HELLO OPERATOR?
Updated: Aug 21, 2021
When was the last time you were feeling perfectly healthy, went to the Dr. for a check-up, and they diagnosed you with a "virus" based on no symptoms at all?
As Florence Nightingale put it: “There are no specific diseases, there are specific disease conditions”.
John Snow, considered to be the father of epidemiology. ...Used scientific methods to identify the environment in which cholera was spreading. By disrupting this environment, he ended the epidemic.
Current Sars CoV2 public health protection protocols (social distancing, lock-downs, masking, etc) are rationalized on the scientifically unsupported theory of asymptomatic transmission. This hypothesis arose from majority of individuals testing positives for Sars CoV2 (Covid 19 infection) with PCR testing do not present symptomatically.
However, as documented above, asymptomatic presentation would be the expected result with PCR test over amplifying sample material through high CT rates resulting in up to 90% false positives per studies reported in NYT; as individual are not ill or contagious.
UP to 86% of Individuals with Positive PCR test have No Core Symptoms of Covid 19 Infection
Additionally, advocates of the asymptomatic spread theory utilize research that is not designed to study for method of transmission of Sars CoV2 but rather evaluates viral load detected on RT PCR tests to hypothesize asymptomatic transmission as a main driver of virus spread. As in this CNN example using a study published in JAMA Medicine:
The study authors admit that their research is not designed to determine method of transmission of virus and states:
"Although the high viral load we observed in asymptomatic patients raises a distinct possibility of a risk for transmission, our study was not designed to determine this," the researchers wrote.
"It is important to note that detection of viral RNA does not equate infectious virus being present and transmissible," the researchers wrote. "
This is a STUNNING statement, as it admits that a positive test result is not reliable proof that the infection originated from Sars CoV2.
This was further documented in the Corman Drosten report above which no longer links to full text article, please refer to archived link above for sourcing:
The design errors described here are so severe that it is highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur using the protocol of the Corman-Drosten paper
According to this statement from 22 top scientific experts in relevant research fields, the WHO/FDA/CDC and all government health organizations have been recommending & implementing the use of a test that is highly unlikely to detect Sars Cov2 virus due to severe problems with testing design. Almost the entire basis of the Sars CoV2 Covid-19 pandemic has been rationalized on the results of these tests. This renders all data results from PCR testing severely corrupted.
CDC Admitted in 2011 PCR Inappropriate for Screening Asymptomatic Individuals for Infection:
CDC warned in 2011 that PCR testing should not be used in diagnosis of petussis infections due to significant potential for false positive results. Nothing inherently has changed about PCR testing to explain for the CDC's change from it former recommendations:
Testing Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Pertussis Early signs and symptoms of pertussis are often non-specific, making it difficult to determine clinically who has pertussis in the earliest stages (http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/clinical/features.html). However, only patients with signs and symptoms consistent with pertussis should be tested by PCR to confirm the diagnosis. Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results. Asymptomatic close contacts of confirmed cases should not be tested and testing of contacts should not be used for post-exposure prophylaxis decisions.
NO DIRECT TRANSMISSION STUDIES had ever been done:
From a CDC study published July 2020 entitled:
Absence of Apparent Transmission of Sars-Cov-2 from Two Stylists After Exposure at a Hair Salon with a Universal Face Covering Policy
"ALTHOUGH NO STUDIES HAVE EXAMINED SARS-CoV-2 TRANSMISSION DIRECTLY, data from previous epidemics (6,7) support the use of universal face coverings as a policy to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2"
Keep in mind that this is a good 6-7 months after the original "SARS-COV-2" studies came out and that NO DIRECT TRANSMISSION STUDIES had ever been done. Beyond the lack of a purified/isolated "virus," it is clear that evidence of transmission is a very important piece of the "virus" puzzle that is clearly missing from the beginning.
_______________________________________
---MY GOAL IS TO BRING YOU CLOSER TO UNDERSTANDING SPREAD / NOT JUST ASYMPTOMATIC IS THE BIGGER LIE WE HAVE BEEN SOLD ---
"New evidence has emerged from China indicating that the LARGE MAJORITY OF CORONAVIRUS INFECTIONS DO NOT RESULT IN SYMPTOMS.
