theory of a disease is correct, then the disease can be cured by a treatment that eliminates the virus from the afflicted.
If the viral theory is not correct, then the disease can be cured by actions that do not address the virus.
Both of these cures must be discounted, dismissed out of hand, if the virus theory is to be maintained.
Do Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or similar products cure viral diseases? These concepts support the virus theory, but cures of viral diseases hurt sales of vaccines - so they must be discounted. Discounting such cures is not difficult. Because the virus is invisible, it's impossible to prove the drug removed it. In addition, most, perhaps all deaths from viral diseases are not, in viral medical theory, caused by the virus, most are a result of our reaction to the virus or clearly a result of other factors that were present before the "viral" infection.
Does baking soda cure the common cold? There are many claims and much evidence that it does - but such cures disprove the viral cause, and therefore must be dismissed.
Does detoxification cure viral diseases? Medically, detoxification is not, cannot be an approved cure. An approved cure is a product. Detoxification is not a product, although there are detoxification products, they are not allowed to claim to be cured. When detoxification cures a disease like polio - the disease goes way. Viral diseases, like the common cold, influenza, and measles "go away" in most cases, so detoxification cannot be proven to cure.
In short, all cures of viral diseases must be ignored (most cases are cured easily), or dismissed (there is no scientific evidence that...) or aggressively attacked ("you are not a horse"), to ensure that the viral theory can be maintained.
Cures of viral diseases are anti-interesting. Discussion and analysis must be avoided because they threaten the paradigm.
As a result, all viral theories of disease are viral and all anti-viral theories are non-viral.
Yes, a very good observation. And many of these are ongoing. Some people are still covering their mouth and nose, washing their hands with poisons, and stabbing each other to prevent the evil from entering, and avoiding others who fail to participate in those rites, even after they themselves have been diagnosed as infected, in some cases several times without harm.
There is another important thing to understand about the "concept" of viruses - as opposed to actual viruses.
The "concept of viruses" and of viruses as causes of disease - is a viral concept.
We naturally think of diseases we don't understand as being caused by malevolent spirits. Spirits are invisible, so malevolent spirits are invisible. The more we look, the less we see. But they still attack us because they are "bad."
We understand scurvy and arsenic poisoning - so we know how to prevent them and to cure them. We know that Vitamin C and arsenic are not malevolent, they have no "spirits of life," no intentions, therefore no intentions to harm. Scurvy, although mysterious for decades and often referred to as an evil spirit...is now understood. However, we might notice if we look closely, that today - no authoritative medical reference documents a "cure" for scurvy. The "disease" is still treated like an evil spirit, not an understood concept.
But we cannot find "a non malevolent cause" of the common cold, influenza, or measles. Modern medicine, with it's "one disease, one cure" model cannot comprehend the reality of a disease with multiple causes. There must be a single cause.
So we blame a malevolent spirit, and we give it a name, and a classification - virus - thus we have the influenza virus, the measles virus, many common cold viruses and more.
Once we name the cause as a "virus" the path to a solution, to preventatives and cures becomes clear: avoid the virus to prevent the disease; eliminate the virus to cure.
The viral theory gains momentum as we learn to use it effectively. The theory is passed from doctor to doctor, from researcher to researcher. It, the theory, becomes viral. It gets passed to patients, and to drug manufacturers, who can manufacture and market "virus preventatives": vaccines.
The viral theory has other factors in its favor, other factors that make the theory "viral." Viruses are invisible. This enhances their mystical malevolent powers, like an evil spirit that cannot be seen. Viruses exist, in theory, on the border between life and death. They are not alive, but they invade and reproduce by eating our cells. They are a perfect scapegoat. And the perfect tool for fearmongering. Mystical powers are enhanced by the fact that we cannot see them, cannot touch them, cannot kill them. We might see shadowy images with our powerful microscopes, but in real life, they are as invisible as malevolent spirits.
The "virus theory" produces sales. Sales of virus preventatives, vaccines, have powerful marketing advantages over medicines. The product can be sold to anyone - even people who are not sick. In addition, they are not expected to work every time. There are a myriad of excuses for vaccine failure - and all of them can be leveraged to sell more vaccines - boosters. Sales of virus preventatives are viral.
And, of course, "Preventatives sell better than cures."
Cures for virus diseases can only be sold when the buyer is sick. Their powers are easily discounted - the patient would have got better anyway. Most people who are sick with "virus causes" recover quickly.
It's much more (sales) effective to sell a preventative product when no disease is present. The concept of using vaccines to prevent disease is "viral." It succeeds by success (ful sales). Who can argue with sales success?
But, life, and the virus theory is not so simple.
To quote Taleb, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
This goes both ways.
1. The absence of evidence of a "virus" is not evidence that the virus does not exist.
2. The absence of evidence that the disease has another cause does not prove that other causes do not exist.
However, the "virus theories" are viral. They feed themselves and grow over time. They make money, so they gain powerful support from those who pursue money over health.
On the other hand, "there are no viruses" theories are not viral. There are many "viruses don't exist" theories - but they are not profitable. In addition, having no single "cause" proponents are required to jump from one disease to another, with whack-a-mole efforts to eliminate hundreds of proposed viral causes and variants for a growing number of diseases labelled viral.
Is there a solution to this question? Yes there is. And the solution is quietly avoided by the "viral theorists." It is a solution barely studied - except in a few clear cases like polio, by "there is no virus" theorists.
Cure.
If the viral theory of a disease is correct, then the disease can be cured by a treatment that eliminates the virus from the afflicted.
If the viral theory is not correct, then the disease can be cured by actions that do not address the virus.
Both of these cures must be discounted, dismissed out of hand, if the virus theory is to be maintained.
Do Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or similar products cure viral diseases? These concepts support the virus theory, but cures of viral diseases hurt sales of vaccines - so they must be discounted. Discounting such cures is not difficult. Because the virus is invisible, it's impossible to prove the drug removed it. In addition, most, perhaps all deaths from viral diseases are not, in viral medical theory, caused by the virus, most are a result of our reaction to the virus or clearly a result of other factors that were present before the "viral" infection.
Does baking soda cure the common cold? There are many claims and much evidence that it does - but such cures disprove the viral cause, and therefore must be dismissed.
Does detoxification cure viral diseases? Medically, detoxification is not, cannot be an approved cure. An approved cure is a product. Detoxification is not a product, although there are detoxification products, they are not allowed to claim to be cured. When detoxification cures a disease like polio - the disease goes way. Viral diseases, like the common cold, influenza, and measles "go away" in most cases, so detoxification cannot be proven to cure.
In short, all cures of viral diseases must be ignored (most cases are cured easily), or dismissed (there is no scientific evidence that...) or aggressively attacked ("you are not a horse"), to ensure that the viral theory can be maintained.
Cures of viral diseases are anti-interesting. Discussion and analysis must be avoided because they threaten the paradigm.
As a result, all viral theories of disease are viral and all anti-viral theories are non-viral.
We definitely witnessed superstition , ghost hunting , exorcism ritual and cult like rites performed with enthusiasm during the Convid operation .
Yes, a very good observation. And many of these are ongoing. Some people are still covering their mouth and nose, washing their hands with poisons, and stabbing each other to prevent the evil from entering, and avoiding others who fail to participate in those rites, even after they themselves have been diagnosed as infected, in some cases several times without harm.