Virologists operate on the level of ancient superstitions. Snatching at imaginary dybbuk's that can only be seen through the lens of super techno-marvel machines that are pre-programmed to point towards motes and mites as evidence of the haunting.
Perpetuating this primitive superstition that submicroscopic invisible particles floating through the air make people sick requires loads of jargon, increasingly obscure language to mystify the quackery. Not to mention a non-stop multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns and legions of hired priests in white robes who claim the mantle of "science" to hoodwink the unsuspecting public. Pretty amazing to think people believe this voodoo garbage. Excellent means of social control.
And then they create magical elixirs (that in a sane world would be understood for what they are- industrial poisons) that allegedly exorcise these submicroscopic demons from the mortal body. Makes for a good show and big business, but has nothing to do with biological reality.
It's rather fitting that the pinnacle of the dangerous religious cults of virology and vaccinology is the malignant belief that injecting synthetic chemicals made by habitually criminal companies that profit from perpetual disease somehow produces health.
Germ theory and gene theory are both reductionist, primitive superstitions that only remain viable due to massive propaganda and massive funding from the ruling interests that birthed and benefit from them at the expense of humanity.
Hmmm. I like your work. I like Tom Cowan. But every sentence in this pull quote is false:
"In the history of medicine, not one published study shows the isolation of identical particles that would represent a disease-causing virus from any bodily fluid from any sick person.... If one takes any person with any “viral” illness—for example, chicken pox, rabies, measles, AIDS or COVID-19—the published literature does not contain any evidence of any virus that was directly isolated from any bodily fluids from even one person suffering from these illnesses. The interesting thing about this statement is that no health institution from any government in the world disagrees. Similarly, there is no disagreement on this point from any virologist or medical doctor who works in or publishes in the field of virology. And there is no disagreement about this statement from such institutions as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Pasteur Institute or the Robert Koch Institute."
We need to apply the same strict scrutiny to the claims from our own side as we do to the claims from the other side. You can easily disprove every sentence in this paragraph with about 1 hour of work. Maybe start here:
I'm not sure why we keep doing this. It's not Germ Theory OR Terrain Theory, it's Germ Theory AND Terrain Theory. They go together, they are not mutually exclusive. The worse the terrain, the more the germs thrive. When we improve the terrain, germs have a harder time taking advantage of us.
If that passage is all false, then I agree, the other side, represented by Cowan et al, has a problem. Least of which it would make them liars.
I wouldn't be able to falsify it in 1 hour though, and I'm aware of Hammond and don't find him convincing on the subject.
I've been told that a genetic particle caused and causes polio. I don't believe that to be true. I assume you don't either.
I've been told that a genetic particle caused and causes AIDS. Same.
The same people that told me about vaccines, told me about polio and AIDS and a litany of other stories that have very credible question marks on them.
Questioning (auditing) them and their stories seems entirely reasonable to me.
Do genetic bits exist. Sure they do. I'm not dying on that hill. Even Cowan is happy to talk about exosomes.
Do these genetic particles cause the diseases I've been told they cause? I believe that is unproven, by the side making the claim.
And seeing we are 200 years into this shitshow, I think it's unproven because the answer is No.
If virology is sound, then vaccination is here to stay.
Having just caught a cold virus at a conference again (I can tell you the exact person I got it from, our symptoms and incubation period match) I just falsified all of Cowan's work, Kaufman's work, and your reply. The amount of gaslighting required to maintain the Team No Virus position rivals even the worst excesses of Pharma. "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" applies here -- the other side is right about some stuff, occasionally. Or partially right. Or a good starting point. Team No Viruses is a get out of jail free card for Tony Fauci, Ralph Baric, and the 13,000 other bioweapons researchers in this country. I am mystified by our ability to resolve this rather straightforward difference.
I'm not on any side, I just want to know what is true, as I'm sure you do.
Colds post conferences, which I’ve also had, can have other plausible explanations. EMF being one.
Catching colds via viruses was studied for 44 years by the Common Cold Unit. Remains unproven.
"Novel pathogen" that leaked from a lab that spread around the world killing people in 2020. Disproved by the work of Rancourt.
Can they make stuff in labs that can make people sick or dead? Sure.
Can they even make genetic matter that can make people sick? I suspect they can and I'm open to the work of Couey on this matter. If Couey is right, they can definitely create sickness in targeted areas to fire start the panic. The media will do the rest. This seems to be a departure from Cowan et al.
But can they make something from genetic matter that “can pandemic.” I am confident the answer is no. It is not biologically plausible. So in that context, the biolab risk is wildly exaggerated for financial and industrial “pandemic preparedness” reasons.
None of this line of thinking let’s anyone off the hook.
My mother-in-law of 87 years has not been sick, not even a little cough or sniffle in all these last four+ years. She has never taken a flu jab ( nor covid jab) and is healthy except for high blood pressure).
For nearly two years she was going to her friend's house everyday spending 3-4 hours with her in her home. Her friend was vaxxed 2x, ( maybe 3x) and she developed blood clots and my mother-in-law was giving her a shot to thin her blood everyday. Now, neither of them have a smart phone or wifi in their homes. Could this be why my MIL has never gotten sick? No wifi and no smart phone? Something to think about...
For the last four+ years every single person has been under pressure, from the lockdowns, isolation, fear of a virus, job loss, uncertainty of the future, inflation, etc., we have all been living in a virtual hell (except for the globalists of course!). Fear and isolation are two of the biggest causes of sickness and even death.
Chemtrails, poisons in our food and water, which has been going on for years, (70% of people have glyphosate their urine), 5G, EMF's, poor diets, etc., have caused people to get sick.
I live in northern Italy and what happened in Italy is that not all of Italy was hit by the "virus", and not even the whole of northern Italy, where 3/4 of all deaths occurred. The epicentre of the virus was in Lombardy which accounts for 2/3 of all the victims.
Why there? Perhaps three reasons.
First it was the first area in Italy with 5G towers. On Global Research, I read some very interesting experiments by American scientist Alan Frey, with pulsed microwaves causing rats to become docile and altering specific behaviors, and causing frog's hearts to stop beating. The US Government understood the potential of this, and they funded Frey's research.
From the article: "For governments it is not difficult to pulse the cell phone signals in the brain frequencies and in this way manipulate the thoughts of their own or foreign citizens. The difference between pulsed microwaves and extra long electromagnetic waves is that pulsed microwaves can be targeted on one person (or the whole nation if cell phone signals are pulsed in brain frequencies) while extra long electromagnetic waves, transmitted in brain frequencies, with their length up to 300 hundred thousands kilometers will reach brains in large areas. For sure so far the legislations around the world (except the Chile and Brazil) do not prohibit such actions to the governments or anybody else on human brains (for example Elon Musk is building a system of 20,000 satellites around the planet and working on neuralink research at the same time".
Secondly, in January, 2020, Lombardy implemented a major vaccination campaign against meningococcus, following a mini epidemic of bacterial meningitis that affected just 6 people (with 2 deaths). The regional authorities decided on a massive and free-of-charge vaccination of the whole population. Within a few weeks, more than 33,000 people were vaccinated in Lombardy.
Within two months, Lombardy was experiencing the majority of "covid" deaths and was the first area of a Western country that was locked-down. (I can back this up with 2 articles, one in English and one in Italian.) Could it be that the meningitis vaccine in Lombardy (and thirdly - even the 2019 flu vaccine given in Western countries) caused these so-called "covid" illnesses? Or made those injected more vulnerable to becoming ill? The Lombardy epicentre of "covid" deaths and the timing of the meningitis vaccine seems to show correlation.
The 2019 flu vaccine, which the majority of people over 65 are pressured to take in Italy, and which was the largest group dying from "covid" in 2020 also concerns me. My Italian friend's parents both took the flu vaccine in early 2020. Her father died within a week from "covid" and her mother passed away a few months later from "heart failure". They were both healthy and fit and in their mid 70's.
Well, I'm one of those people. Viruses? prove it. Virology? Let independents into your lab to watch and see what's being done. Genetics? What, where when how does that prove anything? It doesn't. Psychiatry? 200-300 mental disorders made up by a pervert with no verifiable proof other than he said so. Dermatology? Don't make me laugh. Cosmetic surgeons? Morphed into men cutting young mens penises off. Contagion? Never been proven, ever.
For those who believe in all this Harvard grad chicanery of bullshit, please, have at it. Keep taking these vaccines that are all meant to maim and kill you. Make a list of diseases produced in the 20th century that didn't exist the century before. Were things better or worse after we cured natural childhood disease through vaccines? I know the answer to that last question. The onus falls on you to prove I am wrong. I'm happy to have that debate.
You don't need a Harvard grad to tell you contagion is a thing. Bring a child to a chickenpox party, or sleep with someone who has active genital herpes. You will prove it for yourself, no studies or labs needed.
You are referencing an experiment done pre an understanding of virus etiology. Bacteria does not cause viral infection. Purified blood preparations will have low viral titers. Contagion is far less likely when exposed to a patient well into the illness. Modern virology knows all this. Rosenau did not prove the flu is not contagious.
After leaving aside the off-topic statements (see below), only your first sentence remains: "You are referencing an experiment done pre an understanding of virus etiology." This sentence illustrates the difference between a real science, such as physics, and a fake science, such as virology.
In a real science, a relevant experiment that precedes a theory would have to be explained by that theory. Otherwise that theory would be discarded. For example, the small perihelion shift of Mercury, unexplained by Newton's theory of gravity despite great efforts, would have to be explained by Einstein's theory -- and it was.
Maybe a new physics theory that didn't meet this standard wouldn't always be discarded. But then its preservation would be a matter of shame and would not be proclaimed or, worse, cited as refuting an experiment! In virology, meanwhile, or at least in your interpretation of it, an experiment can supposedly be refuted by a theory -- by this supposed "understanding of virus etiology"!
To turn to your other statements:
"Bacteria does not cause infection." This point, whether true or not, is not relevant to Spanish flu, which is, as we have heard incessantly for 4 years now, a deadly viral disease.
"Purified blood preparations will have low viral titers." This claim, which also begs the question of viral existence, is just a word salad that has nothing to do with Rosenau's experiments, who used much more than blood and, when he used blood, it was treated simply with sodium citrate -- not "purified."
"Contagion is far less likely when exposed to a patient well into the illness." This bald assertion is hardly even a testable scientific claim. What does "well into" mean? How long is that, for Spanish flu? "Far less likely" than what? And even if, for the sake of argument, we ignore these gaping holes and stipulate some meanings: Rosenau still found no, not less, contagion. And he used some patients "quite early in the disease" (p. 312).
"Modern virology knows all this." This claim again begs the questions of whether virology is a legitimate field and whether it knows anything at all.
"Rosenau did not prove the flu is not contagious." This claim is just linguistic trickery. He didn't study what is now called influenza ("flu"). He studied Spanish flu. And he showed that it was not contagious.
Bacteria does cause infection, not viral infection. Regardless, you believe that contagion and viruses are mythological phenomena, despite the fact that large viruses can be viewed under the microscope. There is no point going on from here. It is just circular. You won't convince me that something viewed under the microscope isn't there. I am not going to go back and forth on this because it won't go anywhere.
Thank you Rita, and yes, I used to believe that. I believe childhood diseases are a natural phenomenon, since there is no proof of viral infection. But I draw a line between contagion and infection. I used to get very sick and coincidently being around sick people I attributed that to contagion. When I started taking Vit D, nothing made me sick, no amount of coughing, sneezing right in my face had any affect.
My doctor fell into a pool of glyphosate laced water. Skin being your largest organ, he was chemically burned and died in a year from cancer. Anything that gets into your blood stream, an injection, snake venom, bug bites, bee stings, sex with the wrong person, chemicals, poison food or water can create serious infection. A weakened immune system will render you susceptible to just about anything. But you will always find that one person in your vicinity that did the damage to you. That theory is wrong.
CM - I think it seems as though you did not receive virus into your body due to contagion because after taking Vitamin D you expressed no symptoms. However, Vitamin D modulates the antiviral immune response in the respiratory tract provoking an efficient defense against viral infections. So, your immune system neutralized the pathogens without you even knowing it creating the illusion you never had virions in your body in the first place. All of these immune mechanisms are well documented, studied and can be read in peer reviewed papers. Many of the conclusions we draw that seem intuitive are not in fact what is occurring in the body at all. However, that is marvelous that you are benefitting from exposure to immune modulating phenomena such as light and vitamins.
Very cogent response Rita, thank you, but it only goes to prove that so called contagion didn't affect me because my terrain was healthy, which approves Bechamp and disproves Pasteur. By and large I am not interested in the technical nitty gritty of why this or that works, but rather the results, be it affecting good or belying a bad outcome, consistently. The ability to prove a virus ever existed was eliminated with the destruction of Raymond Royal Rife's microscope in 1935 and later relegated to the dustbin of history known as "because I said so". Hum!! suspicious maybe?
Another interesting theory I have read is that cancer is not viral. It's a parasite, a worm or bug so to speak, that travels around your body and using anti-parasitic treatments will eliminate these parasites. Think Ivermectin. So I listened and understood that that could be a viable theory. Can I recite the technical data given to me that formed my thinking that this could be real? Of course not. But it was logical. For me, given the expertise of those espousing, people never given a platform that would reach a wide audience, was just another nail in the coffin of the lying AMA/Pharma Industrial Complex. The preponderance of evidence that illuminates fully the mendacity of said Complex is outstandingly overwhelming, IMO.
It proves terrain matters, but it doesn't mean germs don't exist. It depends on your immune susceptibility as to whether you become ill or not. It is not reductionistic, it is holistic, all the factors play a role, that is how I see it. Regardless, you are enhancing your terrain and that is the wisest move.
Once it's been shown that viruses don't exist, the entire medical fraternity will dissolve. I feel that industry attracts sadists. Not that all of them are, many are there to do good work for humanity, but it attracts sadists too. Including the psychiatric "industry".
Equally, disproving virology wouldn't end vaccination. Some vaccines are supposed to prevent viruses, but there are vaccines against toxins, protists, bacteria, allergies, cancer.
Gardasil once fake protected 3, now 7. all sexually incuced. So we jab boys too now. Nearly killed my 16 yr old Step Granddaughter, left her with RA/FIBROMYALGIA, A LIFE OF deabiliting PAIN. Her parents are Libs. But no longer do jabs. She's grown, has baby #1, and has gone totally natural. Baby gets no jabs.
So glad to know that at least, even through personal experience, people are seeing that jabs are dangerous. Kudos to parents who don't jab their children.
Allergy vaccines have been around since at least the 1930s. I had a course myself as a child; they didn't work for me at all, although they were probably using the wrong allergen. They're supposed to work by inducing IgG4 (tolerance) antibodies to the allergen. They're less widely used nowadays, because of the risk of anaphylaxis.
Bad advice by doctors, telling parents to avoid all peanuts for the first 3 years of life caused massive increase in peanut allergies. Children need to be exposed to these things so their body understands it is natural. I'm sure vaccines do not help. I wrote a medical article on how vaccines cause allergies, autoimmunity and immunodeficiency so I am not opposed to the reality that vaccines can trigger allergies. I am just not in the camp that says vaccines are the root of all our problems and if we could just destroy germ theory all our problems would go away. Vaccines would not disappear and good health would not be restored for all. I believe we are being attacked by toxins from all sides. So many causes of disease, viruses are just one and dismissing them isn't going to stop the forward March of science making injections of mRNA, crispr gene editing, smart dust, otc medicines and foods with nano tech.
