Daniel I love your work, and absolutely applaud your courage throughout Covid, but this article was a BIG miss for me, going off on a million different tangents except the one that matters: the isolation process.
It is the ENTIRE foundational basis for the skepticism.
The fact that "isolating" involves ADDING a toxic brew of 13 or 14 other ingredients to a sample, then declaring the degradation at the end of the process a "virus" is the issue.
While its a little unusual you'd never heard of Germ vs Terrain theory, its not entirely surprising; that's what the tightly-controlled medical industry does. Mention of it during the training of tomorrow's doctors, would be as verboten as questioning vaccines. An entire money pipeline is built on both, and Big Pharma MUST keep doctors onside.
The Medical/Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex can't afford to have doctors questioning the efficacy of their drugs, the safety of their vaccines, or the validity of their science.
And just like the ever-ballooning DSM-IV Manual suddenly brought legitimacy to psychiatrists (who were originally derided by their own peers as "quacks" because nothing could ever be proven or quantified) and subsequently opened up a whole new revenue stream for the pharmaceutical companies in psychiatric drugs, the unseen germ/virus has done the same, and they won't be letting go of it any time soon.
I don't know what I believe. But I do know the isolation process is deeply flawed. Dr Stefan Lanka proved it when he reproduced exactly the same end result (degraded, destroyed cells we call viruses) with no viral sample present.
What the "no virus" camp has always taken issue with is *the process*.
And that we could be completely misinterpreting what we're seeing; that what we're pointing to and saying "look there, that must be a virus" is simply the result of poisoning the shit out of your sample by pouring in a bunch of toxic ingredients.
It wouldn't be the first time Medicine got it wrong.
We're only just now coming out of the 45 year funk caused by Ancel Keys and his manipulated 7 Countries Study that got everyone believing saturated fat causes heart attacks.
this is why knowing basic biology is so important before making statements based on what someone else said.
Cell cultures are living things. You have to feed them, neutralize their waste, kill bacteria that might infect them because they no longer have an immune system around them for protection .
If you're trying to get a foreign virus into them you have to weaken them because otherwise happy cells don't usually let strangers in. Same goes for healthy people. The infection rate is low for healtjy cell cultures and people. Thats why adding detergent chemicals.to a cell culture is done. Because the lab tech doesn't want to wait 100 days for a successful viral test. Adding chemicals turns an infection rate of 10% into 99% so the lab tech.can go home and have a life.
But if you.never did cell bio, it's easy to believe falsehoods from a position of ignorance.
I ask you to think logically, the ‘cell culture’ is already the lung tissue of the deathly sick person. So why can’t they find the VlRUS in there? The notion that doing anything in a petri dish mimics human physiology is ridiculous. They fail to look at the living tissue inside a living body to understand what is really going on. Virus model has always been a hypothesis about an observed thing named “VlRUS” in an artificial petri dish environment with cell-damaging substances added, such as antibiotics and other things. The only way to verify scientifically would be to actually isolate, purify, and characterize the so-called “VlRUS”, then introduce it into a healthy animal or person (via natural mode of entry with nothing else added) and see if the illness it is alleged to cause results. Never has this been done and then have proof that “X” isolated particles are shown as causation of the specific “Y” disease. We all understand science is about observing things in nature, natural phenomena.
You say…“Pointing out that if contagious “detoxing” were true, children should get sick the least because children’s bodies have the least cumulative exposure to “toxins”, especially compared to adults and the elderly. The elderly are on all sorts of medications these days, have decades of smoking, alcohol and working with industrial chemicals. Yet it always seems that kids catch “detox” colds far more often than old folks in nursing homes.”
LOL, please stop! Have you ever viewed the vaccine schedule for kids. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html Least exposure to toxins, think again… They are loaded with toxins intentionally injected from birth. At least the elderly who get most of the toxic meds get them orally where the body has a better chance to eliminate as the digestive system is the body’s natural mode of protection. Where as injecting makes it much harder for body to eliminate, especially in a not fully developed body, and the body has to go into defense mode to isolate the toxins in different ways in the body.
Talking about observation…Have you ever observed nature or a pet...Obviously not… They lick themselves; they lick their youth, they lick each other. There would be nothing left in nature if germ hypothesis were true. Can there really be something evil created in nature, for example a contagious virus that has the ability to make us sick or to want to destroy us? Did our Creator actually produce something bad that naturally comes out of our body? Does this theory about viruses or bacteria that supposedly make us ill really fit into the biological context of life? Or is this assumption just an unproven dogma in which we believe?... Genesis 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good…
Many things appear to be contagious in nature but that doesn’t mean you caught “IT” from anyone. Take heed from nature, as even trees are known to “communicate” with each other to protect the trees around them. If it happens in nature then it would happen with humans as we are part of nature. You see things like tree leaves changing colors and falling, flower petals dying in different seasons, snakes shedding skin, deer losing antlers, etc., but you wouldn’t claim that is due to them catching a “virus” from each other. Nature has a time, place, and method for restoring all things in nature. And that is what the diseases (i.e. cold and flus etc.) are. They are clinical symptoms that are part of the body’s restoration process for excess internal toxicity.
How about when someone with no symptoms breathes on you, does that mean you then catch their good health particles? If you and your spouse or kids wake up with eye boogers, did you catch them from each other? So why then when someone coughs or sneezes and then at some later point you do the same, why do you believe you “caught it” from someone?
Covid and germ theory/contagion are man-made lies and take away from God's creation. Claims that we are potential breath killing terrorists does not align with God’s word. Breath means life not death as the world wants you to believe. When you understand that, then you understand why we should not be injecting or ingesting toxic things to try to heal or prevent some unproven disease. The body is self regulating. We need to stop interfering thinking we know more than our Creator. God took care of ALL of it!
God created NO harmful particles
Genesis 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.
God gave us physical life through breath
Genesis 2:7 Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
God gave us spiritual life through breath
John 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
God gave us The Gospel to preach by breath
2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Acts 10:42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead.
2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
God used breath to heal.
Mark 8:22-23 And they came to Bethsaida. And they brought a blind man to Jesus and implored Him to touch him. Taking the blind man by the hand, He brought him out of the village; and after spitting on his eyes and laying His hands on him, He asked him, “Do you see anything?”
We're looking for the truth, correct? If the reason for contaminating the virus culture clearly contaminates the end result, merely so the lab tech can go home and have supper... then we need to tighten the reigns on the system, eh?
You are a sharp guy, and proud of your accomplishments. Surely you can see that the methodology for isolating a virus is, at best, sketchy? Or do you wish to continue defending it regardless? The least you could do is say to yourself, "Hmmm... I think they have a point..."
are you talking about what I did in the ER for decades or the strawman from a century ago? The problem with cultists is they can't think outside their strawman argument. If someone pushes them to look outside their strawman argument, they will make any excuse or insult to stay within the box. The only way out is to learn. There's pubmed, genbank, even wiki hasn't corrupted their genetics articles yet. If you don't learn to get out of the cult YOURSELF, you'll simply fall for the next one, even if you get out of this one.
Hi Daniel - I'm new here, and I don't know anything about your EM career. However, I have huge respect for it, and all the good people who do their best in EM.
IMO, EM and constructive surgery are the disciplines of medicine that shine. Chronic disease and infectious disease? Well, the when emergencies arise in these cases, EM shines. Am all for it.
I prefer, however, to try to get to the root of the issue. The vast majority of chronic diseases are self-caused, IMO. Similarly, most infectious disease/contagious disease simply does not occur in those who make a point to take proper care of their health. IOW, immune system competency and strength is the bottom line.
I am a physician who supervises water fasting for patients. Over 40 years I have seen countless examples of the body rapidly healing itself while fasting. Proper lifestyle and diet afterwards maintains a high level of health. Many diseases considered incurable respond very well to serious lifestyle changes. That is what I have dedicated my life to doing, and the results are incredibly satisfying for all concerned.
So when I remark about the virus issue, I have plenty of direct evidence that there are huge question marks surrounding the infection/contagion issue. Obviously conventional medicine profits greatly from the status quo, and health statistics in the USA and the world over in these realms is beyond terrible. To the degree conventional medicine turns a blind eye toward serious questions about these issues, respect for conventional medicine and its practitioners is rapidly lost.
Perhaps it's time you begin thinking outside your own BOX lol :) - besides looking at how corrupt the "No Control Study" "isolation process" is, you should have a look into pleomorphism. . It may take you a long time to catch on to there being "No Virus" i.e. chances are you find the material you need to dissolve the "Virus Illusion" aren't on pubmed etc.
I suggest you look at point 15 of my collection of research on this topic - although, from your tone, you're likely too stuck/invested in the "Invisible Virus" BELIEF SYSTEM.
OK, let's accept you have to add toxic substances to the cell cultures. But then you need proper control experiments, where you have everything but the "virus". Even Enders, in his foundational paper, admitted that the controls were indistinguishable from the samples with "viruses". Stefan Lanka and, more recently, Jamie Andrews showed that no virus is needed to produce cytopathic effect and "viral" particles. The "no virus" position is totally misrepresented. I see nothing of substance in the essay to support the "yes virus" position. None of the criticisms are addressed--simply ignored and misconstrued. Have you read A Farewell to Virology by Dr. Mark Bailey? After reading through the comments and replies, it is obvious that you do not understand the criticisms of virology. I'm sure I'm wasting my time posting a comment here. Maybe that IS the whole point.
i've had thousands of proofs of viruses working in the er through observation of how the body responds differently to bacteria, toxins and viruses. Disinformation books and idols have captured your mind. You can only see that they are liars if you look at information outside their thought cage.
Have you researched simple straining techniques used for viruses; primitive methods of isolation?