Chinese authorities began publishing daily figures on 1 April on the number of new coronavirus cases that are asymptomatic, with the first day’s figures suggesting that AROUND FOUR IN FIVE CORONAVIRUS INFECTIONS CAUSED NO ILLNESS." (1)
"VAST MAJORITY INFECTED WITH CORONAVIRUS ARE ASYMPTOMATIC when tested, study finds
UCL scientist FIND 86 PERCENT DID NOT HAVE A COUGH, TEMPERATURE OR LOSS OF TASTE OR SMELL - 77 PERCENT of those tested SHOWED NO SYMPTOMS" (2)
"UP TO 95 PERCENT OF THE CORONAVIRUS CASES IN KARACHI HAVE BEEN ASYMPTOMATIC, researchers said Tuesday, shedding possible light on why Pakistan has been able to weather the pandemic."(3)
"PEOPLE WHO WERE ASYMPTOMATIC ACCOUNTED FOR 86% OF THE PEOPLE WHO TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVID-19 in a UK sample population during lockdown, a study showed on Thursday" (4)
"For COVID-19, DATA TO DATE SUGGEST THAT 80% OF INFECTIONS ARE MILD OR ASYMPTOMATIC, 15% are severe infection, requiring oxygen and 5% are critical infections, requiring ventilation. These fractions of severe and critical infection would be higher than what is observed for influenza infection." (5)
UP TO 80% OF COVID-19 INFECTIONS ARE ASYMPTOMATIC, a New Case Report Says (6)
"In our area, which includes upper Manhattan and the Bronx, about 15 percent of patients who came to us for delivery tested positive for the coronavirus, BUT AROUND 88 PERCENT OF THESE WOMEN HAD NO SYMPTOMS OF INFECTION." (7)
And before anyone suggests these "asymptomatic" cases will go on to develop symptoms later, guess again:
"COVID-19 PATIENTS WITH NO SYMPTOMS LIKELY TO STAY THAT WAY, Japan researchers say
WHAT ARE THE ODDS COVID-19 PATIENTS WITH NO SYMPTOMS COULD DEVELOP THEM LATER ON?
QUITE SLIM, according to a recent study led by a group of researchers in Aichi Prefecture, who have discovered that asymptomatic coronavirus patients tend to recover within nine days of having their infections confirmed via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. (8)
(8) https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/06/15/national/science-health/asymptomatic-covid-19-patients
________________________________________________
THE INFECTIOUS MYTH BUSTED: PART 2
Some interesting highlights/conclusions about the flu and the inability throughout the decades to show evidence of human-to-human transmission of the so-called "influenza virus:"
"An eighth conundrum – one not addressed by Hope-Simpson – IS THE SURPRISING PERCENTAGE OF SERONEGATIVE VOLUNTEERS WHO EITHER ESCAPE INFECTION OR DEVELOP ONLY MINOR ILLNESSES AFTER BEING EXPERIMENTALLY INOCULATED WITH A NOVEL INFLUENZA VIRUS. The percentage of subjects sickened by iatrogenic aerosol inoculation of influenza virus is less than 50% [3], although such experiments depend on the dose of virus used. Only three of eight subjects without pre-existing antibodies developed illness after aerosol inhalation of A2/Bethesda/10/63 [4]. Intranasal administration of various wild viruses to sero-negative volunteers only resulted in constitutional symptoms 60% of the time; inoculation with Fort Dix Swine virus (H1N1) – a virus thought to be similar to the 1918 virus – in six sero-negative volunteers FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY SERIOUS ILLNESS, with one volunteer suffering moderate illness, three mild, one very mild, and one no illness at all [5]. Similar studies by Beare et al on other H1N1 viruses found 46 of 55 directly inoculated volunteers failed to develop constitutional symptoms [6]. IF INFLUENZA IS HIGHLY INFECTIOUS, WHY DOESN'T DIRECT INOCULATION OF A NOVEL VIRUS CAUSE UNIVERSAL ILLNESS IN SERONEGATIVE VOLUNTEERS?"
"After confronting influenza's conundrums, Hope-Simpson CONCLUDED THAT THE EPIDEMIOLOGY OF INFLUENZA WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH A HIGHLY INFECTIOUS DISEASE SUSTAINED BY AN ENDLESS CHAIN OF SICK-TO-WELL TRANSMISSIONS [2]. Two of the three most recent reviews about the epidemiology of influenza state IT IS "GENERALLY ACCEPTED" that influenza is highly infectious and repeatedly transmitted from the sick to the well, BUT NONE GIVE REFERENCES DOCUMENTING SUCH TRANSMISSION [11-13]. Gregg, in an earlier review, also reiterated this "generally accepted" theory but warned:
"SOME FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE EPIDEMIOLOGY OF INFLUENZA REMAIN OBSCURE AND CONTROVERSIAL. Such broad questions as what specific forces direct the appearance and disappearance of epidemics still challenge virologists and epidemiologists alike. Moreover, at the most basic community, school, or family levels of observation, even the simple dynamics of virus introduction, appearance, dissemination, and particularly transmission vary from epidemic to epidemic, locale to locale, SEEMINGLY UNMINDFUL OF TRADITIONAL INFECTIOUS DISEASE BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS." [14] (p. 46)
Questioning a generally accepted assumption means asking anew, "WHAT DOES THE EVIDENCE ACTUALLY SHOW?"