Of coarse this is just my belief and 2 cents people are welcome to their own beliefs.
So if viruses don't exist why does disease appear to be transmissible? I get that weakened immune systems are more susceptible to disease but this doesn't seem to answer the question as to why one tends to get ill when around ill people.
i'm not convinced that they don't exist. it seems to me to be a way to derail the ''this one has never proven to exist '' similar to flat earth type things , a '' see, silly conspiracy people'' .
even if it were true that hey don't exist it derails/undermines the important discussion.
What will end vaccination is for us to let everyone know not to get them, and to look into them and that they really need to do their due diligence on this one. It's up to the indivdiual what they put into their body. They can put anything they like into it. But to force someone else is an act against nature and it's amazing everyone seems fine with that. How can any adult tell another adult what to do with their body? How can any adult go along with that? Sticking the fangs into children though, without even looking at what the ingredients are is culpable, even more culpable than the law makers. Actually the law makers are not culpable at all. They are only handing out orders. It's obeying them that is culpable, but besides that, we all need to sound the alarm loud and clear yet nobody even mentions the horror to those we know who still take the darned things.
I'm afraid it will take a very long time, for people to realize the mistake, and the harm of vaccination. We have it drilled into our brains that it is a modern miracle and has saved millions of lives. NOT. People refuse to connect allergies, autoimmune conditions, autism, cancer, and other diseases to the injections. They have legal protection from lawsuits, and cannot be put as cause on death certificates. They keep pushing them, and coming up with more, for profit. Evil crime against humanity. It is easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been Fooled.~ Mark Twain. So so sad, as millions more suffer and die from this hideous medical error.
I see this isn’t a reference you need for yourself, but it is a good presentation, in support of everything you say, and more. All 6+ hrs are worth watching.
I think some vaccines save the lives of malnourished children living in countries of penury. Their living conditions have weakened them to where they cannot fight the infections without such intervention. Wouldn't it be much more humane to pump the billions instead into providing clean water, education and good food for these poor creatures. It is a matter of luck where and to whom you are born.
actually they've killed many children. until recently vaccines came with warnings/they were not to be used on anybody who's compromised, even just running a temp, or malnourished.
in australia they killed many children . there's a doctor with a greek name, who wrote/campaigned on this.
I think what Dr. Archie said is all true. I did not know AIDS was transmitted in Africa via dirty needles. I didn't know other diseases were transmitted the same way. My only question is that if a child has marasmus, and measles is racing through the village and a mother sees neighbouring kids die, she has no access to clean water, or food, and someone offers to vaccinate her child against the measles, in that moment does she take the chance the measles will also kill her starving, weak child or the vaccine will save her child in that moment. It is a Sophie's choice. If she could get vitamin C, clean water, food, vitamin A, then the choice is obvious, but what if she cannot? So, in the bigger picture the money spent on vaccines should be redirected into food, clean water, and access to high dose vitamin A and intravenous vitamin C. Otherwise, these kids will die one way or the other. It is a splitting hair decision as to which choice will lead to their death.
So, I guess you answered my last question, the child will die from the vaccine and has a better chance of survival from the illness despite their state of malnutrition.
There are many pharmaceuticals that cause harm to their recipients. My friend was just pumped with a fluoroquinolone and Flagyl together. Are we daily warning our friends and neighbors about the adverse effects of the various medications they are on. I don't think so for the most part. Many people still smoke, do we warn them of lung cancer, people drink alcohol, which is toxic to the liver, covid shots are toxic to the heart, brain and immune system. People are entitled to take the medications they choose, but they are not entitled to choose medications for me to take such as, 'oh you have an infection well then you must take Levofloxacin' if you want to come for Christmas dinner etc....
Modern medicine is turning a lot of disease treatments into vaccines and mRNA. Of coarse, many of the people who do not believe in viruses also say they don't believe in genetics and CRISPR. It must be convenient to just dismiss anything that gets in their way of their belief system.
Downs Sydrome is fake. Congenital defects, all fake. The amount of things NAV need to call fake in order to prop up their belief grows every day since there are many things which back up the existence of viruses, genetics, the immune system...
“…people who don’t believe in viruses…” don’t have that view due to any “belief system.” It is simply that science has failed to demonstrate “viruses” are real. The “believers” are actually those who faithfully believe that other people must have done the work. Anyone is capable of finding out whether their beliefs are based on valid science. Just read and think, that’s all that’s required!
You believe the proof science has aquired with extensive studies is all fake. You excuse your beliefs by equivocation, saying because they are corrupt, what doesn't back up your beliefs, including peoples personal experiences, are all fake. Your belief is that what my son, myself and my family have gone through is not real and if we do not agree with you we are any number of derogatory things.
You are a specialist in gaslighting. He said, correctly, that viruses have not been shown to exist. He could have added the stronger statement that contagion has repeatedly been disproven, e.g. Rosenau (1919).
Instead of discussing these important issues, you produce a stream of invective of at best tangential relevance. It is responses like yours, which are tacit admissions of having no sound arguments, that made me look into the issues with virology. Perhaps you will now have that beneficial effect on others.
It is really easy to call something fake and dismiss all proof. That is called gaslighting. It isn't gaslighting to say something exists which acts like a virus with an incubation and spread like contagion, with studies on blood, biopsies, autopsies.
You project what you are doing onto others.
NAV talk about those harmed by "belief in viruses". If you are wrong and people are infected with viruses what you are doing is harming others with your gaslighting.
The only proof you have that viruses do not exist is saying all proof is fake. You distort people's lived experiences. That is called gaslighting. I'm not altering your experiences I'm stating my beliefs and that I do not appreciate the attacks and insults of most NAV. I do not appreciate being told all proof I provide is "fake" based on someone else's belief of that proof. When I say this don't take it to mean anyone should make me appreciate their views and comments. You do you. I am just stating my beliefs and experiences dealing with NAV and their attacks and insults
That sucks for your son, because the thymus plays a big role in T cell production for the immune system. You know from experience the importance of immunity against pathogens, no studies needed, but they do exist of course. The denialism is an ideology promoted by a handful of doctors who make a living from it. You are wasting your time though, because they dismiss the obvious, they dismiss the proof that large viruses can be seen under a scope, and they keep looping back to their repetitive faulty yardsticks, and they all parrot each other which means they have outsourced their thinking to denialism propaganda.
You can easily view a giant virus under a microscope. Viruses are everywhere, we need them. Only a tiny percentage are virulent. How we respond to a viral infection depends on our immune system and genetic makeup. Koch's observations were not used as a yardstick to prove the existence of viruses, so that is a moot point. Vaccines involve risk, some more than others, and therefore should never be required to attend school, or mandated in general. The reason we have an immune system is to neutralize invading pathogens. If there were no pathogens, we would not need an immune system. The liver and kidneys deal with toxins for elimination.
"You're either lying, stupid or you work for pharma."
????????????
I merely asked what a NAV is - I'm 68 and not familiar with all these new anacronyms on social media. And by the way, I haven't been vaxxed or gone near a doctor for well over 40 years and as far as I'm aware I'm perfectly healthy. I am neither lying (but you can choose to believe I am if you wish), I'm not stupid (or senile yet, and I have a PhD in the Philosophy of Technology) and I was an engineer and inventor, and latterly builder of geodesic greenhouses. Now retired.
Sorry I was trying to be playful and sarcastic. A lot of people don't know the anachronism. I should not use it anymore.
What I meant is this is how NAV treat people (not how I treat people). If you claim to have experienced contagion, expect direct insults or coercion to NAV way of thinking… then if you don't convert, insults ensue.
Yes those conditions exist but the reasons for why they exist has not been told to us. Let's get to what the answers REALLY ARE about the bases of the whole enchilada, and then we can drop germ theory and go in the right direction. If germ theory holds up, then we go that way. Why aren't scientists jumping to prove viruses exist? They could win this one in no time. Why the reluctance from the medical industry to engage in proof of viruses?
Research giant viruses, that is the simplest way to understand that they do exist. Of course, terrain matters, so do the exciting causes of illness (trauma, toxins, pathogens, stress etc....) It is not terrain vs. pathogen, it is terrain interacting with pathogen.
Yes I can come at that more readily - terrain interacting with pathogen. With the trillions spent on medical science and science in general, you'd think we would have studies on everything by now, but how often do they say, "more studies are needed", or "this has not been studied"? For example the veracity of herbal remedies - they know nothing about it, just completely disregard it (although they use the herbs in their pharmaceuticals so they DO know).
We need to understand that we are being degraded and kept down. Once one understands that, then all fits into place. Everyone gives their power to these scoundrels who then go and attack our health and infrastructure, if not ourselves directly through poisoning and threats of even death if we don't toe their line.
I'd like science to get down to opening up the discussion and being prepeared to see things in a new way so we can go forward now. But it won't do that because it has too many people strangled by the idea of their omnipotence and people will do anything, absolutely anything to surrender their bodies and their minds to the nefariousness of this distortion.
Pharma controls the science in universities. Medicine is focused on symptom suppression with pharmaceuticals. Real solutions are constantly suppressed because there is no money in them. The problem is conflicts of interest, and there is a move to suppress supplements. We never hear on media to get sunlight, rest, take bone broth when ill, instead vaccines are pushed, pushed, pushed. Pierre Kory and Dr. Marik are now putting their energy into looking into the science of alternative treatments. It is costly, and they won't be getting grants for their studies. The problem with the alternative health field is that it is too easy to hang out your shingle. Other modalities need to be held to a very high standard so people get the best care possible, the insurance companies will save a fortune, I don't see why they don't get on board with this.
They have documented them under darkfield microscopy, in blood of sick people, injected them into animals, implicated themselves in many ways infecting people with polio vaccine virus and simian virus. If you do not want to believe that's fine but saying proof doesn't exist, does not make it all go POOF just for you. Take on the burden of proof instead of asking people who already proved they exist to keep doing the studies over so you can call them fake.
Take on the burden of proof.
Get your Sam Bailey who makes money selling her theories to study large groups of people who have been tested positive for viruses and see what exactly is going on in their blood.
Maybe Sam Bailey prefers a career in front of a camera instead of medicine. It could be that simple. Ms. Bailey can put forth her opinions, but none of the deniers can prove them.
It's not up to the "deniers" (dissenters is more like it) to prove them. It is up to the ones who claim viruses are real to prove what they say. What is wrong with just wanting facts for what medicine is based on?
Well show us a link. Surely by now their proof should be published everywhere. Just because you say they have proven viruses exist doesn't mean they have. You'll need more evidence than that.
One of the main issues I have with people who do not believe in viruses is they demand ultimate proof off of 1 link. There's no way to prove a virus off of 1 link. You need to go through the history. Genetics, multiple isolation techniques. Ruling out all the things viruses are not. Backing up their existence.It's not like I can just give you one link and it's going to all of your questions. You would need a book.
I.
Say this not because I can't provide a link that shows proof but it would never be enough. Proof for you, you would always find something to pick a part about it and that's okay. You can believe whatever you want and I can believe what I want. I would just appreciate if people who don't believe in viruses would stop forcing their beliefs and insulting on to someone else. I'm not trying to force what I believe on to other people. Almost every time I get into a conversation I have somebody who doesn't believe in viruses.Come on and say oh that's fake.That study that it shows there was spike protein in the brain and an autopsy that was fake.Why are you talking about this?This is stupid you're an idiot.You must be working for pharma. It is derailing all convos and not allowing others to have decent conversations.
Tim Truth, Yeadon's right hand man, told me there is no proof the immune system exists. He wasn't the first or even the 10th NAV to say this. Basically they believe in scientific method but they don't believe in science. They question every medical article, its all fake, even biopsies showing vaccine spike protein in the brain, which killed someone can be identified as not Sarscov-2 infection spike protein. Even articles where science implicates itself, injecting simian virus into people through vaccines, injecting polio causing "vaccine polio outbreaks." There is no debating people who say it is all fake. People who imply because rockefellers are corrupt it means viruses do not exist, were not isolated FIRST from plants. The first tests of viruses were not even on humans but how do they explain this? They don't. They just call it all fake. The first "vaccines" were just infecting people with similar viruses (cow pox) in order to stave off more serious infections (small pox). They didn't involve heavy metals and toxins. It's their choice what they believe but their logic, to me, is illogical.
Exactly. Much of what they dislike about virology actually proves it exists even more. For example, virus isolation is more complex. They used to strain bacteria out. Then they introduced antibiotics to kill the bacteria. This is double proof it is a virus which remains. The microscope showed a virus was present and after antibiotic solution it remained. (they say this proves it isn't a virus) They call it "dust." So, tell me... how does dust replicate inside cells?
Regarding monkey kidney cells (the cells they use to replicate viruses), they lack IL-6 which is the immune cell that fights viruses off. This reveals much of why some people get infected and others do not, is they lack good immune response. It doubly proves it is a virus if it can get through without IL-6 present.
They demand Kochs postulate be fulfilled yet it is irrational because not all people will be susceptible to a virus and some will already have immunity.
What about studies showing gut bacteria fight off viruses? They call it fake because the only way to back up their belief is to say all medical studies are fake. They demand you show proof but they don't want proof they just want you to scurry around looking for medical articles wasting your time and energy, distracting you
What is the purpose of two kidneys, when one would do the job? Just kidding, no you are spot on, the immune system neutralizes pathogens. The pathways on how this occurs is so well studied and known.
“The first tests of viruses were not even on humans.” Um what are you even saying? My understanding is that the first “virus” claimed to be found was “tobacco mosaic virus” and the methodology used to make that ridiculous assertion was ridiculously unscientific. It was basically claimed that, because no bacterial agent could be found, there must be something smaller, so they called the imagined tiny particle “virus.” You have a lot of research ahead of you, and I encourage you to get busy. If you don’t like reading scientific papers, you can start here:
Everything you just said backs up the existence of viruses. You are oversimplifying the tobacco mosaic virus research. You are skipping all the steps they used to prove it was something which did not behave like a bacteria, fungus, toxin. They took many steps to back up the existence.
Your abusive superiority complex is showing. I have so much to learn and you are just the teacher I need to look to.
Your logical fallacies are crumbling. You take one thing, leave out pertinent facts then make sweeping statements.
The immune system 'fights' invading pathogens. For babies who are malnourished in third world countries their immune systems are deficient, and they will die without a vaccine. It is not ideal. It would be better if they had good food, and clean water, so they could fight infections naturally.
We need to understand that we are dealing with phenomenal magicians that know how to manipulate the psyche. Probably true that we don't even have "an immune system" let alone viruses. It's also probably true that we didn't go to the moon and the earth isn't a round ball spinning through space. The lies we've been told - in every field - are staggering in their depth, heft and audacity. They are breathtaking. Imagine all these years, these scientists, believing in something they never even checked on and basing their life on it. And the "unrained" patients, handing over their bodies as if to the gods. It's mind blowing. But if viruses could be proven, then why wasn't it done decades ago? Why haven't they put this subject to bed by simply providing the proof? Is that really too much to ask (of after all - a "scientific" fraternity)? Are they taunting us or playing coy? What the heck is on with them? It is not up to those who question vaccines or medical scinece to answer the question "then what are these people suffering from if viruses don;'t exist". If that cannot be answered by the claimant's of it, then why should anyone believe they DO exist?
It is not the responsibility for backers of terrain theory to explain what those diseases are. It is the responsibility of the claimant. All the debaters want is proof of their claim, which they should been keen to provide.
But there is proof, the larger viruses can be viewed under a microscope. Just keeping it simple here. Scientists have filmed viruses infecting bacteria in real time. Do the research.