Are newer methods of virus isolation more effective at purifying and replicating the virus than old techniques?
Is the result of virus isolation the same virus originally seen prior to isolation? In other words you see some viruses in a blood sample and once you're done with straining and culturing you end up with many times more viruses?
If you were to answer the 3 questions above as Yes (imagine it is all true instead of saying no) do the arguments people who do not believe in viruses make, sound reasonable to you?
Is it possible for doctors and scientists who have a theory or bias, dismiss anything that doesn't back up their theory allowing them to mislead a lot of people?
yes, microwave electroporation is far cleaner than chemical. now we have chromatography to separate out particles by molecular weight, sequencing to determine what species have what effect down to the genes that cause illness. This is why controlled op like psychiatrist dr kaufman keep going on about experiments from a century ago. it's the only strawman they can beat. anyone who has done cell biology in the past 50 years shakes their head at the stupidity of basing their whole belief system on deficiencies from a century ago.
Then why do you not do this, and document it to disprove the thousands of FOIA requests for information regarding the isolation and purification of any virus, anywhere, that were all answered with "We do not have that information"?
Thank you both, Sez777 and dpl, for pointing out the 2 fundamental issues with our whole brainwashed history of contagions and things that attack our cells and replicate inside of us. We are the ones who have been psyop'ed over the years -- "catch a cold" etc -- to believe in contagion and invisible attackers. That's just not how the body works. It's just not. Illness is the result of the body -- which aims for homeostasis -- not being able to achieve homeostasis due to an overload of toxins (poisoning) or a deficiency in nutrients (starvation) or a combination of the two (most typical). So in order to help correct the overload of toxins, the body detoxes the poisons through the available pathways. And when you have more of this than usual -- because our bodies literally detox 24/7 -- you have symptoms. The more symptoms you have and the longer it goes on, the worse you feel and the more chronic and involved the situation becomes. Bacteria are dead cell/debris eaters. They don't cause the disease. They help clean it up. There is no good vs. bad bacteria. Different types appear to consume different debris. That's what we should learn fundamentally. All the invisible enemy stuff has been a 150 year distraction from that. There are books upon books written about this. Sorry that Dr. Nagase has missed this. It's not unusual to miss a discussion or debate on something you're not at all inclined to accept. There is way more information in the world (even within one field) than any one person could ever read. But wrapping one's mind around the fact that viruses have never been proven, nor has contagion, starts with an honest look at those facts, not a lengthy discourse as an attempt to say the true thing is the psy-op. It's no fun facing our cognitive dissonance, but we have all been played on this one.
The “no virus” argument is not a psyop at all. It points to the flimsy science virology is built upon. When you’re sick, your body makes proteins. You can detect them with PCR, but it doesn’t tell you the function of them. You just know they are present when someone is sick. Viruses as a contagious pathogen was a *theory* that got forced into mainstream science.
I think people who went to med school or got PhDs don’t want to honestly challenge their indoctrination. Calling curious people psyops after powerful people orchestrated a string of them to convince people there was a global pandemic is not helping anyone’s cause except the powers that be. People who challenged HIV got KILLED or CANCELED. Weird psyop! If viruses do exist as defined, we’re doing a really poor job of dealing with them, eh?
learn biology. the logical errors in everything you've stated are explained in my article. If you can't understand, it's because you've got an emotional though block.
100% accurate. The PsyOp is that viruses exist and cause disease. Since no "virus" ever has been isolated and shown to cause disease, no viruses exist. Christine Massey has issued thousands of FOIA requests for evidence of the isolation of said particles, and NONE have ever been replied to with evidence of the existence of a virus, or that it causes a disease. Germ Theory is a lie, and can never be proven otherwise. There have been thousands of experiments to see if one person can infect another, including by the US military, and none were successful. This alone proves the virologists are a fraud, and the whole branch of pseudo-medicine has been debunked. It is way past time these charlatans are held to account.
I didn’t know anything significant about virology, just how to think for myself.
My assignment on covid on 3/3/20 was to figure out the PCR. And when I did, I figured out that the primers are in silico, which means AI. So there is nothing to look for that came from a person. You can say that they can transcribe a new virus de novo, but how exactly do you know you got it right?
The 217 FOIAs back this up. The failed transmission studies back this up. The use of metagenomic transcription and the reliance on made-up sequences backs this up. The bullshit tobacco mosaic “virus” is the signed confession.
The mountain of dead bodies from the polio and covid injections are circumstantial evidence society does not have a virus problem, it has a greed problem, and a spiritual black hole of seeking medical physical immortality (the customers).
The virus is the psyop that drives a business plan. And we know EXACTLY whose plan.
Your paisan,
efc
PS did you know that Steve Kirsch is really part of the ChatGPT beta test?
a self replicating sequence is the perfect weapon. today we create sequences in silico first then get a polymerase to make it. If it survives on its own and spreads, it is a virus.
We know how to do this because we learned it from nature.
These are all the non "silico" COVID DNAsequences, where they were found and who sequenced it.
Just because first published sequence was the engineered blueprint "in silico", doesn't mean that all sequences are. I'm surprised you cannot see this most basic logical error.
The sheer number of observed variant sequences observed in real life all over the world just means that coronaviruses are a very durable and stable species of virus that can be engineered towards various ends.
The first entry listed at that link is the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read. Daniel, I challenge you to put aside the ad hominem nonsense and cite a valid study showing the existence of any alleged virus.
Daniel, I've done more work on the missing virus issue than nearly anyone.
If MN908947.2 was juiced up for gain of function, why was it so weak, and why did they need to run the PCR at Ct 37 to 45 when the absolute detection limit of one molecule of target is Ct35 (that is from Bustin)?
So this jazzed up "weapon" has no effects and then to "find" it they have to rely on false positives.
Furthermore, you are citing an NIH publication. Many perpetrators, including Fauci, worked for the NIH. What gets on that page supports the official version of events. Also I suggest you cool it with accusations. It's a good idea to remain civil with me. This way, I will pay less attention to you.
If Nagase or anyone else wants to claim that the "no virus" position is a psyop then they should easily be able to present just one study that shows an isolated and purified "virus" from a sample taken directly from a human, yet this never happens. Now, since all "virologists" and the whole field of "virology" acknowledge that such a thing is "outside of what is possible in "virology"(see link below for the claim), then it's crystal clear who is perpetrating lies.
FOIA request to the US CDC regarding documentation of isolation of SARS-CoV-2
What I always find when people try to refute the "no virus" position is that they have never actually read the studies that claim the isolation of a "virus", understood the foundational issues, genuinely listened to the many people who have been talking about this for decades or read the material that many of the critics of "virology" have written that is freely available like this one:
In my view I think these are some of the things to consider and learn about before we can even have a serious discussion about the topic of "viruses".
- Stefan Lanka's control experiments
- Stefan Lanka's measles trials(where he appealed and won) and the direct/indirect results of these trials
- The many FOI requests that been collected by Christine Massey from all over the world
- The many unproven assumptions that "virologists" are making
- The 30-50+ experiments that failed to prove contagious illness by fluids of sick people
- The work of Harold Hillman and his critique regarding the electron microscope but also of biology in general
- The work of the Perth Group
- The acknowledgement and understanding of pleomorphism(microzyma->bacteria->fungi->bacteria->microzyma)
The worst part of the perpetuation of the lie of "viruses" is that the true causes of illness are never looked at where people are constantly being misdiagnosed and mistreated that leads to unnecessary harm and even death. Not only that but people are also told to fear people and fearful people do not act rationally which leads to all kinds of bad decisions that wreck havoc on society, just look at how people behaved the past 3 years. Last but not least, the fear can also be weaponized and used for political goals which too has happened the past 3 years through the media and will continue to be used as long as people hold on to the false belief in "viruses".
Keep in mind that the greatest tool of control in human history has always been fear, if we can remove that fear we can regain some control which goes against what the powers that shouldn't be want.
It never ceases to amaze me how motivated people are to read and repeat lies, but absolutely to refuse to do basic due diligence to verify if anything of what they're sayind is true... e.g. by learning basic biology
Nothing you posted refute my point, you didn't cite a single study that shows an isolated and purified "virus" from a sample taken directly from a human without the sample first being combined with other genetic material like a tissue culture. In case you aren't aware, the standard method in "virology" is the use of a tissue culture which has nothing to do with isolation. All those studies you referred to uses the same faulty method that was established in 1954 of using a tissue culture during what the "virologists" falsely call isolation where they mix a sample with other genetic material and conduct a pseudoscientific experiment. Logic and common sense tells us that we can't conduct any experiment with things we haven't shown to exist prior to an experiment taking place, I mean it's not like we can conduct experiments with unicorns unless we have proved their existence prior to any experiment taking place. The scientific method require us to have an independent variable which means an isolated and purified "virus" but as I posted above, "virologists" and the whole field of "virology" even go as far as to say that "it's outside of what is possible in virology".
In short, both me and "virologists" are in full agreement on this point, we can't isolate "viruses" from a sample taken directly from a human. The only disagreement here is the consequence of that, I argue that if we haven't found something directly from nature then we can't claim to have evidence of its existence. "Virologists" falsely argue that we can use effects as evidence of its existence because they can't see the unproven assumption they are making.
Referring to effects as proof of the existence of a specific thing like a "virus" is sadly how the "virologists" are working, they refer to the cytopathic effect in their pseudoscientific experiments as evidence of a "virus" which is like referring to a destroyed backyard as evidence of unicorns or presents under the Christmas tree as evidence of Santa Claus.