"In 2003, Bridges et al REVIEWED INFLUENZA TRANSMISSION AND FOUND "NO HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES PUBLISHED IN THE ENGLISH-LANGUAGE LITERATURE DELINEATING PERSON-TO-PERSON TRANSMISSION OF INFLUENZA."
Let's look at all the ways that they say you CAN NOT get "SARS-COV-2:"
DIRECT CONTACT AND FOMITES:
"There is currently no conclusive evidence for fomite or direct contact transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in humans."
DOMESTIC PETS AND FARM ANIMALS:
"There are no confirmed cases of transmission from domestic pets to humans."
VERTICAL TRANSMISSION:
"In addition, breast milk can harbor viral RNA, although no confirmed transmissions to infants from breast milk have been reported (90–92). Taken together, these studies suggest that vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 rarely occurs."
FECAL–ORAL (or FECAL AEROSOL) TRANSMISSION:
"No evidence currently supports fecal–oral transmission in humans, and intragastric inoculation of SARS-CoV-2 in macaques did not result in infection."
SEXUAL TRANSMISSION:
"No current evidence supports sexual transmission of SARS-CoV-2."
BLOODBORNE TRANSMISSION:
"The proportion of persons with viral RNA detectable in blood is currently unknown."
"To date, no replication-competent virus has been isolated from blood samples, and there are no documented cases of bloodborne transmission."
It appears that there is no evidence "SARS-COV-2" can be transmitted from:
*direct contact/fomites
*domestic animals
*mother-to-baby
*fecal to oral
*sexual activity
*bloodborne transmission.
What about RESPIRATORY TRANSMISSION?
"The accumulated evidence SUGGESTS that most transmission is respiratory, with virus suspended either on droplets or, less commonly, on aerosols."
The evidence SUGGESTS.
There is no direct evidence of human-to-human transmission of "SARS-COV-2" from respiratory transmission. Everything that has come out is indirect evidence.
DIRECT EVIDENCE is defined as evidence THAT DIRECTLY PROVES A KEY FACT AT ISSUE.
INDIRECT EVIDENCE, also referred to as circumstantial evidence, is evidence that relies on an INFERENCE to connect it to a conclusion.
There is NO DIRECT EVIDENCE of human-to-human transmission of "SARS-COV-2." It is all INDIRECT EVIDENCE from which assumptions, hypotheses, and theories are drawn from and sold as conclusive.
__________________
"Since then I have seen with my own eyes and smelled with my own nose smallpox growing up in first specimens, either in closed rooms or in overcrowded wards, where it could not by any possibility have been ‘caught’, but must have begun. I have seen diseases begin, grow up, and pass into one another. Now, dogs do not pass into cats.” - Florence Nightingale
________________________
FACT VS FICTION IN TRANSMISSION
Many Departments of Health are putting forward high numbers of confirmed cases. Some of these so-called confirmed cases are not even from PCR test that have been said to be inaccurate at the least. The inventor of the test Kerri Mullins denounced PCR as a tool for identifying virus entirely. Speaking solely on the other, calling confirmed cases with out even using a questionable diagnostic tool, which seems a bit strange to begin with, how are we assuming more cases without clinical data?
A research paper
published on November 20th highlights a case study of almost 10 million people in China. What the study found was there were 300 cases of Coronavirus in the population being carried without any symptoms at all. So the scientists then tracked the asymptomatic carriers. The contact tracing of 1,174 “close contacts” with the asymptomatic carriers showed ZERO transmission. Not a few, not a couple, but zero -none- not a single transmission of Coronavirus from a person without symptoms.... ....So why is the entire world engaged in COVID-19 mitigation processes to block the transmission of a virus that has never, not even once, been identified as occurring?
"Among 1,001 child contacts of these six cases there were no confirmed cases of COVID-19. In the school setting, among 924 child contacts and 101 adult contacts identified, there were no confirmed cases of COVID-19."
"In summary, examination of all Irish pediatric cases of COVID-19 attending school during the pre-symptomatic and symptomatic periods of infection (n = 3) identified no cases of onward transmission to other children or adults within the school and a variety of other settings."
No evidence of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school in Ireland, 2020
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/.../1560-7917.ES.2020.25...
Out of 110 cases, 27 created secondary exposures - of which 23 were in closed environment.
Conversely 71 cases were in closed environment and did not generate a secondary exposure.