My son's thymus organ was stolen during heart surgery leaving him severely immunodeficient. He is the canary in the coal mine. It's all fake though, according to you. Carry on.
I’m not aware of these vaccines you speak of. Please provide a reference to a vaccine against toxins. Thanks. You might be right that people will still choose to inject themselves, their children, and their patients, but I do think that no rational person would do that when they realize that it all is built upon corrupt science…If we can call it science.
For some reason the pernicious ones who decide all this love the idea of vaccines. Why? Well to make tons of money for one thing but secondly, they love fangs. serpents. And they love babies' blood.
Yes, but the fact is “viruses” don’t exist, so there’s no reason to say, “even if viruses exist.” Vaccines are toxic & dangerous AND “virus” is a mythical entity. I agree with your point though.
vaccines are dangerous, and not needed, let's stick with that rather than go over the edge, alienate people who might start thinking about this, and concentrate on the fact that we have immune systems, and that the terrain is important, inside, and outside.
It is interesting that the 1986 law that indemnified pharma companies from any harms caused by "vaccines" contained the statement (paraphrasing), "vaccines are inherently unsafe." Written into a law that holds pharma companies harmless. Only a feckless, bought-and-paid-for Congress could do that.
That is correct. They are inherently unsafe which is why they should never be mandated or pushed on kids to attend school, but it is a gravy train, you can't sue if the kid is harmed. That is the crux of the problem, the indemnification of pharma, which also occurred with the EUA during covid. It earned billions for pharma, and so they will continue with the program by getting the WHO and UN on board to foist vaccines on the whole world and those who refuse will be punished.
It is not disputed that viruses are not living things. To reiterate, they are not biological organisms. They are probably best understood as biological toxins. They are likely, I believe, to be the breakdown products of degraded cells which are dead or dying as a result of one or more environmental stressors, or cells that are just at the end of their life cycle. They may serve as danger signals to other cells or to other living organisms. Virologists appear not to believe that viruses have any adaptive function, but are just infectious agents, waiting to infect in order to do their damage through stealing cellular mechanisms in order to replicate. They are likely, I believe, derived from cellular DNA and RNA of the supposedly “infected organism”, but may also be transmissible. Human DNA usually comprises around 3 billion or more base pairs. Viral DNA or RNA on the other hand, usually comprises 7,000 to 20,000 nucleotide pairs . This would be consistent with(although by no means proof of) the notion that viruses are a subset of host DNA or RNA.
To describe viral transmission as an “infection” may therefore be inaccurate, as infections connote the invasion of one living organism by another. It may be more accurate to view viruses as immunogens or cell derived poisons, possibly designed to sound the alarm system to the immune system that a clean up job is needed to remove the degraded products of moribund or dead cells. A possible model for viral transmission is the “shedding” that has been observed by individuals vaccinated with the COVID-19 spike protein to others who are unvaccinated, but then develop symptoms when in close proximity to the vaccinated person. A similar phenomenon is observed with the measles vaccine, through which others can develop measles. Another paradigm is the chicken pox virus, which can be transmitted through close exposure to those already suffering from chicken pox. Although these cases are usually referred to as “infections”, the word infection implies the invasion of one organism by another, so this is actually a misnomer. Poisoning or contamination might be a better paradigm for viral transmission.
Although the term “live virus” vaccine is used to describe vaccines that are made from viruses that are not “heat-killed”, viruses are not alive, so the term “live virus” is a misnomer. A “heat- killed” viral vaccine may actually be denatured DNA or RNA which has lost much of its immunogenic properties and when injected, produces an even weaker immune reaction from others. It also may have lower transmissibility or immunogenicity when “shed” or transmitted to others.
One of the main complaints about viral theory is that viruses (except for bacteriophages) are never isolated in their pure form (they fail Koch’s and Rogers’ postulates). They are identified indirectly by DNA assays, often PCR tests. If something exists, shouldn’t one be able to find it, especially, when viruses are said to exist in nature by the trillions or quadrillions — more than there are stars in the universe? These objections are never entirely addressed by those favoring classical viral theory. Yet there remains as counterpoint to this objection the undeniable fact of transmissibility and the fact that people have an immune response that is common with many types of infections. There are also easily detectable measures of immune activation, such as the white blood cell count, and cytokines such as prostaglandins, interleukin, TNF alpha, and other immune modulators.
A possible explanation to this conundrum is that the nucleotide base pairs that make up viruses are extremely unstable, perhaps barely stable enough to survive proximate transmission from animal to animal, human to animal or vice versa, but not stable enough to stand up to the in vitro techniques that they are being subjected to in the isolation process. They may be biological examples of what the Heisenberg uncertainty principal is for physics. In other words, the act of studying the virus may alter it in such a way that you can’t actually study it, or the act of studying may alter it in such a way that in such a way that it is no longer the same thing it was prior to being studied.
Because upper respiratory viruses produce a syndrome known as “coryza” or skin rashes which may resemble allergies in some cases, one might also wonder if there is some kind of allergic response with viruses. I think this unlikely as IgE and Eosinophilia are commonly elevated in allergy, and other signs of MAST cell activation. This is not typically seen in the case of viruses. What produces the malaise and secretory symptoms of both viral and allergic symptoms are rather the immune reaction to the substances in the bloodstream. Viruses are not allergens, which are primarily IgE mediated, but they likely are immunogens. We see similar diatheses in some toxic exposures — smoke, air pollution, and poison ivy/oak/sumac. There is a cytokine activation in these intoxications which produces the symptoms, and the nature of this reaction is specific to the toxin. Some kinds of toxins may produce lachrymation, and burning pains in the mucous membranes such as tear gas, and others, such as smoke or coal dust may produce more bronchial irritation and cough.
In sum, rather than viral syndromes being indications of viral “infections”, they may best be considered immune reactions to biologically toxic waste products from decaying or dead cells.
Since these waste products are composed of DNA or RNA fragments, if they are taken up by healthy cells, they may be reduplicated and transmitted to others as well as amplifying one’s own immune response. These biological toxins can be transmissible to those in close proximity, as with shedding, but are unlikely to be transmitted to those who are not in physical contact or close enough to be contaminated by the exhalations of those affected. Those who are sickened may indeed experience intracellular viral replication and develop a significant viral load. They may become quite ill.
I would propose that those who are experiencing viral syndrome secondary to some toxic exposure (chemical or electromagnetic, for example) or other stressor leading to cellular breakdown (excessive stress, poor diet, lack of sleep, exposure to cold, leading to chill, and over-exertion, for example) are likely to develop a worse illness than those who are not similarly intoxicated, but only experience the transmitted toxic effects of the virus. However, this may not always apply. Some people’s immune systems may have more of a tendency to over-react, and some may sweep away the toxins more expeditiously. Liver function also may impact on the severity of illness, as it affects the bodies ability to eliminate toxins rapidly. People with worse immune function may also have unique problems due to inability of the immune system to remove the toxins from the body through antibody binding and phagocytosis. People with an already high toxin load, from other poisons in their environment or a multiplicity of pharmaceutical swimming around in their blood stream may also be compromised. The role of Vitamin D levels in immune function and response to viral syndrome can not be overstated.
Some may object to my relabeling viruses as toxins, and insist they be classified as infectious agents. I am less interested in reclassifying viruses than in redefining them. This theory is nothing but a theory, and it awaits empirical verification, if that is possible in a world where there are limitations to science coming both from both human imperfections and the constraints placed by nature on its measurement, at least with the instruments humans have at their disposal.
Very prescient poignant reasoning. Have been in the trenches with doctorate degree for over 3 decades. The elusive virus does not exist, certainly does not cause infectious disease.
Big P, and their henchmen the medical cartel have always lied.
Admitting the lie is highly problematic, however these times are unprecedented. Pressure from those who experienced. deliberate genocide assists greatly.
My heart is overjoyed reading this. Yes of course - prove that viruses exist! So basic yet still hasn't been done. See the depths of the hallucination? Even "scientists" are not asking for this verification. Maybe in their hearts they know viruses don't exist as we've been told but it's too lucrative for them to quit the charade. This is brilliant! I can't imagine the five labs coming up with the diagnosis consistently. And if they do, then they could put this terrain theory to bed. They should be jumping at the chance to prove to us that viruses are real. They should have that kind of basic information readily available. It would be interesting to see how these tests will be monitored and by whom. I go even further and say all laboratory work is meaningless. The reason I say this is because nobody lives in a sterile environment.
Jamie's work replicating the isolation of viruses is the sort of science that provides evidence we can all understand and support regardless of our personal beliefs. Others seem to just take a lot of $ and self promote without doing any real science themselves.
Lies are definitely unbecoming and its a shame (and a wee shock) to find some of the proponents of no virus are not entirely honest. I now wonder at their motives and am certainly not alone in this regard.
Heidi's and Geoffrey's comments here both contain elements I agree and disagree with, but because the "Science" is not settled my position is to wait and see the results of experiments and good, honest uncensored debates. High expectations, yes I acknowledge that.
The current methodology of isolation is laughable but I also still see transmission of something, perhaps STD's, herpes etc, name it what you want. There is so much we don't know and so much medical knowledge we have been lied to about that it will take years (if ever) for consensus and we don't have that time luxury today.
Terrain does make a lot of logical sense A Dr that states that there is nothing in the body that can harm you is not one that I would want though. How about cancer for starters?
The amount of nurses and ladies that had severe bleeding issues after looking after the freshly jabbed oldies in homes strongly suggests either shedding or transmission of some sort. Even in the small circle I knew at the time it was undeniable.
What is obvious to me is that there is not enough time to convince the world that viruses don't exist in order to stop the continuing poisoning that is occurring, even if it was 100% correct. I still donated to the experiments of Jamie's though and remain happy to debate the points with anyone, without attacking the messengers.
I agree with most of what you said, but is it necessary to delve relentlessly into proving this or that exists when your own eyes tell you what you just saw or experienced? See, that's where I get crazy. Must I prove the sun will burn me if I stay under it for too long, or the reason rain is wet? These are questions my granddaughter has asked when she was 5.
Bechamp was correct. Pasteur was dead wrong. The Rockefeller's went with the germ theory. Why? Can we not see the results from that choice? Can we not see the corruption, mass deaths and profits derived from that decision? Yet we are to believe that these twisted sciences are humanitarian. Really!! Cure something, anything, then maybe I'll believe. Cancer cures? Out the wazoo. All destroyed. Why?
I am lucky as I do get to see cancers go away, recently even one of those common new overnight big lump on the neck ones on a young fella in his 20's- gone in 2 weeks. Another recent one was a glioblastoma - gone in 8 weeks. Yes I only believe what I see optically as well with the scope, and the experiments I do myself.
The cancer I really want to see gone is the rocketfellas and their ilk though.
Virology births cover narratives for industrial poisoning.
Sounds to me like Sam Bailey is asking people to deny the existence of something many people suffer and die from in order to sooth her, and your, fears. This is exactly what we are fleeing, "othering" people who have different beliefs and experiences from us. Gaslighting them and demanding they change their beliefs for us and accommodate our beliefs. These NAV people don't just ask for people to have open minds they ask for them to deny the existence of what they are experiencing.
Contagion is real for many of us who have immune defects, congenital or aquired. Incubation periods are real. Anyone who lives outside of mainstream, away from people who only gets sick when around sick people- (ie) is around EMF and doesn't get sick, catching what others have is real. So is virus isolation through old school means of straining. So is contamination of vaccines with viruses. Call it fake if you want just don't tell me what to believe or "other" me.
Contagion is as obvious as expecting rain from a gathering storm. You are dealing with people who are invested in an ideology. They are correct on some aspects, terrain does matter, vaccines carry varying levels of risk, corruption exists in scientific circles, pharma controls the vaccine narrative, which means greed controls it, pharmaceuticals don't provide health, some medical journals have been corrupted by conflicts of interest, universities have been corrupted by grants etc....But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, despite all that viruses have been proven to exist, over, and over and over irrespective of Koch's faulty yardstick.
I've noticed I also self-censor and change my wording to be more "inclusive" incase a NAV comes along, hoping they will allow me to have a conversation that doesn't turn into them insulting me, demeaning me, accusing me of working for pharma and demanding I change my beliefs and stop discussing what I'm talking about because to them it is all fake.
If anyone is not just telling others what to believe but forcing them to take a medical procedure even if they don't want it, is the medical fraternity or the "scientific" fraternity.
You are "attacking the person and not the issue" by intimating that what we are saying is tha the people who suffer are faking it. Oh we know people suffer, often we suffer too, but that still doesn't prove that viruses exist.
And just because you say they do doesn't make it so either.
Why do you not ask your beloved fraternity to provide unequivocal proof and be done with this argument?
You have no proof what I have suffered from most of my life is not EBV. I have proof every time I go to test and they show my titers, my body going through hell, biopsy of liver showing virus attacking it.
You say I am attacking the person, not the issue. You are attacking me, my experiences, not the issue. So is Sam Bailey. I am saying that when anyone claims to have caught a virus you attack them, like what you just did with me, act like I am part of a fraternity of corrupt science and they are my beloved.
What I and others suffer from is a contagious virus with an incubation which titers can test for immunity to and any insinuation that we dont understand what contagion is, what we experienced, is gaslighting. Acting like I need to provide any proof to you is irrational. I don't owe you anything especially when everything I would show you would be torn apart by you and called fake.
What science is doing to people, forcing them, is the same as what NAV do. You want to control and insult anyone who doesnt agree with you when you cannot control them.
I'm not forcing you to believe I just want to be left the fuck alone when I do discuss something not get some attack on my experience, my values, my intelligence. Fuck off
Ironic isn't it Heidi, you wish to be left alone to speak as you wish in favor of vaccines and we wish to exercise freedom to choose what goes in our bodies. No one is forcing you to shut your mouth. But the people and cause you support forced through coercion to take a medical product against their will. People lost their jobs for refusing the jab. People were beaten and arrested for not wearing masks for God sake. Dr.'s lost their licenses to practice for refusing to go along with obviously nonsensical, unhealthy, dangerous deadly recommendations including a completely untested "vaccine" that's still killing people today as we speak. So Heidi you a free to do what you wish to do with your body including your mouth. You can keep it shut or not. But when ever I encounter people like you, I confront the medical tyranny.
I do not wish in favor of vaccines. Your accusations, your being "triggered" by my belief in viruses causing you to equate me with the enemy is all made up in your head.
I did didn't i? My apologies for conflating the two issues. I'm not sure if viruses are real or not. I'm truly confused and seeking knowledge and understanding. The only way I know to gain discernment is through robust debate from which i believe is distilled the truth.
As for vaccines my opinion is settled. They, all vaccines, are harming people and are "inherently dangerous". This aren't my words in quotations, those words are used in the Vaccine law currently in force. Simply reviewing the incidences of autism and # of vaccines given in the childhood vaccine schedule since the passage of the "vaccine act of 1986" was enough to convince me. 1 in 10,000 was the frequency of autism in 1986. It's been steadily increasing since that time, tracking with the increase in vaccines given to children. Today, the frequency of autism is 1 in 32. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting someone with autism or someone who has an autistic child. And that's just autism. There are many others injured by vaccines to one degree or another.
So again, my apologies. I don't wish to argue. I wish to learn. I think we can only do that through robust dialog. Have a good day.
You can't control another person's beliefs or behaviour. You know the truth that is all that matters. I hope you heal I really do; I wish you the best of health.