Last but not least, all those pseudoscientific experiments conducted by "virologists" also lack proper controls and any alleged scientific experiment without proper controls makes it meaningless and sadly this is standard practice in "virology". It has led to the self deception where "virologists" are deceiving themselves into thinking the cytopathic effect is caused by a "virus" when it's not, it's been shown through proper controls to be caused by the procedure itself.
You've cited a list of entries about made-up in silico "genomes". The first entry listed at that link relates to the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read.
Daniel, I challenge you to put aside the insults and appeals to your own authority, and cite a valid study showing the existence of any alleged virus.
genbank has 1000000+ different isolations of every virus, and every species we've sequenced on this planet. If you don't comprehend the magnitude of what genbank is, take the time to learn before repeating cult mantras. Email and ask any of the labs what their isolation and sequencing proceedures are. I'll congratulate you if you comprehend what.they send you.
Why only computer generated computer cartoons, like NASA, no actual nano-microscopic photographs. I'm just 10 years old, and I see you're lying, dude!!! Just Show us the 💰 🤑 Who gave you the genital herpes of the brain? Prove it!
yes catalytic "toxins". Cyanide is another. However, I have yet to see a cyanide poisoning spread from person to person. Alcohol on the other hand seems to send a "detox" signal to susceptible people on alcoholic terrain to poison themselves and then "detox". I had to oversimplify reality in an attempt to get through the psyop.
The "SARS-COV-2 genome" has never been found in a single person on the planet, let alone "the virus", or any "virus" for that matter. And every study attempting to demonstrate contagion failed completely. I challenge you to cite valid scientific evidence showing otherwise.
My position is based on the irrational Methods sections of "virus isolation and sequencing" papers, and FOI responses from literally hundreds of institutions.
Official Evidence that Virology is Pseudoscience - June 10 2023
- a 40 minute introduction to the massive body of evidence collected on my website, primarily in the form of freedom of information responses from 217 institutions in 40 countries, including Health Canada, PHAC, CDC, NIAID, FDA, and a ridiculous response from the W.H.O., also correspondences directly with "SARS-COV-2" researchers:
Sep 10, 2023·edited Sep 11, 2023Liked by Daniel Nagase MD
Thanks for writing this essay, it does a very good job of dissecting this phenomenon. I think there is an important aspect of the NAV phenomenon that you mentioned obliquely but I think is an important factor.
One of the big strategies with the C19 operation was to define the measurable presence of a virus (or parts thereof) as an infection. This fraudulently boosts the case rates. (Yes, it often picks up dead parts of virus but it would not be legitimate without symptoms even if the virus sample was live)
And this "error" is fundamentally to neglect "terrain" in favor of "germs" as the singular causative agent. There might be many conditions of the terrain (prior exposure, antibodies, healthy immune system, vitamins, mental state, good food) that influences whether a virus takes hold and leads to an infection that produces a viral load.
This obvious error is an open door to the true argument that terrain matters, and calls into question the correctness of the experts, entirely legitimately. This makes boosting NAV serve the direct purpose of the C19 op, almost certainly this was inorganically boosted.
I think it is fair to say that much of the medical establishment focuses on fighting viruses more than on fixing the terrain, which is i think generally a valid criticism. But it doesn't mean viruses don't exist!
"The lack of scientific evidence is catching up with those clinging to germ theory and virus existence. We are now seeing some of the "pathogen" promoters lashing out rather than being prepared to discuss the long history of failed experiments. How much longer can they maintain this façade with their audiences?
Germ "theory" is a fraudulent misnomer as it is a refuted hypothesis rather than a scientific theory. In this video we examine five of the arguments being used by the germ proponents...and why they have all flopped spectacularly."
I always keep an open mind and I'm far from being a scientist or doctor so to a reasonable degree I need to rely on experts. My method is to look at the to and fro argument between them.
So what scientific papers would you point to where the method and results clearly show:
1. a virus has been isolated
2. a virus has caused illness
3. a virus has been transmitted from one person to another causing illness in the transmitted-to person
If you are unaware of such papers what is your evidence for these phenomena?
I have great trouble with the notion that there aren't transmissible respiratory illnesses myself because I don't think it's just common belief that makes us believe you can catch a cold from someone else. While I often seem to get a cold without having obviously "caught" it from someone else I definitely have a sense that I have at least sometimes caught a cold from someone else and I certainly hear people saying they think they caught a cold from this or that person or that it's gone around the whole family type of thing, however, perhaps it's just a perception (or there are other reasons for an illness "going round the whole family") and it would be good to see the clear evidence of it proven using the scientific method.
for bacterial illnesses, we do bacterial cultures every day in the hospital. The nice thing about isolating a bacteria from a patient, is that by doing antibiotic studies on the bacteria isolated from their blood or sputum, an antibiotic can be chosen that selectively kills the bad bacteria. When a pneumonia fails to improve with an antibiotic, and resistance to that chemical is confirmed on bacterial culture petri dishes, most of the time we find on the same antibiotic panel a chemical that the bacteria isn't resistant to, and ultimately that is the chemical that resolves the infection. We also do viral panels to see exactly what virus might be causing a patient's illness. We can do this on blood, sputum, or a nasal swab. With the species of virus identified for a given patient, sometimes we can predict the course of illness, particularly with mild species.
The bacteria is not causing the illness. It's there as part of the clean up crew. In fact it's often there before the illness just as part of the homeostatic environment, but then grows in number when there is dead and dying tissue to clean up. What is causing the dead and dying tissue is what is causing the illness, not the bacteria. Just watch nature.
I'm not one of those people. I know I know nothing but I know that there is disagreement among experts so I have to have a method to try to determine which ones are correct.
Yes, modern viral panel processes were published in the 70's. Viruses are just a smaller version bacteria. And if you read genetics, LINE-1 is a retrotransposon that's an even smaller version of a virus. From the number of copies of LINE-1 in the human genome, it looks like it's a virus that decided it can't be bothered with going outside the cell. All it does is make an occasional copy of itself, and travel in and out of the nucleus from time to time.
My knowledge on isolating viruses or how you observe them in a petri dish is from 40 years ago when I worked in a lab at. the Department of Genetcis at the University of Alberta.
However one of the protocols went something like this: you would first centrifuge the sample that cause the different parts of the solution to layer. The heaviest part would sink to the bottom and the top layer is where the lightest particles are and is the layer where you might have viruses .That part is called the "supernatant".
You would then scoop up the top layer and plate the solution and culture it on a petri dish.
If after culturing you have plaques that meant you indeed had viruses in the top layer.
You could then take part of the top layer and do a "phenol extraction" to separate the protein from the DNA/RNA and in those days we would sequence the genetic material manually using a newly discovered and very elegant methodology at the time called the dideoxy sequencing method invented by Dr. Sanger.(today Next generation Sequencing automates the process and allows many samples to be sequenced in a parallel, there are also simpler ways to isolate genetic material than a phenol extraction)
We would run the genetic sample through a gel where you run a current through the gel and depending on the weight different base pairs would go faster and you would then analyze the band patterns in order to deduce the sequence.
Depending on the sequence we could see what type of virus we had.
'Magically" certain sequences found in viruses from a patient samples produce very distinct symptoms compared to other types of viruses.
This is what we call reproducible data. Science begin and ends with reproducible data, without it is where you get pseudo scientific nonsense. Many more details are involved and different protocols to isolate different viruses but that is one example of plaque causing viruses. All are reproducible and that is what the science game is about.
Cool story, can you cite a valid scientific study to back it up? One where a specific particle was actually identified, sequenced and characterized and studied with valid controlled experiments?
Please tell us more about all the stuff you added to the clinical sample (a complex substance, not purified particles) in the petri dish? Fetal bovine serum? Antibiotics and antifungals? How did you determine that a "virus" had been "cultured"?
So have you put this argument to the "no virus" people? I know they're familiar with the supernatant and Sanger sequencing and petri dishes and so on - they still don't buy though.
I can only relay my experience and observations. For me reproducible data and facts means something. Science is not a popularity contest, it is about truth. I can't fix stupid.
My position is similar and its good to see others state a clear unemotional request for evidence of facts where so many just believe.
Jamie Andrews has done the only real study that I find credible today in this debate and it makes no difference to me which side is correct, but I too want all the lies and liars exposed.
Supposedly we can now see atoms with a microscope and yet we still cannot see a virus? In this I can only recommend people watch the non cgi videos produced by Royal Raymond Rife of micro life, and suggest that surely we should have improved on his work in nearly 100 years.
I also respect Daniel for not only presenting the challenge and replying here, but also to not censor this debate as some do. Censoring polite debate only leads to suspicion for me and should for others too.
I was inspired - after reading Tim West's note with the text below - to write a post suggesting that perhaps all the focus should be on the lack of controls and that moving past that onto isolation and genomic sequencing is kind of a red herring. Science simply stops at the control part.
"If I claim that there are alien space badgers inside every piece of tissue paper that cause bricks to move downwards and I prove it to you by strapping tissue paper to a brick and then letting it go….
You can say “do a control experiment without the paper”
I can do the control experiment without the paper to totally invalidate your proof.
I do not need to isolate alien space badgers to do this."
The falsehood of the “No Virus” camp is infantile thinking. For an infant, if they cannot “see something” it doesn’t exist.
The body, even, animals, plants and bacteria all react to viruses. The species of viruses are differentiated by the differences in the effect on the body.
For example, mononucleosis, fatigue, swollen nodes, was found to be contagious by mucous contact, not through air.
It isn’t 100% contagious, but it is contagious enough that most teenagers get it and then become immune forever.
When they looked further into sequences, they found 2 different species caused the same “mononucleosis” effect. EBV and CMV. They have the same effect but different gene sequences.