As is, the data presented is statistically insignificant... it does not prove that closed environments increase the risk of COVID Exposure.
https://www.medrxiv.org/con.../10.1101/2020.02.28.20029272v2
No evidence of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school in Ireland, 2020 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7268273/
No more lockdowns: World Health Organization warns that the price is too high By TimesLIVE -August 3, 2020 The World Health Organization has urged countries not to reimpose national lockdowns in an attempt to stem the spread of Covid-19 due to social and economic repercussions. https://www.therep.co.za/.../no-more-lockdowns-world.../
________________________________________________________________________
From the Book INVISIBLE RAINBOW:
"Suddenly and inexplicably, influenza, whose descriptions had remained consistent for thousands of years, changed its character in 1889. Flu had last seized most of England in November 1847, over half a century earlier. The last flu epidemic in the United States had raged in the winter of 1874– 1875. Since ancient times, influenza had been known as a capricious, unpredictable disease, a wild animal that came from nowhere, terrorized whole populations at once without warning and without a schedule, and disappeared as suddenly and mysteriously as it had arrived, not to be seen again for years or decades. It behaved unlike any other illness, was thought not to be contagious, and received its name because its comings and goings were said to be governed by the “influence” of the stars.
Influenzal deaths per million in England and Wales, 1850-19402 But in 1889 influenza was tamed. From that year forward it would be present always, in every part of the world. It would vanish mysteriously as before, but it could be counted on to return, at more or less the same time, the following year. And it has never been absent since. Like “anxiety disorder,” influenza is so common and so seemingly familiar that a thorough review of its history is necessary to unmask this stranger and convey the enormity of the public health disaster that occurred one hundred and thirty years ago. It’s not that we don’t know enough about the influenza virus. We know more than enough. The microscopic virus associated with this disease has been so exhaustively studied that scientists know more about its tiny life cycle than about any other single microorganism. But this has been a reason to ignore many unusual facts about this disease, including the fact that it is not contagious."
Public Health England Admits NO PROOF COVID-19 Is Contagious
- At the start of this ‘pandemic’ I read about four separate experiments/ investigations carried out by the US Military during the Spanish Flu, all of which demonstrated that the Spanish Flu could not be passed from very sick to healthy persons, even by getting the healthy to drink the warm sputum of the sick.
I wondered why no similar investigation was being conducted into the transmission of COVID19. Such experiments would not have to be so ‘gross’.
Furthermore. It’s not like this is an issue of no importance.
I sent FOI requests to the Department of Health and Social Care who, in a first reply (to the question of isolation of the virus), admitted that they held “no information relating to the isolation of Sars-Cov-2”, a pretty astonishing statement the elevates Sars-Cov-2 to the same mythical status as that of the unicorn, an extraordinary thing that no one has ever seen.
The main difference between a unicorn and Sars-Cov-2 is that no one has yet invented a “scientific” test of supposed constituent parts that “proves” the existence of a unicorn, which is a great shame as it would be quite something to observe how many people would be convinced if a ‘unicorn test’ ever returned a ‘positive’.
The DHSC also held no information about transmissibility/ contagion but suggested I sent my request to Public Health England.
PHE has replied (at last).
Here are the relevant lines:
Please could you forward any information you have relating to experimental evidence demonstrating that COVID-19 is person-to-person transmissible.
PHE can confirm it does not hold information in the way specified by your request.
What this means is that no specific investigation has been carried out into the most central assumption (and that’s all it is) that has driven the global “response” to this supposed pandemic!
It would quite obviously be a straightforward issue to prove or disprove contagion (i.e. contagion-via-transmitted-droplet) experimentally. There is NO EXCUSE for not investigating this directly. Science could easily resolve contradicting beliefs about this, one way or the other.
In my opinion, it already has done. That’s why the failure to investigate is, in itself, evidence of bad faith and the enforcement of a diabolical lie.
Scientific papers that demonstrate the uselessness of lockdowns and mask-wearing in protecting people against COVID ‘infection’ offer further indirect evidence that flu-like illnesses are NOT person-to-person transmissible. This is simply not how such illnesses work. Other factors, external and internal, define who becomes ill and when.
Here was my second FOI request:
If no such experimental evidence exists for COVID-19 please could you forward any available evidence collected, targeting this particular issue over the past 150 years, that demonstrates person-to-person transmissibility for any other influenza type illness?”
Reply:
PHE can confirm it does hold this information. However, the information is exempt under section 21 of the FOI Act because it is reasonably accessible by other means, and the terms of the exemption mean that we do not have to consider whether or not it would be in the public interest for you to have the information. However, for your convenience we have included a link to the report ‘Impact of mass gatherings on Influenza.’