That it is still a belief is kind of proof that viruses don't exist. Proof extinguishes belief but when no proof is forthcoming, it instills doubt. And there are whole populations who base their lives on such a belief. Until "science" can prove and to the stupidest person to boot, that viruses exist, then they remain merely a belief, and that's equivalent to a religion or a cult.
You have made so many contradictory statements here and are arguing semantics. It's called crazy making.
First a belief existing doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
For me, my belief shows respect that other things can also make people sick and we have a lot more to learn about viruses.
Second, proof exists but when you call it all fake you are instilling doubt which is a tactic used to derail topics and confuse people.
Insinuating that you need to "convince" even the "stupidest person" is a low blow.
You "believe viruses do not exist." That is a cult also when it tries to convert people with abusive language, insults and denying people's experiences. You've reached my FUCK OFF point.
Yeah well people who close their minds to new ideas constantly reach my "fuck off point" so understand that it's no picnic trying to bring sense to a converaation. You have made unsubstantiated claims - that I make contradictory statments but offered no evidence for that. Maybe you think that simply making the claim is enough for people to accept it as truth?
To go to the truth we need to be specific not "wishy washy". Please explain where I was contradictory or shut up. If they hold water, they could help me improve and isn't that what we're really here for?
The highest respect we could give to everyone is to follow the truth. If we instill doubt, so be it! People need to use their grey matter, it's doing them a favor.
Yes, when we make statements, if we are not prepared to make them convincing, then you will be expressing yourself as being full of hot air and then nobody will listen to you. And that's a good thing because we hear too much from hot air expellers.
And the explanation needs to be made so that even a grandmother can understand it. I believe viruses do not exist, correct. However I would like to know why "science" stil lhasn't ascertained that fundamental fact.
But the weirdest thing is why people defend their not needing to.
Most of everything is just a story. Some stories (eg: religions) 'stick' in the collective mind and 'stick around' for centuries, giving us wars, torture of non-believers, and millions of (cult) believers a warped focus to help them in their confusion about life by complying with 'authorities'.
Science is also a story and a religious cult -- as this article on virology demonstrates. The whole of history, often told as 'progress through military technology', is also a story. Stories are everywhere at every level and in every corner of our civilisation. Even this article is a story putting a contrasting view to a mainstream story. Take your pick -- and take the consequences.
Dr. Bailly, I've been following this line of thinking since the scamdemic ushered in mail in balloting and the bloodless coup of 2020. Terrain theory vs germ theory. Virus's no Viruses.
I recently spoke to a gentleman who had stage 4 colon cancer and claims to have cured himself and others with dog dewormer suggesting that parasites might be at the root of cancer and other illnesses.
Clearly people were made ill. Clearly something spread through the population.
Do you have any thoughts regarding parasites causing illness? And my wife had what I thought was a good question. She asked me, "What about the vault that holds all the most dangerous viruses"? Marburg virus, Ebola, Hantavirus, Bird flu virus, Lassa virus, Junin virus, The Crimea-Congo fever, The Machupo virus, Kyasanur Forest Virus (KFD), Dengue fever." I didn't have a good answer for her. Do you?
It is most definitely not "clear" at all that anything "spread" through the population in fact there is zero evidence that there was any unusual amount of illness in early 2020 whatsoever. This has morphed into urban legend with zero proof.
Ebola is purely fictional. It's yet another construct of the pandemic industrial complex/biosecurity complex with multiple purposes attached.
Ebola is cover for industrial operations in Africa which produce major pollutants that have no regulations/oversight in Africa—mining, offshore oil exploration and drilling, rubber-tapping,etc.- Firestone rubber plantation- massive water pollution directly into once potable water that the locals still must drink from as there is no other source of drinking water etc.
The locals curiously then get the same symptoms as "Ebola" after drinking the polluted water.
Plus: Insecticides/Banned Pesticide Dumping in Africa, indoor spraying- walls in West African homes coated with insecticides: carbamates and organophosphates are increasingly important alternatives to pyrethroids for indoor residual spraying. Toxic Vaccine Campaigns in Africa- Beta-lactam Antibiotics- Pharma Profiteering etc. Same story in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Congo.
Ebola is the cover story.
Cover for good old colonialism- land theft- scramble for Africa etc. US also uses Ebola/Marburg cover con to justify moving troops into area (AFRICOM) in order to clamp down certain areas- control a restive populace, prevent other competing entities from gaining a foothold on the region etc.
But no, it's all Ebola/Marburg and has nothing to do with oil reserves off the Liberian Coast, diamond mines in Sierra Leone, coltan in the Congo etc...
It was clear to me from my limited perspective that people around me including me and my family fell ill with something odd. Without knowledge of anything different I can only surmise something spreading.
Post the mass injection of humanity i would repeatedly and uncharacteristically fall ill culminating in two solid months of respiratory illness the likes I've never experienced before. I've never seen so much snot come out of my head, eva!
Regarding Ebola, I don't think I've heard it's a cover story for an industrial waste human catastrophe which could very well be true. So thanks for the info. I'll look into it. That aside, I listed 9 other noted Deadly viruses which you ignored. And there are measles mumps and rubella that i didn't mention. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm trying to figure out what the hell is going on. So thanks for your input.
"It was clear to me from my limited perspective that people around me including me and my family fell ill with something odd. Without knowledge of anything different I can only surmise something spreading." ---
Did y'all fall ill before or after the announcement that there was a killer bat virus on the loose?
Given that you firmly believed without question the myth of contagion, is it not possible, if y'all became ill with "something odd" AFTER the announcement, that you were basically tricked into perceiving a common cold or flu as being something odd and new?
Each illness is unique. We call it a cold or flu but exactly how it starts to show itself, how severe it gets (or doesn't get), and how fast or slow we recover from it, differs each and every time.
Health, illness, and remedies are not what we've been taught these past 120 years. "They" pretend that advancements in science have made their conclusions anything but the guesses and gambles they actually are.
Our health does not follow the rules or expertise of ANY human or agency of humans on earth.
Our health is as unique as our living story, our living biography. What makes you sick today, may not make you sick tomorrow. What helped you today, may not help you next month. What makes you sick may not sicken your wife. And on & on & on it goes.
Each body & life is subjective & unique & personal. No two are biochemically or psychologically the same.
If there's any authority about your health, it has to be within you, and not outside of you.
And no matter what you do or don't do, you will still get sick, and recover, and get sick with something else, and recover, and eventually, if you aren't killed instantly, you will reach the Final Illness that will start off like an innocent cold or flu but turn into pneumonia (or some such shite) which will then lead to death.
(Any "life" that includes sickness and death is in no way a real life at all. Shame on us for having the audacity to get bored with the real life and choose this prison sentence nightmare instead. Death is the only way back to our real life, and therefore, death cannot actually be a bad thing. I think we get sad about others dying before us because we feel abandoned. I think we get sad about our own deaths because we erroneously assume it will lead to the annihilation of our consciousness.)
Let's say you hire a private investigator to look into a recent and sudden spate of illness and death in your community. Nothing noticeable has changed whatsoever in your community so everyone is puzzled and alarmed by what is happening and what is causing these deaths.
The investigator comes back unable to find anything, after weeks of looking into the matter, has found no concrete evidence himself, and declares that what has beset the community is an invisible submicroscopic particle floating through the air.
What would you do? Accept this at face value? Fire the guy and hire someone else? Keep looking for other more tangible explanations?
The above is a true story- with only an embellished wrinkle- that illustrates the madness of looking for an invisible particle floating through the air to explain that which has already been explained at length and with concrete evidence by many people.
Virology did not birth the Plague that destroyed the Roman Empire, or the Athenian plague. Virology did not cause the Black Death, that destroyed two thirds of Europe.
What caused these plagues and Black Death, was the same thing that causes ALL pandemics and plagues; GERM THEORY.
Consider the work of Dr. Jonathan Snow, who, during the great Cholera pandemic, noticed that people were getting sick from drinking water from some wells and not others. He promptly got authorities to shut down these wells, and provide clean drinking water, that eventually eradicated the disease. In other words clean drinking water cured a pandemic.
Why is the work of Dr. Snow, almost universally forgotten in the public mind, and totally ignored by BigPharma?
The reason is, that Dr. Snow focused on the TERRAIN, not a germ?
The Black Death is believed to have been the result of plague, an infectious fever caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis. The disease was likely transmitted from rodents to humans by the bite of infected fleas. https://www.britannica.com/event/Black-Death
Cholera is an acute, diarrheal illness caused by infection of the intestine with the bacterium Vibrio cholerae.
Germ Theory in medicine, the theory that certain diseases are caused by the invasion of the body by microorganisms, organisms too small to be seen except through a microscope.
Read What Really Makes You Ill?, Also, The Invisible Rainbow. Germs are invisible, but what really makes you ill, is also invisible, EMF, poison vapors in the air, poisons in the water. During the plague, there were comets, and they give off noxious gases, which sickened the people. Sounds crazy, but a tiny bug jumping in your nose is beginning to sound crazy to me.
Your right, bacterium caused Black Death, Athenian plague and Anotinine Plague (smallpox). Not viruses. My main point was that Dr. Snow cured Cholera epidemic with clean drinking water, not a pill. Why have we moved so far away from hygiene as a “cure” instead of a pill for every disease?
Both can exist together. Germs in dirty water and toxins in dirty water. Sometimes toxins compromise the immune system and lead to people being susceptible to pathogens. Just because toxins exist doesn't automatically mean viruses do not. This does not equal that. It can all exist.
Brilliant! Thank you. There may be something to germ theory but a minor role. We need to get to the bottom of this toute suite because then we can go in the right direction and people can be healed.
I don't understand the focus on "isolation." All kinds of things in history were postulated before they could be isolated, and turned out to be real.
There is plenty of experimental evidence of the existence of viruses and their effects. There would have to be explained by some other mechanisms that I have seen no compelling alternative for.
This whole argument about isolation seems a waste of energy. And only distracts from most important issues.
No microbe or sub-microbe has ever been removed from a sick creature and given to a healthy creature in a natural way who then became sick with the expected symptoms (or any at all).
The hypothesis about germs was that they cause contagious illnesses by attacking healthy people via coughing or sneezing or exhalation or kissing or intercourse or oral sex. The hypothesis was tested at various times in the first half of the 20th century and the overwhelming results were negative for transmission. Hypothesis refuted for failure to prove it true.
And because they could not make healthy people sick by exposure to sick people, they switched their form of proof to cell culture studies -- petri dishes & test tubes wherein some monkey kidney cells are exposed to some bodily fluid from a sick person along with antibiotics known to be toxic to kidney cells, and if the kidney cells die, then there's your proof that an illness-causing microbe has been found. No healthy creature is shown to become ill from it...just some naked, unprotected kidney cells in a petri dish -- kidney cells who don't have the protection from the body they came from.
The very bottom line about the virus/no virus issue >> No microbe or sub-microbe has ever been removed from a sick creature and given to a healthy creature in a natural way who then became sick with the expected symptoms (or any at all). Thus, no vaccine has ever been necessary, and double thus, no vaccine has ever been safe.
"What you are bringing up is a separate argument. can we show an isolated virus can make someone sick. This is a separate conversion." --
Read your words carefully >> "isolated VIRUS" >> "can we show an isolated virus can make someone sick. " --
Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick.
If you claim something can start a fire, you first have to show it starting a fire.
Without showing the submicroscopic particle making someone sick by the most natural means possible, you cannot call it a virus. That's why in order to prove it is a virus you have to show it making someone sick. (Actually you would wanna use 200 healthy volunteers >> 100 would be the placebo/control group.)
Until you separate the suspected viral particle from the bodily fluid and give it all on its own in the most natural way possible to healthy volunteers and make someone sick with it, it remains just that: a submicroscopic particle of unknown characteristics. It has not earned the right to be called pathogenic or a virus.
PS -- If you're linking to the NIH, you haven't even begun to challenge the official narratives about health, illness, and medicines. You're in no position to talk down to me. You are years behind me in research. Substack is about challenging the Official Narratives because....the narratives serve only to protect the officials.
Linking a paper about experiments is not the same as agreeing with the institutions that run the journals.
I'm sure you agree that experiments exist. This was just a short way of pointing to some of the experiments that can be done.
I know of people who do such experiments. But sending you their phone number would be a violation of their privacy.
The other issue was "Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick."
No. Something can exist without understanding fully what it does. Virus are not defined by created a particular sickness. Though that is a common hypothesis about some of them.
"The other issue was "Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick." No. Something can exist without understanding fully what it does. "
A tool for a particular trade can exist without YOU knowing what it does. But the tool is not accused of making people sick. If YOU accused it of making people sick, then you would be obligated to demonstrate that it makes people sick, otherwise your accusation is baseless.
There are no published studies showing an isolated microscopic or submicroscopic tool making anyone sick in a natural way. There are studies where supposedly such tools were believed to be in a sample of bodily fluid which was then injected into a creature's stomach or brains (or elsewhere) who then became sick. Injection is clearly unnatural and therefore any results from it are clearly unnatural.
All attempts at inducing so-called natural transmission of any illness or disease have failed -- including STDs.
Virologists operate on the level of ancient superstitions. Snatching at imaginary dybbuk's that can only be seen through the lens of super techno-marvel machines that are pre-programmed to point towards motes and mites as evidence of the haunting.
Perpetuating this primitive superstition that submicroscopic invisible particles floating through the air make people sick requires loads of jargon, increasingly obscure language to mystify the quackery. Not to mention a non-stop multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns and legions of hired priests in white robes who claim the mantle of "science" to hoodwink the unsuspecting public. Pretty amazing to think people believe this voodoo garbage. Excellent means of social control.
And then they create magical elixirs (that in a sane world would be understood for what they are- industrial poisons) that allegedly exorcise these submicroscopic demons from the mortal body. Makes for a good show and big business, but has nothing to do with biological reality.
It's rather fitting that the pinnacle of the dangerous religious cults of virology and vaccinology is the malignant belief that injecting synthetic chemicals made by habitually criminal companies that profit from perpetual disease somehow produces health.
Germ theory and gene theory are both reductionist, primitive superstitions that only remain viable due to massive propaganda and massive funding from the ruling interests that birthed and benefit from them at the expense of humanity.
Hmmm. I like your work. I like Tom Cowan. But every sentence in this pull quote is false:
"In the history of medicine, not one published study shows the isolation of identical particles that would represent a disease-causing virus from any bodily fluid from any sick person.... If one takes any person with any “viral” illness—for example, chicken pox, rabies, measles, AIDS or COVID-19—the published literature does not contain any evidence of any virus that was directly isolated from any bodily fluids from even one person suffering from these illnesses. The interesting thing about this statement is that no health institution from any government in the world disagrees. Similarly, there is no disagreement on this point from any virologist or medical doctor who works in or publishes in the field of virology. And there is no disagreement about this statement from such institutions as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Pasteur Institute or the Robert Koch Institute."
We need to apply the same strict scrutiny to the claims from our own side as we do to the claims from the other side. You can easily disprove every sentence in this paragraph with about 1 hour of work. Maybe start here:
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/?s=no+virus
I'm not sure why we keep doing this. It's not Germ Theory OR Terrain Theory, it's Germ Theory AND Terrain Theory. They go together, they are not mutually exclusive. The worse the terrain, the more the germs thrive. When we improve the terrain, germs have a harder time taking advantage of us.
Thanks Toby.
If that passage is all false, then I agree, the other side, represented by Cowan et al, has a problem. Least of which it would make them liars.
I wouldn't be able to falsify it in 1 hour though, and I'm aware of Hammond and don't find him convincing on the subject.