Believing that something doesn’t exist because 1 unit needs an electron microscope to be visualized is like believing combustion doesn’t happen in a car engine because you can’t see it.
The effect of viruses that people can directly observe is dead cells, dead bacteria, and illness in multicellular organisms like people.
Just because you were not privy to the germ vs terrain theory before a certain point in time does not mean that it appeared out of thin air and is some sort of psyop. This is a back and forth argument that has taken place since the time of famed celebrity pseudoscientist Louis Pasteur and his lesser known antagonist Antoine Bechamp. Many people who have taken in this information did so from discovering that they were wrong, not because they want to be correct and push a narrative. It was from escaping a lifelong brainwashing into a false paradigm and stepping into discovering the truth.
Simply put, there are no isolation studies that don’t add toxic chemicals to the cell culture and claim the resulting cytopathic effects are a virus. There are no studies demonstration transmission from one host to another via natural pathways.
Further, do you know where Kossel isolated the alleged nucleotides from? Things like a calf thymus and seabird excrement…LITERAL bird shit. You can’t make this up 😂 So it is safe to say that the foundation of DNA/genetics is just as fraudulent as that of virology.
I think the fundamental takeaway of this article is to heighten awareness of psyops. Forget about viruses existing or not, that’s just an example. Instead think primarily about how easy it is to manipulate people. The first clue is where the danger is invisible to 99%. Predictable is that feature where most cannot actually check, feel or see it. Your warning radar should be loud when you hear that.
This is a great essay. This quote is especially helpful: "A construct of DNA/RNA, with a copy function and protective coat, is called a “virus” in English. It is the smallest thing that replicates, adapts and makes a protective body for itself according to a blueprint". I.e. virus is just a term created to describe this.
The "viruses don't exist" crowd point to issues regarding isolation and purification of viruses and the controversy surrounding this, which I hope Dr. Nagase will address at some point. However, he makes it clear that just because we might have trouble seeing viruses, does not mean they don't exist.
All the other things said about logical fallacies (not just in relation to this question) are very valuable. I will have to read this several times.
As a separate question, given the existence of viruses that cause disease, what are we to make of Covid? Is it merely an engineered bioweapon virus with spike proteins that attack ACE2 receptors and the like, or is it (possibly) quite a bit more involved? Those in the no virus camp do make some compelling arguments about EMF radiation and covid symptoms. Other arguments seem to have potential merit regarding toxins, like synthetic venom peptides.
There's thousands of virus isolation studies every year from sick people on pubmed. Every viral panel i ordered on patients in my career is an isolation study, every family member who was sick and tested positive for the same virus and not any of the 2 dozen other common respiratory viruses is proof of transmission. Everyone in the community sick and testing positive for the same pathogen one year only to have that pathogen never reappear can't be explained by "detoxing". Do the powers that be create a different cold causing "toxin" every year? How is it spread? Or is it a living thing (not a toxin), that spreads by itself?
Every blood test i ordered on a sick person with lymphocyte suppression and no changes to neutrophils shows the body fighting an 'intracellular' DNA problem like a virus or cancer; not bacteria or parasites.
With coronaviruses, the success rate of the species depends on the health of the host. Just like packs of wolves have the highest success catching the sickest or weakest in a herd, coronaviruses are no different. Stress, radiation and malnutrition all weaken the body increasing chances of all viral and bacterial infections.
Maybe engineered self replicating bioweapons are the same as hunting predators and need help from a cell phone tower to weaken their target.
No, he cited a list of entries about made-up in silico "genomes". The first entry listed at that link relates to the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read. Daniel has taken it as an article of faith that the entries are legit.
Elsewhere he cited a study looking at PCR "tests" and fake-isolation (which is actually mixing complex substances together, stressing a cell line and blaming an imaginary "virus" for the cells breaking down).
Thanks for this clarification. I suppose the next question is about the PCR test or other methods they say detect coronavirus. It was admitted that they took the CCP sequencing to develop the vaccine. Kary Mullis of course said the PCR test couldn't be used to diagnose disease, and it was used at fraudulent cycle thresholds. And they have other toxins in the tests getting near the blood brain barrier. But, the question remains: if it is so easy to sequence viruses, are these tests able to find it reliably? Why did Christine Massey find no one who would produce documentation of the isolated virus?
Sep 10, 2023·edited Sep 10, 2023Liked by Daniel Nagase MD
I forgot the term but there is a method where they deliberately spread an idea (like the flat earth theory) and observe how fast and far it spreads and how people buy into it and then analyse the demographics.
It's believed that in the pre-cvd they took data for each country via SNS and other platforms on the internet, and worked out the most effective strategy for each country in a culturally acceptable manner.
it's a form of network stress testing. In the computer world they use pings to network map the computers that might be involved in a distributed denial of service attack (DDOS).
They use a similar concept stress testing aluminum airframes through vibration and resonance. The psyop is a "jucy lie" thought virus, and they monitor how it spreads and who it resonates with.
I suspect the overall purpose is to analyze better control people and the networks they form.
What a brilliant article. I’m fascinated why humans behave the way they do and I’m finding my faith in human nature being lowered below a level I thought possible. It’s so disappointing to me how people can seem to see through one ‘op’ but completely fall for another. I guess these are the people Scott Adams refers to as having guessed their way to the truth by lucky accident.
It’s telling how irate people get when you challenge their false beliefs, they don’t come back with reasonable evidence, or say ‘ that’s interesting, I’ve not heard that before, tell me more so I can update my knowledge’. I didn’t know there were virus deniers before covid, so I’ve listened to their arguments (for many hours) and thought it through in my head and challenged what they’ve said and looked for other sources. I questioned whether everything I thought I knew was wrong and in this case decided it wasn’t. I have also questioned whether everything I thought I knew about vaccines was wrong and decided that yes it was ( mainly due to the fact that I was ignorant of the facts regarding them) and so I have gone from being a ( retired) doctor that fully vaccinated my children to being an anti-vaxxer.
Another psychological note I made was spotting a comparison in the demeanor of the weird woman with the squeaky voice in Matt Walsh’s documentary What is a Woman? ( you know the one talking about chickens having periods) where she has a serene, patronising but exquisitely calm and superior manner, with that of Andy Kaufman in a video where he is being directly challenged and has the same glazed over look and manner ( can’t remember the other person though).They both look hypnotised.
Can’t wait for part 2! Somehow I don’t hold out much hope for being able to breakthrough the spell these people are under. My theory is that in order for humans to survive as a species they have to work together and believe in something above themselves, and so are predisposed to falling for a narrative that gives them comfort in some way.
No, they act like they're being treated like crap. Seems accurate to me.
Meanwhile, we have spooks in the "freedom movement" talking about lab leaks and zoonotic jumps. Both are shoved down our throat because both are wrong. That's the game.
Hey! I know. Let's all learn what military operations are!
Another warning is emotionality like he says. We had better make damned sure we have no emotional stake in it. “My mommy always said to wash my hands or die...”
Daniel I love your work, and absolutely applaud your courage throughout Covid, but this article was a BIG miss for me, going off on a million different tangents except the one that matters: the isolation process.
It is the ENTIRE foundational basis for the skepticism.
The fact that "isolating" involves ADDING a toxic brew of 13 or 14 other ingredients to a sample, then declaring the degradation at the end of the process a "virus" is the issue.
While its a little unusual you'd never heard of Germ vs Terrain theory, its not entirely surprising; that's what the tightly-controlled medical industry does. Mention of it during the training of tomorrow's doctors, would be as verboten as questioning vaccines. An entire money pipeline is built on both, and Big Pharma MUST keep doctors onside.
The Medical/Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex can't afford to have doctors questioning the efficacy of their drugs, the safety of their vaccines, or the validity of their science.
And just like the ever-ballooning DSM-IV Manual suddenly brought legitimacy to psychiatrists (who were originally derided by their own peers as "quacks" because nothing could ever be proven or quantified) and subsequently opened up a whole new revenue stream for the pharmaceutical companies in psychiatric drugs, the unseen germ/virus has done the same, and they won't be letting go of it any time soon.
I don't know what I believe. But I do know the isolation process is deeply flawed. Dr Stefan Lanka proved it when he reproduced exactly the same end result (degraded, destroyed cells we call viruses) with no viral sample present.
What the "no virus" camp has always taken issue with is *the process*.
And that we could be completely misinterpreting what we're seeing; that what we're pointing to and saying "look there, that must be a virus" is simply the result of poisoning the shit out of your sample by pouring in a bunch of toxic ingredients.
It wouldn't be the first time Medicine got it wrong.
We're only just now coming out of the 45 year funk caused by Ancel Keys and his manipulated 7 Countries Study that got everyone believing saturated fat causes heart attacks.
this is why knowing basic biology is so important before making statements based on what someone else said.
Cell cultures are living things. You have to feed them, neutralize their waste, kill bacteria that might infect them because they no longer have an immune system around them for protection .
If you're trying to get a foreign virus into them you have to weaken them because otherwise happy cells don't usually let strangers in. Same goes for healthy people. The infection rate is low for healtjy cell cultures and people. Thats why adding detergent chemicals.to a cell culture is done. Because the lab tech doesn't want to wait 100 days for a successful viral test. Adding chemicals turns an infection rate of 10% into 99% so the lab tech.can go home and have a life.
But if you.never did cell bio, it's easy to believe falsehoods from a position of ignorance.