The first part of the response indicates, in my opinion, that PHE are admitting that they hold or are aware of the scientific evidence collected during the Spanish Flu (that used to be online in ‘The US Surgeon General’s Report 1919 [which disappeared from the document last October]).
By referring to not having to consider “whether or not it is in the public interest” that they release this information they are covertly admitting that they know the investigation demonstrated non-contagion and that it might be “in the public interest” that we be told this.
In fact, under our new global ‘Communitarian’ system (yes, we’re already in it folks) what is defined as “the public interest” is decided by rulers …. as anyone with a brain should realise by now.
Truth, or even what we understand as the public interest (i.e. the common good) has nothing to do with anything any more … as American voters recently found out the hard way.
The linked report, in my opinion, has little to do with my FOI request. The weak ‘conclusion’ of “The impact of mass gatherings on Influenza” suggests correlation without demonstrating proof of anything at all. The probabilities suggested in the Conclusion are, yet again, based on assumptions that the author does not even care to define. Correlation between future infection and mass gatherings without investigation of other factors inherent to mass gatherings (e.g. everyone being in approximately the same place and therefore subject to multiple identical environmental influences at the same time) surely means nothing scientifically. The report admits there is no proof of causation but suggests it is “prudent” to discourage them. Why, one wonders, does it not suggest it would be prudent to investigate the scientific community’s own primary assumption, that these illnesses are in any way contagious at all? See this link to the full document. Here is its ‘conclusion’. In conclusion there is limited data indicating that mass gatherings are associated with influenza transmission and this theme is continued with the inclusion of new evidence for the update. Certain unique events such as the Hajj, specialised settings including civilian and military ships- a new theme for this update, indoor venues and crowded outdoor venues provide the primary evidence base to suggest mass gatherings can be associated with Influenza outbreaks. Some evidence suggests that restricting mass gatherings together with other social distancing measures may help to reduce transmission. However, the evidence is still not strong enough to warrant advocating legislated restrictions. Therefore, in a pandemic situation a cautious policy of voluntary avoidance of mass gatherings would is still the most prudent message. Operational considerations including practical implications of policy directed at restricting mass gathering events should be carefully considered. After reading the entirety of the FOI response, here is my own conclusion: PHE admits that government’s assumption of human-to-human transmissibility of COVID-19 is based on … NO SCIENCE AT ALL! NONE! ZERO! Source and reference: KevBoyle.blogspot.com; Assets.publishing.service.gov.uk [pdf]
__________________________________
Here is something you will never see in the news. During the 1918 Spanish Flu which is considered to be the most contagious "virus" of all, researchers for the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy tried to determine what caused the flu and how infectious it was. The results of their experiments proved that the flu is not infectious at all:
"Perhaps the most interesting epidemiological studies conducted during the 1918–1919 pandemic were the human experiments conducted by the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy under the supervision of Milton Rosenau on Gallops Island, the quarantine station in Boston Harbor, and on Angel Island, its counterpart in San Francisco. The experiment began with 100 VOLUNTEERS from the Navy WHO HAD NO HISTORY OF INFLUENZA. Rosenau was the first to report on the experiments conducted at Gallops Island in November and December 1918.69 His first volunteers received FIRST ONE STRAIN and THEN SEVERAL STRAINS of Pfeiffer's bacillus BY SPRAY AND SWABS INTO THEIR NOSES AND THROATS AND THEN INTO THEIR EYES. When that procedure FAILED TO PRODUCE DISEASE, OTHERS WERE INOCULATED WITH MIXTURES OF OTHER ORGANISMS ISOLATED FROM THE THROATS AND NOSES OF INFLUENZA PATIENTS. Next, SOME volunteers RECEIVED INJECTIONS OF BLOOD FROM INFLUENZA PATIENTS. Finally, 13 of the volunteers were taken into an influenza ward and exposed to 10 influenza patients each. EACH VOLUNTEER WAS TO SHAKE HANDS WITH EACH PATIENT, to TALK WITH HIM AT CLOSE RANGE, AND TO PERMIT HIM TO COUGH DIRECTLY INTO HIS FACE. NONE OF THE VOLUNTEERS IN THESE EXPERIMENTS DEVELOPED INFLUENZA. Rosenau was clearly puzzled, and he cautioned against drawing conclusions from negative results. He ended his article in JAMA with a telling acknowledgement: “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. PERHAPS, IF WE HAVE LEARNED ANYTHING, IT IS THAT WE ARE NOT QUITE SURE WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE DISEASE.”69 (p. 313)
The research conducted at Angel Island and that continued in early 1919 in Boston broadened this research by INOCULATING WITH the MATHERS STREPTOCOCCUS AND BY INCLUDING A SEARCH FOR FILTER-PASSING AGENTS, BUT IT PRODUCED SIMILAR NEGATIVE RESULTS.70–72 IT SEEMED THAT WHAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED TO BE ONE OF THE MOST CONTAGIOUS OF COMMUNICABLE DISEASES COULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED UNDER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS."