I've been told that a genetic particle caused and causes polio. I don't believe that to be true. I assume you don't either.
I've been told that a genetic particle caused and causes AIDS. Same.
The same people that told me about vaccines, told me about polio and AIDS and a litany of other stories that have very credible question marks on them.
Questioning (auditing) them and their stories seems entirely reasonable to me.
Do genetic bits exist. Sure they do. I'm not dying on that hill. Even Cowan is happy to talk about exosomes.
Do these genetic particles cause the diseases I've been told they cause? I believe that is unproven, by the side making the claim.
And seeing we are 200 years into this shitshow, I think it's unproven because the answer is No.
If virology is sound, then vaccination is here to stay.
Having just caught a cold virus at a conference again (I can tell you the exact person I got it from, our symptoms and incubation period match) I just falsified all of Cowan's work, Kaufman's work, and your reply. The amount of gaslighting required to maintain the Team No Virus position rivals even the worst excesses of Pharma. "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" applies here -- the other side is right about some stuff, occasionally. Or partially right. Or a good starting point. Team No Viruses is a get out of jail free card for Tony Fauci, Ralph Baric, and the 13,000 other bioweapons researchers in this country. I am mystified by our ability to resolve this rather straightforward difference.
I can see you are annoyed Toby, that's a shame.
I'm not on any side, I just want to know what is true, as I'm sure you do.
Colds post conferences, which I’ve also had, can have other plausible explanations. EMF being one.
Catching colds via viruses was studied for 44 years by the Common Cold Unit. Remains unproven.
"Novel pathogen" that leaked from a lab that spread around the world killing people in 2020. Disproved by the work of Rancourt.
Can they make stuff in labs that can make people sick or dead? Sure.
Can they even make genetic matter that can make people sick? I suspect they can and I'm open to the work of Couey on this matter. If Couey is right, they can definitely create sickness in targeted areas to fire start the panic. The media will do the rest. This seems to be a departure from Cowan et al.
But can they make something from genetic matter that “can pandemic.” I am confident the answer is no. It is not biologically plausible. So in that context, the biolab risk is wildly exaggerated for financial and industrial “pandemic preparedness” reasons.
None of this line of thinking let’s anyone off the hook.
My mother-in-law of 87 years has not been sick, not even a little cough or sniffle in all these last four+ years. She has never taken a flu jab ( nor covid jab) and is healthy except for high blood pressure).
For nearly two years she was going to her friend's house everyday spending 3-4 hours with her in her home. Her friend was vaxxed 2x, ( maybe 3x) and she developed blood clots and my mother-in-law was giving her a shot to thin her blood everyday. Now, neither of them have a smart phone or wifi in their homes. Could this be why my MIL has never gotten sick? No wifi and no smart phone? Something to think about...
For the last four+ years every single person has been under pressure, from the lockdowns, isolation, fear of a virus, job loss, uncertainty of the future, inflation, etc., we have all been living in a virtual hell (except for the globalists of course!). Fear and isolation are two of the biggest causes of sickness and even death.
Chemtrails, poisons in our food and water, which has been going on for years, (70% of people have glyphosate their urine), 5G, EMF's, poor diets, etc., have caused people to get sick.
And, as Dr. Yeadon says, there was no virus.
I live in northern Italy and what happened in Italy is that not all of Italy was hit by the "virus", and not even the whole of northern Italy, where 3/4 of all deaths occurred. The epicentre of the virus was in Lombardy which accounts for 2/3 of all the victims.
Why there? Perhaps three reasons.
First it was the first area in Italy with 5G towers. On Global Research, I read some very interesting experiments by American scientist Alan Frey, with pulsed microwaves causing rats to become docile and altering specific behaviors, and causing frog's hearts to stop beating. The US Government understood the potential of this, and they funded Frey's research.
From the article: "For governments it is not difficult to pulse the cell phone signals in the brain frequencies and in this way manipulate the thoughts of their own or foreign citizens. The difference between pulsed microwaves and extra long electromagnetic waves is that pulsed microwaves can be targeted on one person (or the whole nation if cell phone signals are pulsed in brain frequencies) while extra long electromagnetic waves, transmitted in brain frequencies, with their length up to 300 hundred thousands kilometers will reach brains in large areas. For sure so far the legislations around the world (except the Chile and Brazil) do not prohibit such actions to the governments or anybody else on human brains (for example Elon Musk is building a system of 20,000 satellites around the planet and working on neuralink research at the same time".
https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-governments-around-world-classify-information-about-effects-pulsed-mirowaves-extra-low-frequency-electromagnetic-waves-human-brains/5839545
Secondly, in January, 2020, Lombardy implemented a major vaccination campaign against meningococcus, following a mini epidemic of bacterial meningitis that affected just 6 people (with 2 deaths). The regional authorities decided on a massive and free-of-charge vaccination of the whole population. Within a few weeks, more than 33,000 people were vaccinated in Lombardy.
Within two months, Lombardy was experiencing the majority of "covid" deaths and was the first area of a Western country that was locked-down. (I can back this up with 2 articles, one in English and one in Italian.) Could it be that the meningitis vaccine in Lombardy (and thirdly - even the 2019 flu vaccine given in Western countries) caused these so-called "covid" illnesses? Or made those injected more vulnerable to becoming ill? The Lombardy epicentre of "covid" deaths and the timing of the meningitis vaccine seems to show correlation.
The 2019 flu vaccine, which the majority of people over 65 are pressured to take in Italy, and which was the largest group dying from "covid" in 2020 also concerns me. My Italian friend's parents both took the flu vaccine in early 2020. Her father died within a week from "covid" and her mother passed away a few months later from "heart failure". They were both healthy and fit and in their mid 70's.
Rife culturization of virus. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6120fd6cda3b62095f7499c9/t/614b810b86efd545800bdd97/1632338188190/Rife-Culturization+of+Virus+1958.pdf
https://rife.org/lab-clinical-reports
Have you ignored the work of Royal Rife that isolated cancer viruses using a microscope that he developed
To me, it's very simple: if vaccination and virology didn't make any money, they wouldn't exist.
Well, I'm one of those people. Viruses? prove it. Virology? Let independents into your lab to watch and see what's being done. Genetics? What, where when how does that prove anything? It doesn't. Psychiatry? 200-300 mental disorders made up by a pervert with no verifiable proof other than he said so. Dermatology? Don't make me laugh. Cosmetic surgeons? Morphed into men cutting young mens penises off. Contagion? Never been proven, ever.
For those who believe in all this Harvard grad chicanery of bullshit, please, have at it. Keep taking these vaccines that are all meant to maim and kill you. Make a list of diseases produced in the 20th century that didn't exist the century before. Were things better or worse after we cured natural childhood disease through vaccines? I know the answer to that last question. The onus falls on you to prove I am wrong. I'm happy to have that debate.
You don't need a Harvard grad to tell you contagion is a thing. Bring a child to a chickenpox party, or sleep with someone who has active genital herpes. You will prove it for yourself, no studies or labs needed.
As you know, a Harvard professor, Rosenau, showed that Spanish flu is not contagious.
You are referencing an experiment done pre an understanding of virus etiology. Bacteria does not cause viral infection. Purified blood preparations will have low viral titers. Contagion is far less likely when exposed to a patient well into the illness. Modern virology knows all this. Rosenau did not prove the flu is not contagious.
After leaving aside the off-topic statements (see below), only your first sentence remains: "You are referencing an experiment done pre an understanding of virus etiology." This sentence illustrates the difference between a real science, such as physics, and a fake science, such as virology.
In a real science, a relevant experiment that precedes a theory would have to be explained by that theory. Otherwise that theory would be discarded. For example, the small perihelion shift of Mercury, unexplained by Newton's theory of gravity despite great efforts, would have to be explained by Einstein's theory -- and it was.
Maybe a new physics theory that didn't meet this standard wouldn't always be discarded. But then its preservation would be a matter of shame and would not be proclaimed or, worse, cited as refuting an experiment! In virology, meanwhile, or at least in your interpretation of it, an experiment can supposedly be refuted by a theory -- by this supposed "understanding of virus etiology"!
To turn to your other statements:
"Bacteria does not cause infection." This point, whether true or not, is not relevant to Spanish flu, which is, as we have heard incessantly for 4 years now, a deadly viral disease.
"Purified blood preparations will have low viral titers." This claim, which also begs the question of viral existence, is just a word salad that has nothing to do with Rosenau's experiments, who used much more than blood and, when he used blood, it was treated simply with sodium citrate -- not "purified."
"Contagion is far less likely when exposed to a patient well into the illness." This bald assertion is hardly even a testable scientific claim. What does "well into" mean? How long is that, for Spanish flu? "Far less likely" than what? And even if, for the sake of argument, we ignore these gaping holes and stipulate some meanings: Rosenau still found no, not less, contagion. And he used some patients "quite early in the disease" (p. 312).
"Modern virology knows all this." This claim again begs the questions of whether virology is a legitimate field and whether it knows anything at all.
"Rosenau did not prove the flu is not contagious." This claim is just linguistic trickery. He didn't study what is now called influenza ("flu"). He studied Spanish flu. And he showed that it was not contagious.
Bacteria does cause infection, not viral infection. Regardless, you believe that contagion and viruses are mythological phenomena, despite the fact that large viruses can be viewed under the microscope. There is no point going on from here. It is just circular. You won't convince me that something viewed under the microscope isn't there. I am not going to go back and forth on this because it won't go anywhere.
You keep stating irrelevant points responding to straw men of your own invention. So, you are right that it’s pointless to continue.
Thank you Rita, and yes, I used to believe that. I believe childhood diseases are a natural phenomenon, since there is no proof of viral infection. But I draw a line between contagion and infection. I used to get very sick and coincidently being around sick people I attributed that to contagion. When I started taking Vit D, nothing made me sick, no amount of coughing, sneezing right in my face had any affect.
My doctor fell into a pool of glyphosate laced water. Skin being your largest organ, he was chemically burned and died in a year from cancer. Anything that gets into your blood stream, an injection, snake venom, bug bites, bee stings, sex with the wrong person, chemicals, poison food or water can create serious infection. A weakened immune system will render you susceptible to just about anything. But you will always find that one person in your vicinity that did the damage to you. That theory is wrong.
CM - I think it seems as though you did not receive virus into your body due to contagion because after taking Vitamin D you expressed no symptoms. However, Vitamin D modulates the antiviral immune response in the respiratory tract provoking an efficient defense against viral infections. So, your immune system neutralized the pathogens without you even knowing it creating the illusion you never had virions in your body in the first place. All of these immune mechanisms are well documented, studied and can be read in peer reviewed papers. Many of the conclusions we draw that seem intuitive are not in fact what is occurring in the body at all. However, that is marvelous that you are benefitting from exposure to immune modulating phenomena such as light and vitamins.
Very cogent response Rita, thank you, but it only goes to prove that so called contagion didn't affect me because my terrain was healthy, which approves Bechamp and disproves Pasteur. By and large I am not interested in the technical nitty gritty of why this or that works, but rather the results, be it affecting good or belying a bad outcome, consistently. The ability to prove a virus ever existed was eliminated with the destruction of Raymond Royal Rife's microscope in 1935 and later relegated to the dustbin of history known as "because I said so". Hum!! suspicious maybe?
Another interesting theory I have read is that cancer is not viral. It's a parasite, a worm or bug so to speak, that travels around your body and using anti-parasitic treatments will eliminate these parasites. Think Ivermectin. So I listened and understood that that could be a viable theory. Can I recite the technical data given to me that formed my thinking that this could be real? Of course not. But it was logical. For me, given the expertise of those espousing, people never given a platform that would reach a wide audience, was just another nail in the coffin of the lying AMA/Pharma Industrial Complex. The preponderance of evidence that illuminates fully the mendacity of said Complex is outstandingly overwhelming, IMO.
It proves terrain matters, but it doesn't mean germs don't exist. It depends on your immune susceptibility as to whether you become ill or not. It is not reductionistic, it is holistic, all the factors play a role, that is how I see it. Regardless, you are enhancing your terrain and that is the wisest move.
I really appreciated reading both your viewpoints. Thanks to both of you for taking the time to respectfully debate. Love this.
Once it's been shown that viruses don't exist, the entire medical fraternity will dissolve. I feel that industry attracts sadists. Not that all of them are, many are there to do good work for humanity, but it attracts sadists too. Including the psychiatric "industry".
we can reject vaccination as a bad idea even if viruses exist. ''settled'' science ?!
Equally, disproving virology wouldn't end vaccination. Some vaccines are supposed to prevent viruses, but there are vaccines against toxins, protists, bacteria, allergies, cancer.
'allergies, cancer. '' ' there are? or in the planning? in any case, both are caused by vaccines.
Gardasil once fake protected 3, now 7. all sexually incuced. So we jab boys too now. Nearly killed my 16 yr old Step Granddaughter, left her with RA/FIBROMYALGIA, A LIFE OF deabiliting PAIN. Her parents are Libs. But no longer do jabs. She's grown, has baby #1, and has gone totally natural. Baby gets no jabs.
So glad to know that at least, even through personal experience, people are seeing that jabs are dangerous. Kudos to parents who don't jab their children.
Allergy vaccines have been around since at least the 1930s. I had a course myself as a child; they didn't work for me at all, although they were probably using the wrong allergen. They're supposed to work by inducing IgG4 (tolerance) antibodies to the allergen. They're less widely used nowadays, because of the risk of anaphylaxis.
all i know is that vaccines have been known to cause allergies, for 100 years, roughly.
egg
and peanut
It doesn’t work.
Bad advice by doctors, telling parents to avoid all peanuts for the first 3 years of life caused massive increase in peanut allergies. Children need to be exposed to these things so their body understands it is natural. I'm sure vaccines do not help. I wrote a medical article on how vaccines cause allergies, autoimmunity and immunodeficiency so I am not opposed to the reality that vaccines can trigger allergies. I am just not in the camp that says vaccines are the root of all our problems and if we could just destroy germ theory all our problems would go away. Vaccines would not disappear and good health would not be restored for all. I believe we are being attacked by toxins from all sides. So many causes of disease, viruses are just one and dismissing them isn't going to stop the forward March of science making injections of mRNA, crispr gene editing, smart dust, otc medicines and foods with nano tech.
Of coarse this is just my belief and 2 cents people are welcome to their own beliefs.
peanuts are hardly a natural part of the european diet. peanut oil was used as adjuvant.
So if viruses don't exist why does disease appear to be transmissible? I get that weakened immune systems are more susceptible to disease but this doesn't seem to answer the question as to why one tends to get ill when around ill people.
i'm not convinced that they don't exist. it seems to me to be a way to derail the ''this one has never proven to exist '' similar to flat earth type things , a '' see, silly conspiracy people'' .
even if it were true that hey don't exist it derails/undermines the important discussion.
real /psyop
vaccines, a good idea, or not.
What will end vaccination is for us to let everyone know not to get them, and to look into them and that they really need to do their due diligence on this one. It's up to the indivdiual what they put into their body. They can put anything they like into it. But to force someone else is an act against nature and it's amazing everyone seems fine with that. How can any adult tell another adult what to do with their body? How can any adult go along with that? Sticking the fangs into children though, without even looking at what the ingredients are is culpable, even more culpable than the law makers. Actually the law makers are not culpable at all. They are only handing out orders. It's obeying them that is culpable, but besides that, we all need to sound the alarm loud and clear yet nobody even mentions the horror to those we know who still take the darned things.