This, by definition, is nowhere close to isolating a particle. You sound like the psyop here…
I ask you to think logically, the ‘cell culture’ is already the lung tissue of the deathly sick person. So why can’t they find the VlRUS in there? The notion that doing anything in a petri dish mimics human physiology is ridiculous. They fail to look at the living tissue inside a living body to understand what is really going on. Virus model has always been a hypothesis about an observed thing named “VlRUS” in an artificial petri dish environment with cell-damaging substances added, such as antibiotics and other things. The only way to verify scientifically would be to actually isolate, purify, and characterize the so-called “VlRUS”, then introduce it into a healthy animal or person (via natural mode of entry with nothing else added) and see if the illness it is alleged to cause results. Never has this been done and then have proof that “X” isolated particles are shown as causation of the specific “Y” disease. We all understand science is about observing things in nature, natural phenomena.
You say…“Pointing out that if contagious “detoxing” were true, children should get sick the least because children’s bodies have the least cumulative exposure to “toxins”, especially compared to adults and the elderly. The elderly are on all sorts of medications these days, have decades of smoking, alcohol and working with industrial chemicals. Yet it always seems that kids catch “detox” colds far more often than old folks in nursing homes.”
LOL, please stop! Have you ever viewed the vaccine schedule for kids. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html Least exposure to toxins, think again… They are loaded with toxins intentionally injected from birth. At least the elderly who get most of the toxic meds get them orally where the body has a better chance to eliminate as the digestive system is the body’s natural mode of protection. Where as injecting makes it much harder for body to eliminate, especially in a not fully developed body, and the body has to go into defense mode to isolate the toxins in different ways in the body.
Talking about observation…Have you ever observed nature or a pet...Obviously not… They lick themselves; they lick their youth, they lick each other. There would be nothing left in nature if germ hypothesis were true. Can there really be something evil created in nature, for example a contagious virus that has the ability to make us sick or to want to destroy us? Did our Creator actually produce something bad that naturally comes out of our body? Does this theory about viruses or bacteria that supposedly make us ill really fit into the biological context of life? Or is this assumption just an unproven dogma in which we believe?... Genesis 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good…
Many things appear to be contagious in nature but that doesn’t mean you caught “IT” from anyone. Take heed from nature, as even trees are known to “communicate” with each other to protect the trees around them. If it happens in nature then it would happen with humans as we are part of nature. You see things like tree leaves changing colors and falling, flower petals dying in different seasons, snakes shedding skin, deer losing antlers, etc., but you wouldn’t claim that is due to them catching a “virus” from each other. Nature has a time, place, and method for restoring all things in nature. And that is what the diseases (i.e. cold and flus etc.) are. They are clinical symptoms that are part of the body’s restoration process for excess internal toxicity.
How about when someone with no symptoms breathes on you, does that mean you then catch their good health particles? If you and your spouse or kids wake up with eye boogers, did you catch them from each other? So why then when someone coughs or sneezes and then at some later point you do the same, why do you believe you “caught it” from someone?
Covid and germ theory/contagion are man-made lies and take away from God's creation. Claims that we are potential breath killing terrorists does not align with God’s word. Breath means life not death as the world wants you to believe. When you understand that, then you understand why we should not be injecting or ingesting toxic things to try to heal or prevent some unproven disease. The body is self regulating. We need to stop interfering thinking we know more than our Creator. God took care of ALL of it!
God created NO harmful particles
Genesis 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.
God gave us physical life through breath
Genesis 2:7 Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
God gave us spiritual life through breath
John 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
God gave us The Gospel to preach by breath
2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Acts 10:42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead.
2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
God used breath to heal.
Mark 8:22-23 And they came to Bethsaida. And they brought a blind man to Jesus and implored Him to touch him. Taking the blind man by the hand, He brought him out of the village; and after spitting on his eyes and laying His hands on him, He asked him, “Do you see anything?”
We're looking for the truth, correct? If the reason for contaminating the virus culture clearly contaminates the end result, merely so the lab tech can go home and have supper... then we need to tighten the reigns on the system, eh?
You are a sharp guy, and proud of your accomplishments. Surely you can see that the methodology for isolating a virus is, at best, sketchy? Or do you wish to continue defending it regardless? The least you could do is say to yourself, "Hmmm... I think they have a point..."
are you talking about what I did in the ER for decades or the strawman from a century ago? The problem with cultists is they can't think outside their strawman argument. If someone pushes them to look outside their strawman argument, they will make any excuse or insult to stay within the box. The only way out is to learn. There's pubmed, genbank, even wiki hasn't corrupted their genetics articles yet. If you don't learn to get out of the cult YOURSELF, you'll simply fall for the next one, even if you get out of this one.
Hi Daniel - I'm new here, and I don't know anything about your EM career. However, I have huge respect for it, and all the good people who do their best in EM.
IMO, EM and constructive surgery are the disciplines of medicine that shine. Chronic disease and infectious disease? Well, the when emergencies arise in these cases, EM shines. Am all for it.
I prefer, however, to try to get to the root of the issue. The vast majority of chronic diseases are self-caused, IMO. Similarly, most infectious disease/contagious disease simply does not occur in those who make a point to take proper care of their health. IOW, immune system competency and strength is the bottom line.
I am a physician who supervises water fasting for patients. Over 40 years I have seen countless examples of the body rapidly healing itself while fasting. Proper lifestyle and diet afterwards maintains a high level of health. Many diseases considered incurable respond very well to serious lifestyle changes. That is what I have dedicated my life to doing, and the results are incredibly satisfying for all concerned.
So when I remark about the virus issue, I have plenty of direct evidence that there are huge question marks surrounding the infection/contagion issue. Obviously conventional medicine profits greatly from the status quo, and health statistics in the USA and the world over in these realms is beyond terrible. To the degree conventional medicine turns a blind eye toward serious questions about these issues, respect for conventional medicine and its practitioners is rapidly lost.
Perhaps it's time you begin thinking outside your own BOX lol :) - besides looking at how corrupt the "No Control Study" "isolation process" is, you should have a look into pleomorphism. . It may take you a long time to catch on to there being "No Virus" i.e. chances are you find the material you need to dissolve the "Virus Illusion" aren't on pubmed etc.
I suggest you look at point 15 of my collection of research on this topic - although, from your tone, you're likely too stuck/invested in the "Invisible Virus" BELIEF SYSTEM.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/vngkjfr7i64nvtxvl9b3i/h?rlkey=1893ti5oo3hb5irbi083styke&dl=0
🎯🎯🎯
You might want to read what THE CREATOR of ALL things says about your claims. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT14y9fEKOEZzlVls7uNbA0g1lRfOtMtqbxhpEe7kjVE8fMkMeACP1nugoV-c_ZkI5LVJlJyxGbthWC/pub
OK, let's accept you have to add toxic substances to the cell cultures. But then you need proper control experiments, where you have everything but the "virus". Even Enders, in his foundational paper, admitted that the controls were indistinguishable from the samples with "viruses". Stefan Lanka and, more recently, Jamie Andrews showed that no virus is needed to produce cytopathic effect and "viral" particles. The "no virus" position is totally misrepresented. I see nothing of substance in the essay to support the "yes virus" position. None of the criticisms are addressed--simply ignored and misconstrued. Have you read A Farewell to Virology by Dr. Mark Bailey? After reading through the comments and replies, it is obvious that you do not understand the criticisms of virology. I'm sure I'm wasting my time posting a comment here. Maybe that IS the whole point.
you didn't comprehend the article did you?
i've had thousands of proofs of viruses working in the er through observation of how the body responds differently to bacteria, toxins and viruses. Disinformation books and idols have captured your mind. You can only see that they are liars if you look at information outside their thought cage.
5 questions
Have you researched simple straining techniques used for viruses; primitive methods of isolation?
Are newer methods of virus isolation more effective at purifying and replicating the virus than old techniques?
Is the result of virus isolation the same virus originally seen prior to isolation? In other words you see some viruses in a blood sample and once you're done with straining and culturing you end up with many times more viruses?
If you were to answer the 3 questions above as Yes (imagine it is all true instead of saying no) do the arguments people who do not believe in viruses make, sound reasonable to you?
Is it possible for doctors and scientists who have a theory or bias, dismiss anything that doesn't back up their theory allowing them to mislead a lot of people?
yes, microwave electroporation is far cleaner than chemical. now we have chromatography to separate out particles by molecular weight, sequencing to determine what species have what effect down to the genes that cause illness. This is why controlled op like psychiatrist dr kaufman keep going on about experiments from a century ago. it's the only strawman they can beat. anyone who has done cell biology in the past 50 years shakes their head at the stupidity of basing their whole belief system on deficiencies from a century ago.
Then why do you not do this, and document it to disprove the thousands of FOIA requests for information regarding the isolation and purification of any virus, anywhere, that were all answered with "We do not have that information"?
Where is the real photograph, not your friggin cartoon spikey thingamajigger?😎🤥 you got herpes of the bran, dude!
Thank you both, Sez777 and dpl, for pointing out the 2 fundamental issues with our whole brainwashed history of contagions and things that attack our cells and replicate inside of us. We are the ones who have been psyop'ed over the years -- "catch a cold" etc -- to believe in contagion and invisible attackers. That's just not how the body works. It's just not. Illness is the result of the body -- which aims for homeostasis -- not being able to achieve homeostasis due to an overload of toxins (poisoning) or a deficiency in nutrients (starvation) or a combination of the two (most typical). So in order to help correct the overload of toxins, the body detoxes the poisons through the available pathways. And when you have more of this than usual -- because our bodies literally detox 24/7 -- you have symptoms. The more symptoms you have and the longer it goes on, the worse you feel and the more chronic and involved the situation becomes. Bacteria are dead cell/debris eaters. They don't cause the disease. They help clean it up. There is no good vs. bad bacteria. Different types appear to consume different debris. That's what we should learn fundamentally. All the invisible enemy stuff has been a 150 year distraction from that. There are books upon books written about this. Sorry that Dr. Nagase has missed this. It's not unusual to miss a discussion or debate on something you're not at all inclined to accept. There is way more information in the world (even within one field) than any one person could ever read. But wrapping one's mind around the fact that viruses have never been proven, nor has contagion, starts with an honest look at those facts, not a lengthy discourse as an attempt to say the true thing is the psy-op. It's no fun facing our cognitive dissonance, but we have all been played on this one.