And then there's this:
Influenza Studies III. Attempts to Cultivate Filtrable Viruses from Cases of Influenza and Common Colds
Sara E Branham, Ivan C Hall
The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 143-149, 1921
"THESE EXPERIMENTS OFFER NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE THEORY THAT THE CAUSE OF EITHER COMMON COLDS OR INFLUENZA IS A FILTRABLE VIRUS. In attempting to cultivate filtrable viruses from the nasopharyngeal secretions in colds and influenza, NO BODIES WERE FOUND IN THE "CULTURES" WHICH COULD NOT BE FOUND ALSO IN THOSE FROM NORMAL PERSONS, IN CONTROLS IN ALL SIMPLE MEDIUMS EXAMINED, AND ON BLANK SLIDES. It is recognized that negative experiments, limited to the attempted cultivation of a filtrable virus, and including no attempts to reproduce the disease in animals, do not offer conclusive evidence that such a virus is not involved. No conclusions can be drawn concerning influenza, on account of the few cases examined, together with the fact that samples of such were not collected during the earliest stages of the disease. However, THE UNIFORMLY NEGATIVE RESULTS OBTAINED WITH A LARGE AND REPRESENTATIVE NUMBER OF COLDS ARE NOT WITHOUT SIGNIFICANCE."
Downloaded From: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/ by a Simon Fraser University User on 05/31/2015
Evidence continues to prove social distancing and herd immunity are unnecessary agendas based on the myth that "viruses" are contagious which has no basis in reality.
"Researchers have yet to prove that a virus causes any of these conditions" - Dr. Tom Cowan
“if we see flies on a manure pile which do we think is more intelligent – to fight disease be swatting flies or to remove the pile of manure.” -Dr. J. Baldor, Surgeon, Florida
Swine Flu Expose
a book by Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D.
I heard that This was in an army camp, so I wrote to the Government for verification. They sent me the report of U.S. Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson. The report not only verified the report of the seven who dropped dead from the vaccines, but it stated that there had been 63 deaths and 28,585 cases of hepatitis as a direct result of the yellow fever vaccine during only 6 months of the war. That was only one of the 14 to 25 shots given the soldiers. We can imagine the damage that all these shots did to the men. (See the chapter on What Vaccinations Did to Our Soldiers.)
The first World War was of a short duration, so the vaccine makers were unable to use up all their vaccines. As they were (and still are) in business for profit, they decided to sell it to the rest of the population. So they drummed up the largest vaccination campaign in U.S. history. There were no epidemics to justify it so they used other tricks. Their propaganda claimed the soldiers were coming home from foreign countries with all kinds of diseases and that everyone must have all the shots on the market.
The people believed them because, first of all, they wanted to believe their doctors, and second, the returning soldiers certainly had been sick. They didn’t know it was from doctor-made vaccine diseases, as the army doctors don’t tell them things like that. Many of the returned soldiers were disabled for life by these drug-induced diseases. Many were insane from postvaccinal encephalitis, but the doctors called it even though many had never left American soil.
The disease brought on by the many poison vaccines baffled the doctors, as they never had a vaccination spree before which used so many different vaccines. The new disease they had created had symptoms of all the diseases they had injected into the man. There was the high fever, extreme weakness, abdominal rash and intestinal disturbance characteristic of typhoid. The diphtheria vaccine caused lung congestion, chills and fever, swollen, sore throat clogged with the false membrane, and the choking suffocation because of difficulty in breathing followed by gasping and death, after which the body turned black from stagnant blood that had been deprived of oxygen in the suffocation stages. In early days they called it The other vaccines cause their own reactions — paralysis, brain damage, lockjaw, etc.
When doctors had tried to suppress the symptoms of the typhoid with a stronger vaccine, it caused a worse form of typhoid which they named But when they concocted a stronger and more dangerous vaccine to suppress that one, they created an even worse disease which they didn’t have a name for. What should they call it? They didn’t want to tell the people what it really was — their own Frankenstein monster which they had created with their vaccines and suppressive medicines. They wanted to direct the blame away from themselves, so they called it It was certainly not of Spanish origin, and the Spanish people resented the implication that the world-wide scourge of that day should be blamed on them. But the name stuck and American medical doctors and vaccine makers were not suspected of the crime of this widespread devastation — the It is only in recent years that researchers have been digging up the facts and laying the blame where it belongs.