I'm afraid it will take a very long time, for people to realize the mistake, and the harm of vaccination. We have it drilled into our brains that it is a modern miracle and has saved millions of lives. NOT. People refuse to connect allergies, autoimmune conditions, autism, cancer, and other diseases to the injections. They have legal protection from lawsuits, and cannot be put as cause on death certificates. They keep pushing them, and coming up with more, for profit. Evil crime against humanity. It is easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been Fooled.~ Mark Twain. So so sad, as millions more suffer and die from this hideous medical error.
I see this isn’t a reference you need for yourself, but it is a good presentation, in support of everything you say, and more. All 6+ hrs are worth watching.
https://www.sirillp.com/aaron-siri-testifies-before-new-hampshire-house-committee/
I think some vaccines save the lives of malnourished children living in countries of penury. Their living conditions have weakened them to where they cannot fight the infections without such intervention. Wouldn't it be much more humane to pump the billions instead into providing clean water, education and good food for these poor creatures. It is a matter of luck where and to whom you are born.
found a recent article https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/interview-with-dr-archie-kalokerinos?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=355417&post_id=148628484&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ff3y&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
actually they've killed many children. until recently vaccines came with warnings/they were not to be used on anybody who's compromised, even just running a temp, or malnourished.
in australia they killed many children . there's a doctor with a greek name, who wrote/campaigned on this.
I think what Dr. Archie said is all true. I did not know AIDS was transmitted in Africa via dirty needles. I didn't know other diseases were transmitted the same way. My only question is that if a child has marasmus, and measles is racing through the village and a mother sees neighbouring kids die, she has no access to clean water, or food, and someone offers to vaccinate her child against the measles, in that moment does she take the chance the measles will also kill her starving, weak child or the vaccine will save her child in that moment. It is a Sophie's choice. If she could get vitamin C, clean water, food, vitamin A, then the choice is obvious, but what if she cannot? So, in the bigger picture the money spent on vaccines should be redirected into food, clean water, and access to high dose vitamin A and intravenous vitamin C. Otherwise, these kids will die one way or the other. It is a splitting hair decision as to which choice will lead to their death.
So, I guess you answered my last question, the child will die from the vaccine and has a better chance of survival from the illness despite their state of malnutrition.
There are many pharmaceuticals that cause harm to their recipients. My friend was just pumped with a fluoroquinolone and Flagyl together. Are we daily warning our friends and neighbors about the adverse effects of the various medications they are on. I don't think so for the most part. Many people still smoke, do we warn them of lung cancer, people drink alcohol, which is toxic to the liver, covid shots are toxic to the heart, brain and immune system. People are entitled to take the medications they choose, but they are not entitled to choose medications for me to take such as, 'oh you have an infection well then you must take Levofloxacin' if you want to come for Christmas dinner etc....
🎯
Modern medicine is turning a lot of disease treatments into vaccines and mRNA. Of coarse, many of the people who do not believe in viruses also say they don't believe in genetics and CRISPR. It must be convenient to just dismiss anything that gets in their way of their belief system.
Downs Sydrome is fake. Congenital defects, all fake. The amount of things NAV need to call fake in order to prop up their belief grows every day since there are many things which back up the existence of viruses, genetics, the immune system...
“…people who don’t believe in viruses…” don’t have that view due to any “belief system.” It is simply that science has failed to demonstrate “viruses” are real. The “believers” are actually those who faithfully believe that other people must have done the work. Anyone is capable of finding out whether their beliefs are based on valid science. Just read and think, that’s all that’s required!
You believe the proof science has aquired with extensive studies is all fake. You excuse your beliefs by equivocation, saying because they are corrupt, what doesn't back up your beliefs, including peoples personal experiences, are all fake. Your belief is that what my son, myself and my family have gone through is not real and if we do not agree with you we are any number of derogatory things.
You are a specialist in gaslighting. He said, correctly, that viruses have not been shown to exist. He could have added the stronger statement that contagion has repeatedly been disproven, e.g. Rosenau (1919).
Instead of discussing these important issues, you produce a stream of invective of at best tangential relevance. It is responses like yours, which are tacit admissions of having no sound arguments, that made me look into the issues with virology. Perhaps you will now have that beneficial effect on others.
It is really easy to call something fake and dismiss all proof. That is called gaslighting. It isn't gaslighting to say something exists which acts like a virus with an incubation and spread like contagion, with studies on blood, biopsies, autopsies.
You project what you are doing onto others.
NAV talk about those harmed by "belief in viruses". If you are wrong and people are infected with viruses what you are doing is harming others with your gaslighting.
The only proof you have that viruses do not exist is saying all proof is fake. You distort people's lived experiences. That is called gaslighting. I'm not altering your experiences I'm stating my beliefs and that I do not appreciate the attacks and insults of most NAV. I do not appreciate being told all proof I provide is "fake" based on someone else's belief of that proof. When I say this don't take it to mean anyone should make me appreciate their views and comments. You do you. I am just stating my beliefs and experiences dealing with NAV and their attacks and insults
That sucks for your son, because the thymus plays a big role in T cell production for the immune system. You know from experience the importance of immunity against pathogens, no studies needed, but they do exist of course. The denialism is an ideology promoted by a handful of doctors who make a living from it. You are wasting your time though, because they dismiss the obvious, they dismiss the proof that large viruses can be seen under a scope, and they keep looping back to their repetitive faulty yardsticks, and they all parrot each other which means they have outsourced their thinking to denialism propaganda.
idk if that's actually true, but in any case, the discussion derail the real discussion, does a particular one exist, what there ever a pandemic.
You can easily view a giant virus under a microscope. Viruses are everywhere, we need them. Only a tiny percentage are virulent. How we respond to a viral infection depends on our immune system and genetic makeup. Koch's observations were not used as a yardstick to prove the existence of viruses, so that is a moot point. Vaccines involve risk, some more than others, and therefore should never be required to attend school, or mandated in general. The reason we have an immune system is to neutralize invading pathogens. If there were no pathogens, we would not need an immune system. The liver and kidneys deal with toxins for elimination.
What's a NAV?
"You're either lying, stupid or you work for pharma."
????????????
I merely asked what a NAV is - I'm 68 and not familiar with all these new anacronyms on social media. And by the way, I haven't been vaxxed or gone near a doctor for well over 40 years and as far as I'm aware I'm perfectly healthy. I am neither lying (but you can choose to believe I am if you wish), I'm not stupid (or senile yet, and I have a PhD in the Philosophy of Technology) and I was an engineer and inventor, and latterly builder of geodesic greenhouses. Now retired.
🙏💞🎯
Sorry I was trying to be playful and sarcastic. A lot of people don't know the anachronism. I should not use it anymore.
What I meant is this is how NAV treat people (not how I treat people). If you claim to have experienced contagion, expect direct insults or coercion to NAV way of thinking… then if you don't convert, insults ensue.
Yes those conditions exist but the reasons for why they exist has not been told to us. Let's get to what the answers REALLY ARE about the bases of the whole enchilada, and then we can drop germ theory and go in the right direction. If germ theory holds up, then we go that way. Why aren't scientists jumping to prove viruses exist? They could win this one in no time. Why the reluctance from the medical industry to engage in proof of viruses?
Research giant viruses, that is the simplest way to understand that they do exist. Of course, terrain matters, so do the exciting causes of illness (trauma, toxins, pathogens, stress etc....) It is not terrain vs. pathogen, it is terrain interacting with pathogen.
Yes I can come at that more readily - terrain interacting with pathogen. With the trillions spent on medical science and science in general, you'd think we would have studies on everything by now, but how often do they say, "more studies are needed", or "this has not been studied"? For example the veracity of herbal remedies - they know nothing about it, just completely disregard it (although they use the herbs in their pharmaceuticals so they DO know).
We need to understand that we are being degraded and kept down. Once one understands that, then all fits into place. Everyone gives their power to these scoundrels who then go and attack our health and infrastructure, if not ourselves directly through poisoning and threats of even death if we don't toe their line.
I'd like science to get down to opening up the discussion and being prepeared to see things in a new way so we can go forward now. But it won't do that because it has too many people strangled by the idea of their omnipotence and people will do anything, absolutely anything to surrender their bodies and their minds to the nefariousness of this distortion.
Pharma controls the science in universities. Medicine is focused on symptom suppression with pharmaceuticals. Real solutions are constantly suppressed because there is no money in them. The problem is conflicts of interest, and there is a move to suppress supplements. We never hear on media to get sunlight, rest, take bone broth when ill, instead vaccines are pushed, pushed, pushed. Pierre Kory and Dr. Marik are now putting their energy into looking into the science of alternative treatments. It is costly, and they won't be getting grants for their studies. The problem with the alternative health field is that it is too easy to hang out your shingle. Other modalities need to be held to a very high standard so people get the best care possible, the insurance companies will save a fortune, I don't see why they don't get on board with this.
They already proven viruses exist.
They have documented them under darkfield microscopy, in blood of sick people, injected them into animals, implicated themselves in many ways infecting people with polio vaccine virus and simian virus. If you do not want to believe that's fine but saying proof doesn't exist, does not make it all go POOF just for you. Take on the burden of proof instead of asking people who already proved they exist to keep doing the studies over so you can call them fake.
Take on the burden of proof.
Get your Sam Bailey who makes money selling her theories to study large groups of people who have been tested positive for viruses and see what exactly is going on in their blood.
Maybe Sam Bailey prefers a career in front of a camera instead of medicine. It could be that simple. Ms. Bailey can put forth her opinions, but none of the deniers can prove them.
It's not up to the "deniers" (dissenters is more like it) to prove them. It is up to the ones who claim viruses are real to prove what they say. What is wrong with just wanting facts for what medicine is based on?
Well show us a link. Surely by now their proof should be published everywhere. Just because you say they have proven viruses exist doesn't mean they have. You'll need more evidence than that.
One of the main issues I have with people who do not believe in viruses is they demand ultimate proof off of 1 link. There's no way to prove a virus off of 1 link. You need to go through the history. Genetics, multiple isolation techniques. Ruling out all the things viruses are not. Backing up their existence.It's not like I can just give you one link and it's going to all of your questions. You would need a book.
I.
Say this not because I can't provide a link that shows proof but it would never be enough. Proof for you, you would always find something to pick a part about it and that's okay. You can believe whatever you want and I can believe what I want. I would just appreciate if people who don't believe in viruses would stop forcing their beliefs and insulting on to someone else. I'm not trying to force what I believe on to other people. Almost every time I get into a conversation I have somebody who doesn't believe in viruses.Come on and say oh that's fake.That study that it shows there was spike protein in the brain and an autopsy that was fake.Why are you talking about this?This is stupid you're an idiot.You must be working for pharma. It is derailing all convos and not allowing others to have decent conversations.
really? pity people go so over the top/extreme. it devalues real critique.
Tim Truth, Yeadon's right hand man, told me there is no proof the immune system exists. He wasn't the first or even the 10th NAV to say this. Basically they believe in scientific method but they don't believe in science. They question every medical article, its all fake, even biopsies showing vaccine spike protein in the brain, which killed someone can be identified as not Sarscov-2 infection spike protein. Even articles where science implicates itself, injecting simian virus into people through vaccines, injecting polio causing "vaccine polio outbreaks." There is no debating people who say it is all fake. People who imply because rockefellers are corrupt it means viruses do not exist, were not isolated FIRST from plants. The first tests of viruses were not even on humans but how do they explain this? They don't. They just call it all fake. The first "vaccines" were just infecting people with similar viruses (cow pox) in order to stave off more serious infections (small pox). They didn't involve heavy metals and toxins. It's their choice what they believe but their logic, to me, is illogical.
i do wonder if this extremity is away to muddle the convo altogether.
Exactly. Much of what they dislike about virology actually proves it exists even more. For example, virus isolation is more complex. They used to strain bacteria out. Then they introduced antibiotics to kill the bacteria. This is double proof it is a virus which remains. The microscope showed a virus was present and after antibiotic solution it remained. (they say this proves it isn't a virus) They call it "dust." So, tell me... how does dust replicate inside cells?
Regarding monkey kidney cells (the cells they use to replicate viruses), they lack IL-6 which is the immune cell that fights viruses off. This reveals much of why some people get infected and others do not, is they lack good immune response. It doubly proves it is a virus if it can get through without IL-6 present.
They demand Kochs postulate be fulfilled yet it is irrational because not all people will be susceptible to a virus and some will already have immunity.
What about studies showing gut bacteria fight off viruses? They call it fake because the only way to back up their belief is to say all medical studies are fake. They demand you show proof but they don't want proof they just want you to scurry around looking for medical articles wasting your time and energy, distracting you
There is no proof of viruses, as explained in the post. So what is purpose of the alleged immune system and what would it be doing?
What is the purpose of two kidneys, when one would do the job? Just kidding, no you are spot on, the immune system neutralizes pathogens. The pathways on how this occurs is so well studied and known.
I need Phar and her gorilla analogy here.
::batsignalling Phar::
“The first tests of viruses were not even on humans.” Um what are you even saying? My understanding is that the first “virus” claimed to be found was “tobacco mosaic virus” and the methodology used to make that ridiculous assertion was ridiculously unscientific. It was basically claimed that, because no bacterial agent could be found, there must be something smaller, so they called the imagined tiny particle “virus.” You have a lot of research ahead of you, and I encourage you to get busy. If you don’t like reading scientific papers, you can start here:
https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/viruses-unplugged/tobacco-mosaic-virus-the-beginning-and-end-of-virology/
It wasn't until the 20th century that viruses were proven to exist.
Everything you just said backs up the existence of viruses. You are oversimplifying the tobacco mosaic virus research. You are skipping all the steps they used to prove it was something which did not behave like a bacteria, fungus, toxin. They took many steps to back up the existence.
Your abusive superiority complex is showing. I have so much to learn and you are just the teacher I need to look to.
Your logical fallacies are crumbling. You take one thing, leave out pertinent facts then make sweeping statements.
What is the immune system, but the way the body naturally protects and heals itself. That is the real miracle, not poison injections.
The immune system 'fights' invading pathogens. For babies who are malnourished in third world countries their immune systems are deficient, and they will die without a vaccine. It is not ideal. It would be better if they had good food, and clean water, so they could fight infections naturally.
We need to understand that we are dealing with phenomenal magicians that know how to manipulate the psyche. Probably true that we don't even have "an immune system" let alone viruses. It's also probably true that we didn't go to the moon and the earth isn't a round ball spinning through space. The lies we've been told - in every field - are staggering in their depth, heft and audacity. They are breathtaking. Imagine all these years, these scientists, believing in something they never even checked on and basing their life on it. And the "unrained" patients, handing over their bodies as if to the gods. It's mind blowing. But if viruses could be proven, then why wasn't it done decades ago? Why haven't they put this subject to bed by simply providing the proof? Is that really too much to ask (of after all - a "scientific" fraternity)? Are they taunting us or playing coy? What the heck is on with them? It is not up to those who question vaccines or medical scinece to answer the question "then what are these people suffering from if viruses don;'t exist". If that cannot be answered by the claimant's of it, then why should anyone believe they DO exist?
It is not the responsibility for backers of terrain theory to explain what those diseases are. It is the responsibility of the claimant. All the debaters want is proof of their claim, which they should been keen to provide.
Ah logic, you're so right, it's splendid!
But there is proof, the larger viruses can be viewed under a microscope. Just keeping it simple here. Scientists have filmed viruses infecting bacteria in real time. Do the research.
My son's thymus organ was stolen during heart surgery leaving him severely immunodeficient. He is the canary in the coal mine. It's all fake though, according to you. Carry on.