And what did Cowan conclude, dpl? That viruses exist?🤡😉😂😎
The “no virus” argument is not a psyop at all. It points to the flimsy science virology is built upon. When you’re sick, your body makes proteins. You can detect them with PCR, but it doesn’t tell you the function of them. You just know they are present when someone is sick. Viruses as a contagious pathogen was a *theory* that got forced into mainstream science.
I think people who went to med school or got PhDs don’t want to honestly challenge their indoctrination. Calling curious people psyops after powerful people orchestrated a string of them to convince people there was a global pandemic is not helping anyone’s cause except the powers that be. People who challenged HIV got KILLED or CANCELED. Weird psyop! If viruses do exist as defined, we’re doing a really poor job of dealing with them, eh?
https://open.substack.com/pub/rickyrants/p/the-no-virus-argument-is-not-a-distraction
&
to take it a step further:
https://open.substack.com/pub/dpl003/p/jamie-discussing-the-pcr-gene-sequencing
learn biology. the logical errors in everything you've stated are explained in my article. If you can't understand, it's because you've got an emotional though block.
The body...makes...proteins...?
100% accurate. The PsyOp is that viruses exist and cause disease. Since no "virus" ever has been isolated and shown to cause disease, no viruses exist. Christine Massey has issued thousands of FOIA requests for evidence of the isolation of said particles, and NONE have ever been replied to with evidence of the existence of a virus, or that it causes a disease. Germ Theory is a lie, and can never be proven otherwise. There have been thousands of experiments to see if one person can infect another, including by the US military, and none were successful. This alone proves the virologists are a fraud, and the whole branch of pseudo-medicine has been debunked. It is way past time these charlatans are held to account.
This. All contagion studies have failed.
Are you serious, Nagase?
I didn’t know anything significant about virology, just how to think for myself.
My assignment on covid on 3/3/20 was to figure out the PCR. And when I did, I figured out that the primers are in silico, which means AI. So there is nothing to look for that came from a person. You can say that they can transcribe a new virus de novo, but how exactly do you know you got it right?
The 217 FOIAs back this up. The failed transmission studies back this up. The use of metagenomic transcription and the reliance on made-up sequences backs this up. The bullshit tobacco mosaic “virus” is the signed confession.
The mountain of dead bodies from the polio and covid injections are circumstantial evidence society does not have a virus problem, it has a greed problem, and a spiritual black hole of seeking medical physical immortality (the customers).
The virus is the psyop that drives a business plan. And we know EXACTLY whose plan.
Your paisan,
efc
PS did you know that Steve Kirsch is really part of the ChatGPT beta test?
a self replicating sequence is the perfect weapon. today we create sequences in silico first then get a polymerase to make it. If it survives on its own and spreads, it is a virus.
We know how to do this because we learned it from nature.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/virus/vssi/#/virus?SeqType_s=Nucleotide&VirusLineage_ss=SARS-CoV-2,%20taxid:2697049
These are all the non "silico" COVID DNAsequences, where they were found and who sequenced it.
Just because first published sequence was the engineered blueprint "in silico", doesn't mean that all sequences are. I'm surprised you cannot see this most basic logical error.
The sheer number of observed variant sequences observed in real life all over the world just means that coronaviruses are a very durable and stable species of virus that can be engineered towards various ends.
The first entry listed at that link is the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read. Daniel, I challenge you to put aside the ad hominem nonsense and cite a valid study showing the existence of any alleged virus.
Christine has been on this for years. People owe her some isolation, purification and proof of pathogenicity and contagiousness!
Can you show me some data on when this has happened?
That was not the sequence of events re MN908947.2 or 402123.
Did you read my reply? i just posted the entire genbank history of the covid-19 lineage, all their relatives and where they were found.
Either you can read and comprehend 10,000 + entries in 26 minutes and you're a genius,
or
You're willfully blind to information that has been put before you.
Daniel, I've done more work on the missing virus issue than nearly anyone.
If MN908947.2 was juiced up for gain of function, why was it so weak, and why did they need to run the PCR at Ct 37 to 45 when the absolute detection limit of one molecule of target is Ct35 (that is from Bustin)?
So this jazzed up "weapon" has no effects and then to "find" it they have to rely on false positives.
Here is my report; it's about 325 pages.
https://chironreturn.org/chronology/
Furthermore, you are citing an NIH publication. Many perpetrators, including Fauci, worked for the NIH. What gets on that page supports the official version of events. Also I suggest you cool it with accusations. It's a good idea to remain civil with me. This way, I will pay less attention to you.
If Nagase or anyone else wants to claim that the "no virus" position is a psyop then they should easily be able to present just one study that shows an isolated and purified "virus" from a sample taken directly from a human, yet this never happens. Now, since all "virologists" and the whole field of "virology" acknowledge that such a thing is "outside of what is possible in "virology"(see link below for the claim), then it's crystal clear who is perpetrating lies.
FOIA request to the US CDC regarding documentation of isolation of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/CDC-March-1-2021-SARS-COV-2-Isolation-Response-Redacted.pdf
What I always find when people try to refute the "no virus" position is that they have never actually read the studies that claim the isolation of a "virus", understood the foundational issues, genuinely listened to the many people who have been talking about this for decades or read the material that many of the critics of "virology" have written that is freely available like this one:
"A Farewell To Virology" by Mark Bailey
https://drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert-edition/
In my view I think these are some of the things to consider and learn about before we can even have a serious discussion about the topic of "viruses".
- Stefan Lanka's control experiments
- Stefan Lanka's measles trials(where he appealed and won) and the direct/indirect results of these trials
- The many FOI requests that been collected by Christine Massey from all over the world
- The many unproven assumptions that "virologists" are making
- The 30-50+ experiments that failed to prove contagious illness by fluids of sick people
- The work of Harold Hillman and his critique regarding the electron microscope but also of biology in general
- The work of the Perth Group
- The acknowledgement and understanding of pleomorphism(microzyma->bacteria->fungi->bacteria->microzyma)
The worst part of the perpetuation of the lie of "viruses" is that the true causes of illness are never looked at where people are constantly being misdiagnosed and mistreated that leads to unnecessary harm and even death. Not only that but people are also told to fear people and fearful people do not act rationally which leads to all kinds of bad decisions that wreck havoc on society, just look at how people behaved the past 3 years. Last but not least, the fear can also be weaponized and used for political goals which too has happened the past 3 years through the media and will continue to be used as long as people hold on to the false belief in "viruses".
Keep in mind that the greatest tool of control in human history has always been fear, if we can remove that fear we can regain some control which goes against what the powers that shouldn't be want.
It never ceases to amaze me how motivated people are to read and repeat lies, but absolutely to refuse to do basic due diligence to verify if anything of what they're sayind is true... e.g. by learning basic biology
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/virus/vssi/#/virus?SeqType_s=Nucleotide&VirusLineage_ss=SARS-CoV-2,%20taxid:2697049
That's a list of every variant that's been isolated from a sick person, where it was isolated from, and by whom.
You can look up the thousands of DNA sequences for any other species on genbank as well. i.e. viruses, mice, or humans.
Once again you prove my point.
Nothing you posted refute my point, you didn't cite a single study that shows an isolated and purified "virus" from a sample taken directly from a human without the sample first being combined with other genetic material like a tissue culture. In case you aren't aware, the standard method in "virology" is the use of a tissue culture which has nothing to do with isolation. All those studies you referred to uses the same faulty method that was established in 1954 of using a tissue culture during what the "virologists" falsely call isolation where they mix a sample with other genetic material and conduct a pseudoscientific experiment. Logic and common sense tells us that we can't conduct any experiment with things we haven't shown to exist prior to an experiment taking place, I mean it's not like we can conduct experiments with unicorns unless we have proved their existence prior to any experiment taking place. The scientific method require us to have an independent variable which means an isolated and purified "virus" but as I posted above, "virologists" and the whole field of "virology" even go as far as to say that "it's outside of what is possible in virology".
In short, both me and "virologists" are in full agreement on this point, we can't isolate "viruses" from a sample taken directly from a human. The only disagreement here is the consequence of that, I argue that if we haven't found something directly from nature then we can't claim to have evidence of its existence. "Virologists" falsely argue that we can use effects as evidence of its existence because they can't see the unproven assumption they are making.
Referring to effects as proof of the existence of a specific thing like a "virus" is sadly how the "virologists" are working, they refer to the cytopathic effect in their pseudoscientific experiments as evidence of a "virus" which is like referring to a destroyed backyard as evidence of unicorns or presents under the Christmas tree as evidence of Santa Claus.
Last but not least, all those pseudoscientific experiments conducted by "virologists" also lack proper controls and any alleged scientific experiment without proper controls makes it meaningless and sadly this is standard practice in "virology". It has led to the self deception where "virologists" are deceiving themselves into thinking the cytopathic effect is caused by a "virus" when it's not, it's been shown through proper controls to be caused by the procedure itself.
You've cited a list of entries about made-up in silico "genomes". The first entry listed at that link relates to the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read.
Daniel, I challenge you to put aside the insults and appeals to your own authority, and cite a valid study showing the existence of any alleged virus.
about made-up in silico "genomes" You are a clown, you have no idea what you are talking about. dideoxy sequencing is not "in slico".