Some of the soldiers may have been in Spain before coming home, but their diseases originated in their own home-based U.S. Army Camps. Our medical men still use that same dodge. When their own vaccines (required for travel) cause vaccine diseases abroad they use this as grounds for a scare campaign to stampede people into the vaccination centers. Do you remember the Hong Kong Flu and the Asian Flu and the London Flu scares? These were all medically-made epidemics mixed with the usual common colds which people have every year.
____
The experiment began with 100 volunteers from the Navy who had no history of influenza. Rosenau was the first to report on the experiments conducted at Gallops Island in November and December 1918.69 His first volunteers received first one strain and then several strains of Pfeiffer's bacillus by spray and swab into their noses and throats and then into their eyes. When that procedure failed to produce disease, others were inoculated with mixtures of other organisms isolated from the throats and noses of influenza patients. Next, some volunteers received injections of blood from influenza patients. Finally, 13 of the volunteers were taken into an influenza ward and exposed to 10 influenza patients each. Each volunteer was to shake hands with each patient, to talk with him at close range, and to permit him to cough directly into his face. None of the volunteers in these experiments developed influenza. Rosenau was clearly puzzled, and he cautioned against drawing conclusions from negative results. He ended his article in JAMA with a telling acknowledgement: “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”
Https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862332/?fbclid=IwAR0a1IpdU3tY1j_nMFCbVlH1NwE43FFuTGZi-sGJFyHB8AU0n8bvsCWjrbI
__________________________
It is more important to know what sort of person has a disease than to know what sort of disease a person has. -Hippocrates
_________________________ COURT CASES OF SMALLPOX EPIDEMICS DECLARED WHEN THERE WAS NO SMALLPOX
(Report from THE ADVERTISER’S PROTECTIVE BUREAU of Kansas City)
"In the fall of 1921 the health of the city was unusually good, but dull for the doctors. So the Jackson Medical Society met and resolved to make an epidemic in the city.
According to the record:
"MOTION WAS MADE AND SECONDED THAT A RECOMMENDATION BE MADE BY THE COMMITTEE TO THE BOARD OF HEALTH THAT AN EPIDEMIC OF SMALLPOX BE DECLARED TO EXIST IN THE CITY AT THE PRESENT TIME.
"MOVED AND SECONDED THAT A DAY BE SET ASIDE TO BE TERMED ON WHICH PHYSICIANS WILL BE STATIONED AT ALL SCHOOLS, CLINICS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND HOSPITALS ... TO VACCINATE, FREE OF CHARGE. (No shots are free. The taxpayers are charged for them.)
"It is further recommended that wide publicity be given, stating that vaccination is a preventitive of smallpox and urging the absolute necessity of vaccination for every man, woman and child in the city.
Those who investigated this fake, doctor-made epidemic searched for cases of smallpox to justify this vaccination drive, but could not find one case in the city.
The scare-head vaccination propaganda showed a picture of a child covered with sores (probably from empetigo, psoriasis or congenital syphilis), and called it smallpox. People are easily frightened when public officials tell them a disease is contagious and is in their midst. The fear vanishes when people learn the truth. Smallpox is not contagious, and compulsory vaccination is illegal. (See the chapter on smallpox for information on tests which proved smallpox and other diseases are not contagious, and can be avoided with the right knowledge and application of that knowledge, given in the big book, "VACCINATION CONDEMNED BY COMPETENT DOCTORS."
Most people do not question the decision of their doctors and public officials so they trustingly put their lives and the lives of their children into the hands of the unprincipled drug vendors. The results were disastrous for the people but good for the doctors. The hospitals were soon filled with vaccine poisoned people and the doctors had business all winter.
According to the record, the doctors made $500,000 from that Kansas City vaccination spree, not counting the millions of dollars from the hospital cases.
ANOTHER MEDICALLY-MADE EPIDEMIC IN PITTSBURGH IN 1924 The same procedure was carried out as for Kansas. The doctors called a meeting and moved and seconded that an epidemic be declared in the city. As usual, they spread their scare propaganda far-and-wide and herded the people into the vaccination centers.
When the vaccination campaign was at its height, the report showed the death-rate rose 22% in three months, from July 1 to Sept. 30. These deaths were all among the recently vaccinated. Were the doctors and pharmaceutical companies charged with murder and given the death sentence? No. They "got by with murder;" they usually do.
This doctor-made epidemic never would have been brought to public attention if it had not been for an active, and well informed group of non-medical, health-minded citizens known as THE PITTSBURGH HEALTH CLUB. They, and their legal aid investigated this manufactured epidemic and brought the instigators to trial.
According to the Health Club’s attorney: "THE DIRECT MONEY LOSS TO THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH IN THIS VACCINATION RAID in 1924 was $3,096,616 of which the doctors took $2,000,000. . "This does not represent the indirect losses such as deaths, permanent injury, business loss from work, etc."