Yup. Tetanus is supposedly caused by a bacterium. That's a very common vaccine.
I’m not aware of these vaccines you speak of. Please provide a reference to a vaccine against toxins. Thanks. You might be right that people will still choose to inject themselves, their children, and their patients, but I do think that no rational person would do that when they realize that it all is built upon corrupt science…If we can call it science.
For some reason the pernicious ones who decide all this love the idea of vaccines. Why? Well to make tons of money for one thing but secondly, they love fangs. serpents. And they love babies' blood.
I know viruses exist, and I think vaccinations are dangerous.
Yes, but the fact is “viruses” don’t exist, so there’s no reason to say, “even if viruses exist.” Vaccines are toxic & dangerous AND “virus” is a mythical entity. I agree with your point though.
is it a fact?
vaccines are dangerous, and not needed, let's stick with that rather than go over the edge, alienate people who might start thinking about this, and concentrate on the fact that we have immune systems, and that the terrain is important, inside, and outside.
Check out giant viruses, they exist.
Sounds like a variation on a Japanese horror movie.
It is interesting that the 1986 law that indemnified pharma companies from any harms caused by "vaccines" contained the statement (paraphrasing), "vaccines are inherently unsafe." Written into a law that holds pharma companies harmless. Only a feckless, bought-and-paid-for Congress could do that.
That is correct. They are inherently unsafe which is why they should never be mandated or pushed on kids to attend school, but it is a gravy train, you can't sue if the kid is harmed. That is the crux of the problem, the indemnification of pharma, which also occurred with the EUA during covid. It earned billions for pharma, and so they will continue with the program by getting the WHO and UN on board to foist vaccines on the whole world and those who refuse will be punished.
It is not disputed that viruses are not living things. To reiterate, they are not biological organisms. They are probably best understood as biological toxins. They are likely, I believe, to be the breakdown products of degraded cells which are dead or dying as a result of one or more environmental stressors, or cells that are just at the end of their life cycle. They may serve as danger signals to other cells or to other living organisms. Virologists appear not to believe that viruses have any adaptive function, but are just infectious agents, waiting to infect in order to do their damage through stealing cellular mechanisms in order to replicate. They are likely, I believe, derived from cellular DNA and RNA of the supposedly “infected organism”, but may also be transmissible. Human DNA usually comprises around 3 billion or more base pairs. Viral DNA or RNA on the other hand, usually comprises 7,000 to 20,000 nucleotide pairs . This would be consistent with(although by no means proof of) the notion that viruses are a subset of host DNA or RNA.
To describe viral transmission as an “infection” may therefore be inaccurate, as infections connote the invasion of one living organism by another. It may be more accurate to view viruses as immunogens or cell derived poisons, possibly designed to sound the alarm system to the immune system that a clean up job is needed to remove the degraded products of moribund or dead cells. A possible model for viral transmission is the “shedding” that has been observed by individuals vaccinated with the COVID-19 spike protein to others who are unvaccinated, but then develop symptoms when in close proximity to the vaccinated person. A similar phenomenon is observed with the measles vaccine, through which others can develop measles. Another paradigm is the chicken pox virus, which can be transmitted through close exposure to those already suffering from chicken pox. Although these cases are usually referred to as “infections”, the word infection implies the invasion of one organism by another, so this is actually a misnomer. Poisoning or contamination might be a better paradigm for viral transmission.
Although the term “live virus” vaccine is used to describe vaccines that are made from viruses that are not “heat-killed”, viruses are not alive, so the term “live virus” is a misnomer. A “heat- killed” viral vaccine may actually be denatured DNA or RNA which has lost much of its immunogenic properties and when injected, produces an even weaker immune reaction from others. It also may have lower transmissibility or immunogenicity when “shed” or transmitted to others.
One of the main complaints about viral theory is that viruses (except for bacteriophages) are never isolated in their pure form (they fail Koch’s and Rogers’ postulates). They are identified indirectly by DNA assays, often PCR tests. If something exists, shouldn’t one be able to find it, especially, when viruses are said to exist in nature by the trillions or quadrillions — more than there are stars in the universe? These objections are never entirely addressed by those favoring classical viral theory. Yet there remains as counterpoint to this objection the undeniable fact of transmissibility and the fact that people have an immune response that is common with many types of infections. There are also easily detectable measures of immune activation, such as the white blood cell count, and cytokines such as prostaglandins, interleukin, TNF alpha, and other immune modulators.
A possible explanation to this conundrum is that the nucleotide base pairs that make up viruses are extremely unstable, perhaps barely stable enough to survive proximate transmission from animal to animal, human to animal or vice versa, but not stable enough to stand up to the in vitro techniques that they are being subjected to in the isolation process. They may be biological examples of what the Heisenberg uncertainty principal is for physics. In other words, the act of studying the virus may alter it in such a way that you can’t actually study it, or the act of studying may alter it in such a way that in such a way that it is no longer the same thing it was prior to being studied.
Because upper respiratory viruses produce a syndrome known as “coryza” or skin rashes which may resemble allergies in some cases, one might also wonder if there is some kind of allergic response with viruses. I think this unlikely as IgE and Eosinophilia are commonly elevated in allergy, and other signs of MAST cell activation. This is not typically seen in the case of viruses. What produces the malaise and secretory symptoms of both viral and allergic symptoms are rather the immune reaction to the substances in the bloodstream. Viruses are not allergens, which are primarily IgE mediated, but they likely are immunogens. We see similar diatheses in some toxic exposures — smoke, air pollution, and poison ivy/oak/sumac. There is a cytokine activation in these intoxications which produces the symptoms, and the nature of this reaction is specific to the toxin. Some kinds of toxins may produce lachrymation, and burning pains in the mucous membranes such as tear gas, and others, such as smoke or coal dust may produce more bronchial irritation and cough.
In sum, rather than viral syndromes being indications of viral “infections”, they may best be considered immune reactions to biologically toxic waste products from decaying or dead cells.
Since these waste products are composed of DNA or RNA fragments, if they are taken up by healthy cells, they may be reduplicated and transmitted to others as well as amplifying one’s own immune response. These biological toxins can be transmissible to those in close proximity, as with shedding, but are unlikely to be transmitted to those who are not in physical contact or close enough to be contaminated by the exhalations of those affected. Those who are sickened may indeed experience intracellular viral replication and develop a significant viral load. They may become quite ill.
I would propose that those who are experiencing viral syndrome secondary to some toxic exposure (chemical or electromagnetic, for example) or other stressor leading to cellular breakdown (excessive stress, poor diet, lack of sleep, exposure to cold, leading to chill, and over-exertion, for example) are likely to develop a worse illness than those who are not similarly intoxicated, but only experience the transmitted toxic effects of the virus. However, this may not always apply. Some people’s immune systems may have more of a tendency to over-react, and some may sweep away the toxins more expeditiously. Liver function also may impact on the severity of illness, as it affects the bodies ability to eliminate toxins rapidly. People with worse immune function may also have unique problems due to inability of the immune system to remove the toxins from the body through antibody binding and phagocytosis. People with an already high toxin load, from other poisons in their environment or a multiplicity of pharmaceutical swimming around in their blood stream may also be compromised. The role of Vitamin D levels in immune function and response to viral syndrome can not be overstated.
Some may object to my relabeling viruses as toxins, and insist they be classified as infectious agents. I am less interested in reclassifying viruses than in redefining them. This theory is nothing but a theory, and it awaits empirical verification, if that is possible in a world where there are limitations to science coming both from both human imperfections and the constraints placed by nature on its measurement, at least with the instruments humans have at their disposal.
Appreciate the considered and thoughtful comment. Thank you.
Very prescient poignant reasoning. Have been in the trenches with doctorate degree for over 3 decades. The elusive virus does not exist, certainly does not cause infectious disease.
Big P, and their henchmen the medical cartel have always lied.
Admitting the lie is highly problematic, however these times are unprecedented. Pressure from those who experienced. deliberate genocide assists greatly.
My heart is overjoyed reading this. Yes of course - prove that viruses exist! So basic yet still hasn't been done. See the depths of the hallucination? Even "scientists" are not asking for this verification. Maybe in their hearts they know viruses don't exist as we've been told but it's too lucrative for them to quit the charade. This is brilliant! I can't imagine the five labs coming up with the diagnosis consistently. And if they do, then they could put this terrain theory to bed. They should be jumping at the chance to prove to us that viruses are real. They should have that kind of basic information readily available. It would be interesting to see how these tests will be monitored and by whom. I go even further and say all laboratory work is meaningless. The reason I say this is because nobody lives in a sterile environment.
Jamie's work replicating the isolation of viruses is the sort of science that provides evidence we can all understand and support regardless of our personal beliefs. Others seem to just take a lot of $ and self promote without doing any real science themselves.
Lies are definitely unbecoming and its a shame (and a wee shock) to find some of the proponents of no virus are not entirely honest. I now wonder at their motives and am certainly not alone in this regard.
Heidi's and Geoffrey's comments here both contain elements I agree and disagree with, but because the "Science" is not settled my position is to wait and see the results of experiments and good, honest uncensored debates. High expectations, yes I acknowledge that.
The current methodology of isolation is laughable but I also still see transmission of something, perhaps STD's, herpes etc, name it what you want. There is so much we don't know and so much medical knowledge we have been lied to about that it will take years (if ever) for consensus and we don't have that time luxury today.
Terrain does make a lot of logical sense A Dr that states that there is nothing in the body that can harm you is not one that I would want though. How about cancer for starters?
The amount of nurses and ladies that had severe bleeding issues after looking after the freshly jabbed oldies in homes strongly suggests either shedding or transmission of some sort. Even in the small circle I knew at the time it was undeniable.
What is obvious to me is that there is not enough time to convince the world that viruses don't exist in order to stop the continuing poisoning that is occurring, even if it was 100% correct. I still donated to the experiments of Jamie's though and remain happy to debate the points with anyone, without attacking the messengers.
I agree with most of what you said, but is it necessary to delve relentlessly into proving this or that exists when your own eyes tell you what you just saw or experienced? See, that's where I get crazy. Must I prove the sun will burn me if I stay under it for too long, or the reason rain is wet? These are questions my granddaughter has asked when she was 5.
Bechamp was correct. Pasteur was dead wrong. The Rockefeller's went with the germ theory. Why? Can we not see the results from that choice? Can we not see the corruption, mass deaths and profits derived from that decision? Yet we are to believe that these twisted sciences are humanitarian. Really!! Cure something, anything, then maybe I'll believe. Cancer cures? Out the wazoo. All destroyed. Why?
I am lucky as I do get to see cancers go away, recently even one of those common new overnight big lump on the neck ones on a young fella in his 20's- gone in 2 weeks. Another recent one was a glioblastoma - gone in 8 weeks. Yes I only believe what I see optically as well with the scope, and the experiments I do myself.
The cancer I really want to see gone is the rocketfellas and their ilk though.
How are the cancers gone? Are you referring to IVM?
There is a lot of mythology in virology and genetics. Johnathan Couey has helped me sort a lot of this out.
https://gigaohmbiological.substack.com/p/uk-doctors-for-covid-ethics-international
Sam Bailey says:
Virology births Vaccination.
Virology births “Pandemics.”
Virology births Lockdowns.
Virology births Pandemic Preparedness.
Virology births cover narratives for industrial poisoning.
Sounds to me like Sam Bailey is asking people to deny the existence of something many people suffer and die from in order to sooth her, and your, fears. This is exactly what we are fleeing, "othering" people who have different beliefs and experiences from us. Gaslighting them and demanding they change their beliefs for us and accommodate our beliefs. These NAV people don't just ask for people to have open minds they ask for them to deny the existence of what they are experiencing.
Contagion is real for many of us who have immune defects, congenital or aquired. Incubation periods are real. Anyone who lives outside of mainstream, away from people who only gets sick when around sick people- (ie) is around EMF and doesn't get sick, catching what others have is real. So is virus isolation through old school means of straining. So is contamination of vaccines with viruses. Call it fake if you want just don't tell me what to believe or "other" me.
Contagion is as obvious as expecting rain from a gathering storm. You are dealing with people who are invested in an ideology. They are correct on some aspects, terrain does matter, vaccines carry varying levels of risk, corruption exists in scientific circles, pharma controls the vaccine narrative, which means greed controls it, pharmaceuticals don't provide health, some medical journals have been corrupted by conflicts of interest, universities have been corrupted by grants etc....But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, despite all that viruses have been proven to exist, over, and over and over irrespective of Koch's faulty yardstick.
Even worse - they censor polite debate.
🎯🔥
I've noticed I also self-censor and change my wording to be more "inclusive" incase a NAV comes along, hoping they will allow me to have a conversation that doesn't turn into them insulting me, demeaning me, accusing me of working for pharma and demanding I change my beliefs and stop discussing what I'm talking about because to them it is all fake.
They feel threatened by virus believers and become combative many use ad hominem attacks which is a signal to stop interacting with abuse tactics.
What is a “NAV”?
People who believe when someone is sick, whatever it is, it is '“Not A Virus.” Its an old anachronism. I'm endeavoring to stop using it.
If anyone is not just telling others what to believe but forcing them to take a medical procedure even if they don't want it, is the medical fraternity or the "scientific" fraternity.
You are "attacking the person and not the issue" by intimating that what we are saying is tha the people who suffer are faking it. Oh we know people suffer, often we suffer too, but that still doesn't prove that viruses exist.
And just because you say they do doesn't make it so either.
Why do you not ask your beloved fraternity to provide unequivocal proof and be done with this argument?
You have no proof what I have suffered from most of my life is not EBV. I have proof every time I go to test and they show my titers, my body going through hell, biopsy of liver showing virus attacking it.
You say I am attacking the person, not the issue. You are attacking me, my experiences, not the issue. So is Sam Bailey. I am saying that when anyone claims to have caught a virus you attack them, like what you just did with me, act like I am part of a fraternity of corrupt science and they are my beloved.
What I and others suffer from is a contagious virus with an incubation which titers can test for immunity to and any insinuation that we dont understand what contagion is, what we experienced, is gaslighting. Acting like I need to provide any proof to you is irrational. I don't owe you anything especially when everything I would show you would be torn apart by you and called fake.
What science is doing to people, forcing them, is the same as what NAV do. You want to control and insult anyone who doesnt agree with you when you cannot control them.
I'm not forcing you to believe I just want to be left the fuck alone when I do discuss something not get some attack on my experience, my values, my intelligence. Fuck off
Ironic isn't it Heidi, you wish to be left alone to speak as you wish in favor of vaccines and we wish to exercise freedom to choose what goes in our bodies. No one is forcing you to shut your mouth. But the people and cause you support forced through coercion to take a medical product against their will. People lost their jobs for refusing the jab. People were beaten and arrested for not wearing masks for God sake. Dr.'s lost their licenses to practice for refusing to go along with obviously nonsensical, unhealthy, dangerous deadly recommendations including a completely untested "vaccine" that's still killing people today as we speak. So Heidi you a free to do what you wish to do with your body including your mouth. You can keep it shut or not. But when ever I encounter people like you, I confront the medical tyranny.
"as you wish in favor of vaccines"
I do not wish in favor of vaccines. Your accusations, your being "triggered" by my belief in viruses causing you to equate me with the enemy is all made up in your head.
I did didn't i? My apologies for conflating the two issues. I'm not sure if viruses are real or not. I'm truly confused and seeking knowledge and understanding. The only way I know to gain discernment is through robust debate from which i believe is distilled the truth.