The "genomes" are strictly in silico. If you claim they have actually been found in any "host", I challenge you to cite valid evidence.
I see you have insults like Daniel, but no valid science to cite so far either.
genbank has 1000000+ different isolations of every virus, and every species we've sequenced on this planet. If you don't comprehend the magnitude of what genbank is, take the time to learn before repeating cult mantras. Email and ask any of the labs what their isolation and sequencing proceedures are. I'll congratulate you if you comprehend what.they send you.
Genbank is a database of in silico "genomes", not a listing of valid scientific studies. It's as meaningful as a database of Santa Claus sightings.
Why only computer generated computer cartoons, like NASA, no actual nano-microscopic photographs. I'm just 10 years old, and I see you're lying, dude!!! Just Show us the 💰 🤑 Who gave you the genital herpes of the brain? Prove it!
Bingo!
I can think of a few toxins that start small, mild and gradually get worse.
Primarily those are genotoxic substances.
Agent Orange (Dioxin)
Asbestos
Thalidomide
I'd say mustard gas, but that starts out bad, gets better and then worse later.
yes catalytic "toxins". Cyanide is another. However, I have yet to see a cyanide poisoning spread from person to person. Alcohol on the other hand seems to send a "detox" signal to susceptible people on alcoholic terrain to poison themselves and then "detox". I had to oversimplify reality in an attempt to get through the psyop.
I don't even know why I wrote it. I guess I just want people to think about genotoxicity.
Radiation too.
But otherwise good essay and I like the mnemonics.
I would also wonder why and how biohazard suits, negative pressure systems etcetera work if viruses are an electromagnetic phenomenon.
Those make sense if you are blocking a particle but not an energy.
Energy would better be stopped by lead, concrete or some sort of highly dense material
Hence the banning of lead-based paint that was used to paint houses and render them immune to electromagnetic radiation.
The "SARS-COV-2 genome" has never been found in a single person on the planet, let alone "the virus", or any "virus" for that matter. And every study attempting to demonstrate contagion failed completely. I challenge you to cite valid scientific evidence showing otherwise.
My position is based on the irrational Methods sections of "virus isolation and sequencing" papers, and FOI responses from literally hundreds of institutions.
Official Evidence that Virology is Pseudoscience - June 10 2023
- a 40 minute introduction to the massive body of evidence collected on my website, primarily in the form of freedom of information responses from 217 institutions in 40 countries, including Health Canada, PHAC, CDC, NIAID, FDA, and a ridiculous response from the W.H.O., also correspondences directly with "SARS-COV-2" researchers:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/gvu4NbieSuVb/
“So What The Hell Is Going On?"
(how perps pulled off fake-covid without a virus, the meaninglessness of the tests, etc)
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/what-the-hell-is-going-on/
Thanks for writing this essay, it does a very good job of dissecting this phenomenon. I think there is an important aspect of the NAV phenomenon that you mentioned obliquely but I think is an important factor.
One of the big strategies with the C19 operation was to define the measurable presence of a virus (or parts thereof) as an infection. This fraudulently boosts the case rates. (Yes, it often picks up dead parts of virus but it would not be legitimate without symptoms even if the virus sample was live)
And this "error" is fundamentally to neglect "terrain" in favor of "germs" as the singular causative agent. There might be many conditions of the terrain (prior exposure, antibodies, healthy immune system, vitamins, mental state, good food) that influences whether a virus takes hold and leads to an infection that produces a viral load.
This obvious error is an open door to the true argument that terrain matters, and calls into question the correctness of the experts, entirely legitimately. This makes boosting NAV serve the direct purpose of the C19 op, almost certainly this was inorganically boosted.
I think it is fair to say that much of the medical establishment focuses on fighting viruses more than on fixing the terrain, which is i think generally a valid criticism. But it doesn't mean viruses don't exist!
"The lack of scientific evidence is catching up with those clinging to germ theory and virus existence. We are now seeing some of the "pathogen" promoters lashing out rather than being prepared to discuss the long history of failed experiments. How much longer can they maintain this façade with their audiences?
Germ "theory" is a fraudulent misnomer as it is a refuted hypothesis rather than a scientific theory. In this video we examine five of the arguments being used by the germ proponents...and why they have all flopped spectacularly."
-- Sam Bailey's latest video:
5 Spectacular Fails From Germ Theory
https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/5-spectacular-fails-from-germ-theory
I always keep an open mind and I'm far from being a scientist or doctor so to a reasonable degree I need to rely on experts. My method is to look at the to and fro argument between them.
So what scientific papers would you point to where the method and results clearly show:
1. a virus has been isolated
2. a virus has caused illness
3. a virus has been transmitted from one person to another causing illness in the transmitted-to person
If you are unaware of such papers what is your evidence for these phenomena?
I have great trouble with the notion that there aren't transmissible respiratory illnesses myself because I don't think it's just common belief that makes us believe you can catch a cold from someone else. While I often seem to get a cold without having obviously "caught" it from someone else I definitely have a sense that I have at least sometimes caught a cold from someone else and I certainly hear people saying they think they caught a cold from this or that person or that it's gone around the whole family type of thing, however, perhaps it's just a perception (or there are other reasons for an illness "going round the whole family") and it would be good to see the clear evidence of it proven using the scientific method.
for bacterial illnesses, we do bacterial cultures every day in the hospital. The nice thing about isolating a bacteria from a patient, is that by doing antibiotic studies on the bacteria isolated from their blood or sputum, an antibiotic can be chosen that selectively kills the bad bacteria. When a pneumonia fails to improve with an antibiotic, and resistance to that chemical is confirmed on bacterial culture petri dishes, most of the time we find on the same antibiotic panel a chemical that the bacteria isn't resistant to, and ultimately that is the chemical that resolves the infection. We also do viral panels to see exactly what virus might be causing a patient's illness. We can do this on blood, sputum, or a nasal swab. With the species of virus identified for a given patient, sometimes we can predict the course of illness, particularly with mild species.
This happens every day in the ER.
The bacteria is not causing the illness. It's there as part of the clean up crew. In fact it's often there before the illness just as part of the homeostatic environment, but then grows in number when there is dead and dying tissue to clean up. What is causing the dead and dying tissue is what is causing the illness, not the bacteria. Just watch nature.
You were asked to cite scientific papers. And I am challenging you to do so, as well.
It would be sad if one motivation to believe in No virus were "an emotional attachment to “knowing more” than the “academics”". I don't think so.
I'm not one of those people. I know I know nothing but I know that there is disagreement among experts so I have to have a method to try to determine which ones are correct.
Yes, I know. His article said that no virus people were like that.
I see, sorry, that should have been obvious to me.
So is the process of what you do in viral panels available in scientific papers?
How would scientists who reject the proof of the existence of viruses be able to reproduce what you do?
Yes, modern viral panel processes were published in the 70's. Viruses are just a smaller version bacteria. And if you read genetics, LINE-1 is a retrotransposon that's an even smaller version of a virus. From the number of copies of LINE-1 in the human genome, it looks like it's a virus that decided it can't be bothered with going outside the cell. All it does is make an occasional copy of itself, and travel in and out of the nucleus from time to time.
Cool story, can you cite a valid scientific study to back it up?
My knowledge on isolating viruses or how you observe them in a petri dish is from 40 years ago when I worked in a lab at. the Department of Genetcis at the University of Alberta.
However one of the protocols went something like this: you would first centrifuge the sample that cause the different parts of the solution to layer. The heaviest part would sink to the bottom and the top layer is where the lightest particles are and is the layer where you might have viruses .That part is called the "supernatant".
You would then scoop up the top layer and plate the solution and culture it on a petri dish.
If after culturing you have plaques that meant you indeed had viruses in the top layer.
You could then take part of the top layer and do a "phenol extraction" to separate the protein from the DNA/RNA and in those days we would sequence the genetic material manually using a newly discovered and very elegant methodology at the time called the dideoxy sequencing method invented by Dr. Sanger.(today Next generation Sequencing automates the process and allows many samples to be sequenced in a parallel, there are also simpler ways to isolate genetic material than a phenol extraction)
We would run the genetic sample through a gel where you run a current through the gel and depending on the weight different base pairs would go faster and you would then analyze the band patterns in order to deduce the sequence.
Depending on the sequence we could see what type of virus we had.
'Magically" certain sequences found in viruses from a patient samples produce very distinct symptoms compared to other types of viruses.
This is what we call reproducible data. Science begin and ends with reproducible data, without it is where you get pseudo scientific nonsense. Many more details are involved and different protocols to isolate different viruses but that is one example of plaque causing viruses. All are reproducible and that is what the science game is about.
Cool story, can you cite a valid scientific study to back it up? One where a specific particle was actually identified, sequenced and characterized and studied with valid controlled experiments?
How about a valid study demonstrating contagion?
Please tell us more about all the stuff you added to the clinical sample (a complex substance, not purified particles) in the petri dish? Fetal bovine serum? Antibiotics and antifungals? How did you determine that a "virus" had been "cultured"?
Hi Christine,
What is your educational background and have you ever worked in a lab?
Hi Sid.
Why? Are you trying to apply the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority, as Daniel has done?
Are you unwilling to answer my questions about the culturing of alleged "viruses" that you claim to have done?
So have you put this argument to the "no virus" people? I know they're familiar with the supernatant and Sanger sequencing and petri dishes and so on - they still don't buy though.
I can only relay my experience and observations. For me reproducible data and facts means something. Science is not a popularity contest, it is about truth. I can't fix stupid.
The thing is, scientists who've been involved in the very work you've done such as Mike Donio, question reproducibility and replication.
https://stillinthestorm.substack.com/p/ever-heard-of-the-reproducibility-crisis
Hi Petra,
My position is similar and its good to see others state a clear unemotional request for evidence of facts where so many just believe.