As for vaccines my opinion is settled. They, all vaccines, are harming people and are "inherently dangerous". This aren't my words in quotations, those words are used in the Vaccine law currently in force. Simply reviewing the incidences of autism and # of vaccines given in the childhood vaccine schedule since the passage of the "vaccine act of 1986" was enough to convince me. 1 in 10,000 was the frequency of autism in 1986. It's been steadily increasing since that time, tracking with the increase in vaccines given to children. Today, the frequency of autism is 1 in 32. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting someone with autism or someone who has an autistic child. And that's just autism. There are many others injured by vaccines to one degree or another.
So again, my apologies. I don't wish to argue. I wish to learn. I think we can only do that through robust dialog. Have a good day.
You can't control another person's beliefs or behaviour. You know the truth that is all that matters. I hope you heal I really do; I wish you the best of health.
Thank you. 🙏
Foul language or outrage is not evidence. Where is the evidence that EBV exists? I don’t mean titers, which beg the question.
what are NAV people?
People who believe whatever it is, it is "Not A Virus."
NAV is an easier, shorter way to say people who do not believe in viruses
That it is still a belief is kind of proof that viruses don't exist. Proof extinguishes belief but when no proof is forthcoming, it instills doubt. And there are whole populations who base their lives on such a belief. Until "science" can prove and to the stupidest person to boot, that viruses exist, then they remain merely a belief, and that's equivalent to a religion or a cult.
You have made so many contradictory statements here and are arguing semantics. It's called crazy making.
First a belief existing doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
For me, my belief shows respect that other things can also make people sick and we have a lot more to learn about viruses.
Second, proof exists but when you call it all fake you are instilling doubt which is a tactic used to derail topics and confuse people.
Insinuating that you need to "convince" even the "stupidest person" is a low blow.
You "believe viruses do not exist." That is a cult also when it tries to convert people with abusive language, insults and denying people's experiences. You've reached my FUCK OFF point.
Yeah well people who close their minds to new ideas constantly reach my "fuck off point" so understand that it's no picnic trying to bring sense to a converaation. You have made unsubstantiated claims - that I make contradictory statments but offered no evidence for that. Maybe you think that simply making the claim is enough for people to accept it as truth?
To go to the truth we need to be specific not "wishy washy". Please explain where I was contradictory or shut up. If they hold water, they could help me improve and isn't that what we're really here for?
The highest respect we could give to everyone is to follow the truth. If we instill doubt, so be it! People need to use their grey matter, it's doing them a favor.
Yes, when we make statements, if we are not prepared to make them convincing, then you will be expressing yourself as being full of hot air and then nobody will listen to you. And that's a good thing because we hear too much from hot air expellers.
And the explanation needs to be made so that even a grandmother can understand it. I believe viruses do not exist, correct. However I would like to know why "science" stil lhasn't ascertained that fundamental fact.
But the weirdest thing is why people defend their not needing to.
Excellent as always!
Vaccines are poisons
https://theylied.ca/Vaccines.shtml
.
Join the campaign to Take Action and Raise Public Awareness at
https://TheyLied.ca/
Most of everything is just a story. Some stories (eg: religions) 'stick' in the collective mind and 'stick around' for centuries, giving us wars, torture of non-believers, and millions of (cult) believers a warped focus to help them in their confusion about life by complying with 'authorities'.
Science is also a story and a religious cult -- as this article on virology demonstrates. The whole of history, often told as 'progress through military technology', is also a story. Stories are everywhere at every level and in every corner of our civilisation. Even this article is a story putting a contrasting view to a mainstream story. Take your pick -- and take the consequences.
Dr. Bailly, I've been following this line of thinking since the scamdemic ushered in mail in balloting and the bloodless coup of 2020. Terrain theory vs germ theory. Virus's no Viruses.
I recently spoke to a gentleman who had stage 4 colon cancer and claims to have cured himself and others with dog dewormer suggesting that parasites might be at the root of cancer and other illnesses.
Clearly people were made ill. Clearly something spread through the population.
Do you have any thoughts regarding parasites causing illness? And my wife had what I thought was a good question. She asked me, "What about the vault that holds all the most dangerous viruses"? Marburg virus, Ebola, Hantavirus, Bird flu virus, Lassa virus, Junin virus, The Crimea-Congo fever, The Machupo virus, Kyasanur Forest Virus (KFD), Dengue fever." I didn't have a good answer for her. Do you?
People are "made" ill all the time.
It is most definitely not "clear" at all that anything "spread" through the population in fact there is zero evidence that there was any unusual amount of illness in early 2020 whatsoever. This has morphed into urban legend with zero proof.
Ebola is purely fictional. It's yet another construct of the pandemic industrial complex/biosecurity complex with multiple purposes attached.
Ebola is cover for industrial operations in Africa which produce major pollutants that have no regulations/oversight in Africa—mining, offshore oil exploration and drilling, rubber-tapping,etc.- Firestone rubber plantation- massive water pollution directly into once potable water that the locals still must drink from as there is no other source of drinking water etc.
The locals curiously then get the same symptoms as "Ebola" after drinking the polluted water.
Plus: Insecticides/Banned Pesticide Dumping in Africa, indoor spraying- walls in West African homes coated with insecticides: carbamates and organophosphates are increasingly important alternatives to pyrethroids for indoor residual spraying. Toxic Vaccine Campaigns in Africa- Beta-lactam Antibiotics- Pharma Profiteering etc. Same story in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Congo.
Ebola is the cover story.
Cover for good old colonialism- land theft- scramble for Africa etc. US also uses Ebola/Marburg cover con to justify moving troops into area (AFRICOM) in order to clamp down certain areas- control a restive populace, prevent other competing entities from gaining a foothold on the region etc.
But no, it's all Ebola/Marburg and has nothing to do with oil reserves off the Liberian Coast, diamond mines in Sierra Leone, coltan in the Congo etc...
Same as it ever was.
It was clear to me from my limited perspective that people around me including me and my family fell ill with something odd. Without knowledge of anything different I can only surmise something spreading.
Post the mass injection of humanity i would repeatedly and uncharacteristically fall ill culminating in two solid months of respiratory illness the likes I've never experienced before. I've never seen so much snot come out of my head, eva!
Regarding Ebola, I don't think I've heard it's a cover story for an industrial waste human catastrophe which could very well be true. So thanks for the info. I'll look into it. That aside, I listed 9 other noted Deadly viruses which you ignored. And there are measles mumps and rubella that i didn't mention. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm trying to figure out what the hell is going on. So thanks for your input.
"It was clear to me from my limited perspective that people around me including me and my family fell ill with something odd. Without knowledge of anything different I can only surmise something spreading." ---
Did y'all fall ill before or after the announcement that there was a killer bat virus on the loose?
Given that you firmly believed without question the myth of contagion, is it not possible, if y'all became ill with "something odd" AFTER the announcement, that you were basically tricked into perceiving a common cold or flu as being something odd and new?
Each illness is unique. We call it a cold or flu but exactly how it starts to show itself, how severe it gets (or doesn't get), and how fast or slow we recover from it, differs each and every time.
Health, illness, and remedies are not what we've been taught these past 120 years. "They" pretend that advancements in science have made their conclusions anything but the guesses and gambles they actually are.
Our health does not follow the rules or expertise of ANY human or agency of humans on earth.
Our health is as unique as our living story, our living biography. What makes you sick today, may not make you sick tomorrow. What helped you today, may not help you next month. What makes you sick may not sicken your wife. And on & on & on it goes.
Each body & life is subjective & unique & personal. No two are biochemically or psychologically the same.
If there's any authority about your health, it has to be within you, and not outside of you.
And no matter what you do or don't do, you will still get sick, and recover, and get sick with something else, and recover, and eventually, if you aren't killed instantly, you will reach the Final Illness that will start off like an innocent cold or flu but turn into pneumonia (or some such shite) which will then lead to death.
(Any "life" that includes sickness and death is in no way a real life at all. Shame on us for having the audacity to get bored with the real life and choose this prison sentence nightmare instead. Death is the only way back to our real life, and therefore, death cannot actually be a bad thing. I think we get sad about others dying before us because we feel abandoned. I think we get sad about our own deaths because we erroneously assume it will lead to the annihilation of our consciousness.)
Let's say you hire a private investigator to look into a recent and sudden spate of illness and death in your community. Nothing noticeable has changed whatsoever in your community so everyone is puzzled and alarmed by what is happening and what is causing these deaths.
The investigator comes back unable to find anything, after weeks of looking into the matter, has found no concrete evidence himself, and declares that what has beset the community is an invisible submicroscopic particle floating through the air.
What would you do? Accept this at face value? Fire the guy and hire someone else? Keep looking for other more tangible explanations?
The above is a true story- with only an embellished wrinkle- that illustrates the madness of looking for an invisible particle floating through the air to explain that which has already been explained at length and with concrete evidence by many people.
“Virology births Pandemics.”
Not true.
Virology did not birth the Plague that destroyed the Roman Empire, or the Athenian plague. Virology did not cause the Black Death, that destroyed two thirds of Europe.
What caused these plagues and Black Death, was the same thing that causes ALL pandemics and plagues; GERM THEORY.
Consider the work of Dr. Jonathan Snow, who, during the great Cholera pandemic, noticed that people were getting sick from drinking water from some wells and not others. He promptly got authorities to shut down these wells, and provide clean drinking water, that eventually eradicated the disease. In other words clean drinking water cured a pandemic.
Why is the work of Dr. Snow, almost universally forgotten in the public mind, and totally ignored by BigPharma?
The reason is, that Dr. Snow focused on the TERRAIN, not a germ?
While I am curious about this NAV issue, Just to clarify:
Bacteria are not viruses.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/virus-vs-bacteria-difference
What caused the Black Death?
The Black Death is believed to have been the result of plague, an infectious fever caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis. The disease was likely transmitted from rodents to humans by the bite of infected fleas. https://www.britannica.com/event/Black-Death
Cholera is an acute, diarrheal illness caused by infection of the intestine with the bacterium Vibrio cholerae.
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/cholera
Germ Theory in medicine, the theory that certain diseases are caused by the invasion of the body by microorganisms, organisms too small to be seen except through a microscope.
https://www.britannica.com/science/germ-theory
Read What Really Makes You Ill?, Also, The Invisible Rainbow. Germs are invisible, but what really makes you ill, is also invisible, EMF, poison vapors in the air, poisons in the water. During the plague, there were comets, and they give off noxious gases, which sickened the people. Sounds crazy, but a tiny bug jumping in your nose is beginning to sound crazy to me.
But you see, if that is so, the viruses are not the cause of anything, the terrain is, and that allows the "viruses" to invade the body.
My mother live to be a centenarian with any vaccines. She always said she had a Noah’s Arc gut. The terrain is everything.
Your right, bacterium caused Black Death, Athenian plague and Anotinine Plague (smallpox). Not viruses. My main point was that Dr. Snow cured Cholera epidemic with clean drinking water, not a pill. Why have we moved so far away from hygiene as a “cure” instead of a pill for every disease?
Both can exist together. Germs in dirty water and toxins in dirty water. Sometimes toxins compromise the immune system and lead to people being susceptible to pathogens. Just because toxins exist doesn't automatically mean viruses do not. This does not equal that. It can all exist.
Right.
Brilliant! Thank you. There may be something to germ theory but a minor role. We need to get to the bottom of this toute suite because then we can go in the right direction and people can be healed.
I don't understand the focus on "isolation." All kinds of things in history were postulated before they could be isolated, and turned out to be real.
There is plenty of experimental evidence of the existence of viruses and their effects. There would have to be explained by some other mechanisms that I have seen no compelling alternative for.
This whole argument about isolation seems a waste of energy. And only distracts from most important issues.
No microbe or sub-microbe has ever been removed from a sick creature and given to a healthy creature in a natural way who then became sick with the expected symptoms (or any at all).
The hypothesis about germs was that they cause contagious illnesses by attacking healthy people via coughing or sneezing or exhalation or kissing or intercourse or oral sex. The hypothesis was tested at various times in the first half of the 20th century and the overwhelming results were negative for transmission. Hypothesis refuted for failure to prove it true.
And because they could not make healthy people sick by exposure to sick people, they switched their form of proof to cell culture studies -- petri dishes & test tubes wherein some monkey kidney cells are exposed to some bodily fluid from a sick person along with antibiotics known to be toxic to kidney cells, and if the kidney cells die, then there's your proof that an illness-causing microbe has been found. No healthy creature is shown to become ill from it...just some naked, unprotected kidney cells in a petri dish -- kidney cells who don't have the protection from the body they came from.
The very bottom line about the virus/no virus issue >> No microbe or sub-microbe has ever been removed from a sick creature and given to a healthy creature in a natural way who then became sick with the expected symptoms (or any at all). Thus, no vaccine has ever been necessary, and double thus, no vaccine has ever been safe.
Let's disambiguate these two things.
The original discussion was, "is something that cannot be isolated therefore proved not to exist." The answer is no. That is not a valid supposition.
What you are bringing up is a separate argument. can we show an isolated virus can make someone sick. This is a separate conversion.
If we can agree on the point above, we can address your argument here?
I'll leave you with this paper about how researchers immortalize cell lines using viruses.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9944833/
Symptomatic infection from viruses is separate.
The experimental use of viruses, or something that we call viruses, is commonly done,
"What you are bringing up is a separate argument. can we show an isolated virus can make someone sick. This is a separate conversion." --
Read your words carefully >> "isolated VIRUS" >> "can we show an isolated virus can make someone sick. " --
Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick.
If you claim something can start a fire, you first have to show it starting a fire.
Without showing the submicroscopic particle making someone sick by the most natural means possible, you cannot call it a virus. That's why in order to prove it is a virus you have to show it making someone sick. (Actually you would wanna use 200 healthy volunteers >> 100 would be the placebo/control group.)
Until you separate the suspected viral particle from the bodily fluid and give it all on its own in the most natural way possible to healthy volunteers and make someone sick with it, it remains just that: a submicroscopic particle of unknown characteristics. It has not earned the right to be called pathogenic or a virus.
PS -- If you're linking to the NIH, you haven't even begun to challenge the official narratives about health, illness, and medicines. You're in no position to talk down to me. You are years behind me in research. Substack is about challenging the Official Narratives because....the narratives serve only to protect the officials.
WTFU, M8.
Linking a paper about experiments is not the same as agreeing with the institutions that run the journals.
I'm sure you agree that experiments exist. This was just a short way of pointing to some of the experiments that can be done.
I know of people who do such experiments. But sending you their phone number would be a violation of their privacy.
The other issue was "Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick."
No. Something can exist without understanding fully what it does. Virus are not defined by created a particular sickness. Though that is a common hypothesis about some of them.
What is does is secondary to "existence"
"The other issue was "Before you can call it a virus, you first have to demonstrate that it makes someone sick." No. Something can exist without understanding fully what it does. "
A tool for a particular trade can exist without YOU knowing what it does. But the tool is not accused of making people sick. If YOU accused it of making people sick, then you would be obligated to demonstrate that it makes people sick, otherwise your accusation is baseless.
There are no published studies showing an isolated microscopic or submicroscopic tool making anyone sick in a natural way. There are studies where supposedly such tools were believed to be in a sample of bodily fluid which was then injected into a creature's stomach or brains (or elsewhere) who then became sick. Injection is clearly unnatural and therefore any results from it are clearly unnatural.
All attempts at inducing so-called natural transmission of any illness or disease have failed -- including STDs.
Hole in one.