Jamie Andrews has done the only real study that I find credible today in this debate and it makes no difference to me which side is correct, but I too want all the lies and liars exposed.
Supposedly we can now see atoms with a microscope and yet we still cannot see a virus? In this I can only recommend people watch the non cgi videos produced by Royal Raymond Rife of micro life, and suggest that surely we should have improved on his work in nearly 100 years.
I also respect Daniel for not only presenting the challenge and replying here, but also to not censor this debate as some do. Censoring polite debate only leads to suspicion for me and should for others too.
Thanks,
Matt.
Yes, Jamie is doing great work.
I was inspired - after reading Tim West's note with the text below - to write a post suggesting that perhaps all the focus should be on the lack of controls and that moving past that onto isolation and genomic sequencing is kind of a red herring. Science simply stops at the control part.
"If I claim that there are alien space badgers inside every piece of tissue paper that cause bricks to move downwards and I prove it to you by strapping tissue paper to a brick and then letting it go….
You can say “do a control experiment without the paper”
I can do the control experiment without the paper to totally invalidate your proof.
I do not need to isolate alien space badgers to do this."
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/is-the-focus-on-virus-isolation-genomic
The falsehood of the “No Virus” camp is infantile thinking. For an infant, if they cannot “see something” it doesn’t exist.
The body, even, animals, plants and bacteria all react to viruses. The species of viruses are differentiated by the differences in the effect on the body.
For example, mononucleosis, fatigue, swollen nodes, was found to be contagious by mucous contact, not through air.
It isn’t 100% contagious, but it is contagious enough that most teenagers get it and then become immune forever.
When they looked further into sequences, they found 2 different species caused the same “mononucleosis” effect. EBV and CMV. They have the same effect but different gene sequences.
Believing that something doesn’t exist because 1 unit needs an electron microscope to be visualized is like believing combustion doesn’t happen in a car engine because you can’t see it.
The effect of viruses that people can directly observe is dead cells, dead bacteria, and illness in multicellular organisms like people.
Just because you were not privy to the germ vs terrain theory before a certain point in time does not mean that it appeared out of thin air and is some sort of psyop. This is a back and forth argument that has taken place since the time of famed celebrity pseudoscientist Louis Pasteur and his lesser known antagonist Antoine Bechamp. Many people who have taken in this information did so from discovering that they were wrong, not because they want to be correct and push a narrative. It was from escaping a lifelong brainwashing into a false paradigm and stepping into discovering the truth.
Simply put, there are no isolation studies that don’t add toxic chemicals to the cell culture and claim the resulting cytopathic effects are a virus. There are no studies demonstration transmission from one host to another via natural pathways.
Further, do you know where Kossel isolated the alleged nucleotides from? Things like a calf thymus and seabird excrement…LITERAL bird shit. You can’t make this up 😂 So it is safe to say that the foundation of DNA/genetics is just as fraudulent as that of virology.
I think the fundamental takeaway of this article is to heighten awareness of psyops. Forget about viruses existing or not, that’s just an example. Instead think primarily about how easy it is to manipulate people. The first clue is where the danger is invisible to 99%. Predictable is that feature where most cannot actually check, feel or see it. Your warning radar should be loud when you hear that.
This is a great essay. This quote is especially helpful: "A construct of DNA/RNA, with a copy function and protective coat, is called a “virus” in English. It is the smallest thing that replicates, adapts and makes a protective body for itself according to a blueprint". I.e. virus is just a term created to describe this.
The "viruses don't exist" crowd point to issues regarding isolation and purification of viruses and the controversy surrounding this, which I hope Dr. Nagase will address at some point. However, he makes it clear that just because we might have trouble seeing viruses, does not mean they don't exist.
All the other things said about logical fallacies (not just in relation to this question) are very valuable. I will have to read this several times.
As a separate question, given the existence of viruses that cause disease, what are we to make of Covid? Is it merely an engineered bioweapon virus with spike proteins that attack ACE2 receptors and the like, or is it (possibly) quite a bit more involved? Those in the no virus camp do make some compelling arguments about EMF radiation and covid symptoms. Other arguments seem to have potential merit regarding toxins, like synthetic venom peptides.
There's thousands of virus isolation studies every year from sick people on pubmed. Every viral panel i ordered on patients in my career is an isolation study, every family member who was sick and tested positive for the same virus and not any of the 2 dozen other common respiratory viruses is proof of transmission. Everyone in the community sick and testing positive for the same pathogen one year only to have that pathogen never reappear can't be explained by "detoxing". Do the powers that be create a different cold causing "toxin" every year? How is it spread? Or is it a living thing (not a toxin), that spreads by itself?
Every blood test i ordered on a sick person with lymphocyte suppression and no changes to neutrophils shows the body fighting an 'intracellular' DNA problem like a virus or cancer; not bacteria or parasites.
With coronaviruses, the success rate of the species depends on the health of the host. Just like packs of wolves have the highest success catching the sickest or weakest in a herd, coronaviruses are no different. Stress, radiation and malnutrition all weaken the body increasing chances of all viral and bacterial infections.
Maybe engineered self replicating bioweapons are the same as hunting predators and need help from a cell phone tower to weaken their target.
Come on Daniel, cite a valid scientific study, please!
He already did clown.
No, he cited a list of entries about made-up in silico "genomes". The first entry listed at that link relates to the ridiculous Fan Wu study, the next 10 entries don't even have publications, so there are no Methods sections to even read. Daniel has taken it as an article of faith that the entries are legit.
Elsewhere he cited a study looking at PCR "tests" and fake-isolation (which is actually mixing complex substances together, stressing a cell line and blaming an imaginary "virus" for the cells breaking down).
Thanks for this clarification. I suppose the next question is about the PCR test or other methods they say detect coronavirus. It was admitted that they took the CCP sequencing to develop the vaccine. Kary Mullis of course said the PCR test couldn't be used to diagnose disease, and it was used at fraudulent cycle thresholds. And they have other toxins in the tests getting near the blood brain barrier. But, the question remains: if it is so easy to sequence viruses, are these tests able to find it reliably? Why did Christine Massey find no one who would produce documentation of the isolated virus?
I forgot the term but there is a method where they deliberately spread an idea (like the flat earth theory) and observe how fast and far it spreads and how people buy into it and then analyse the demographics.
It's believed that in the pre-cvd they took data for each country via SNS and other platforms on the internet, and worked out the most effective strategy for each country in a culturally acceptable manner.
it's a form of network stress testing. In the computer world they use pings to network map the computers that might be involved in a distributed denial of service attack (DDOS).
They use a similar concept stress testing aluminum airframes through vibration and resonance. The psyop is a "jucy lie" thought virus, and they monitor how it spreads and who it resonates with.
I suspect the overall purpose is to analyze better control people and the networks they form.
What a brilliant article. I’m fascinated why humans behave the way they do and I’m finding my faith in human nature being lowered below a level I thought possible. It’s so disappointing to me how people can seem to see through one ‘op’ but completely fall for another. I guess these are the people Scott Adams refers to as having guessed their way to the truth by lucky accident.
It’s telling how irate people get when you challenge their false beliefs, they don’t come back with reasonable evidence, or say ‘ that’s interesting, I’ve not heard that before, tell me more so I can update my knowledge’. I didn’t know there were virus deniers before covid, so I’ve listened to their arguments (for many hours) and thought it through in my head and challenged what they’ve said and looked for other sources. I questioned whether everything I thought I knew was wrong and in this case decided it wasn’t. I have also questioned whether everything I thought I knew about vaccines was wrong and decided that yes it was ( mainly due to the fact that I was ignorant of the facts regarding them) and so I have gone from being a ( retired) doctor that fully vaccinated my children to being an anti-vaxxer.
Another psychological note I made was spotting a comparison in the demeanor of the weird woman with the squeaky voice in Matt Walsh’s documentary What is a Woman? ( you know the one talking about chickens having periods) where she has a serene, patronising but exquisitely calm and superior manner, with that of Andy Kaufman in a video where he is being directly challenged and has the same glazed over look and manner ( can’t remember the other person though).They both look hypnotised.
Can’t wait for part 2! Somehow I don’t hold out much hope for being able to breakthrough the spell these people are under. My theory is that in order for humans to survive as a species they have to work together and believe in something above themselves, and so are predisposed to falling for a narrative that gives them comfort in some way.
Brilliant, if you know nothing.
https://chironreturn.org/dont-look-back-by-eric-francis-coppolino/
Very good observations! The observation that followers of the no virus idea act like they're in a cult has come to me more than once.
No, they act like they're being treated like crap. Seems accurate to me.
Meanwhile, we have spooks in the "freedom movement" talking about lab leaks and zoonotic jumps. Both are shoved down our throat because both are wrong. That's the game.
Hey! I know. Let's all learn what military operations are!
Yes, there is a cult, and you are in the only one that will destroy the world all humanity.
I Am Vaccinated.
And I Don't Want To Hear Another Word
About Sudden Vaccine Deaths.
They're Dead.
What Difference Does It Make - To Me ?
You're Scaring Me.
I am Terrified Enough Already Of Breathing Air.
I Don't Care How Many People Die From The Vaccine.
We Are Running The Risk Of Scaring Children
From Getting Injected And Giving Me Covid.
if you eliminate the fear of death, then there really is nothing scary about the natural world, even us.
.
- From Thomas Lewis
Clowns To The Left Of Me ...
Jokers To The Right ...
Here I Am:
UselessLiberal.com
.
Another warning is emotionality like he says. We had better make damned sure we have no emotional stake in it. “My mommy always said to wash my hands or die...”