Every city and town today should have an active, capable, and well prepared NON-MEDICAL health group such as those in Pittsburgh and Kansas City to warn the people against the many questionable practices of the medical doctors, because they continue to stage deadly vaccination campaigns, both large and small in all cities across the country every year, but most of them are not investigated or questioned.
We are in the middle of one of these medically-made epidemics right now..............
Https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/EXPERIMENTS-TO-DETERMINE-MODE-OF-SPREAD-OF-Rosenau/40e4027b4d2f0b9b26a963f10022ea79ffed84e4?
***This post contains scientific references of many studies that were undertaken to try and prove that germs cause disease. All of the studies failed***
Where is the evidence that viruses cause disease? I have been asking for almost 12 months now, and no one has been able to provide me with a single peer reviewed journal article showing an isolated virus causes disease. It should be so easy to look through the literature and find a study in a couple of minutes, yet no one seems to be able to do such a thing.
Scientists and doctors have already done countless experiments to try and prove germ theory over the course of 120+ years, and all have failed.
So I will ask again, can anyone provide me one such study, showing an isolated virus causes disease in humans? If so, I will gladly stand corrected and recount everything I have ever said on this matter.
There needs to be a truly scientific and intellectually honest conversation about this. This is the beauty of the scientific method, that we can ask questions, challenge our beliefs, put forward new ideas (that may or may not be correct) and learn new things.
Here are just some of the experiments that have been done on the common cold / flu. Many studies like this have been done in other diseases like measles and chicken pox as well, and they have not been able to prove viral causation or contagion.
Another investigation from a similar mind writes: Thanks NORTHERN TRACEY - DANIEL
______________
Contagion a Fairy Story – Northern Tracey's scribblings (wordpress.com)
In 1758,
Francis Home attempted to inoculate 15 children with experimental measles by making a superficial incision in to an infected persons arm, right over a measles lesion. He then stuffed cotton inside the wound and let it sit for three days. Home then made an incision in a healthy persons arm, and stuffed the cotton that was inside the sick persons arm inside the healthy persons wound. He reported that in many cases he observed that a “mild and modified form of measles” occurred. He also soaked cotton in the watery fluid coming from the eyes of infected people, made an incision in the arms of healthy people and applied the cotton over the wound. He found that within 6 days the person became unwell and within a couple of days the person was better(1).
Erasmus Darwin attempted to replicate these experiments, but found when he exposed healthy children to the blood and tears of measles patients, they did not become ill. Hoffman also questioned the results of Home, as he found that the blood of children infected with small pox was not infectious. C.J Themmen was also doubtful of Home’s results, as he found that natural measles breaks out on the 14th day after exposure to an infected person. Themmen tried to replicate Home’s work and undertook five experiments where he exposed incisions on the arms of healthy children with the blood, tears and perspiration of infected children. None of the children contracted measles. Themmen even questions whether Home even ever undertook such experiments(1).
Home’s notes were examined by several doctors and scientists years later. they concluded that none of the 15 children were ever actually infected with measles as a result of the inoculation(1).
In 1799, Dr. Green reported that he successfully infected three children by exposing them to the fluid of measles scabs, however there are no reliable records on this(1).
In 1801, Chapman repeatedly tried to infect healthy people with measles by exposing them to the blood, tears, nasal mucous, lung fluid and the discharge from measles scabs, however none of the participants became sick(1).
In 1809, Willan tried to infect three children by exposing them to the fluid of measles lesions from sick people. None of the children became sick(1).
In 1810, Waschel claimed to have experimentally infected an 18-year-old man with measles, however these claims were disputed by others at the time. The man became sick 22 days after inoculation and it is said the man actually contracted measles naturally and not from the inoculation(1).
In 1822, Dr. Frigori tried to infect 6 children with measles using the above-mentioned methods used by Home. Whilst the children developed mild non-specific symptoms, they did not develop measles. Not happy with his results, Frigori attempted to infect himself but without success(1).
In 1822, Dr. Negri tried to infect two children using Home’s methods, however he had the same negative results as Dr. Frigori.
In 1822, Speranza attempted to infect 4 children using similar methods, but without success(1).
In 1834, Albers tried to infect four children with measles, however none fell ill(1).
Between 1845 – 1851 Mayr is said to have successfully infected 6 children with measles, however it seems to be a modified form of the disease (in other words, not measles)(1).
In 1890, Hugh Thompson tried to infect children with measles in two separate instances, however both attempts failed(1).
References: 1. Hektoen L. Experimental Measles. J Infect Dis. 1905;2(2):238-255. doi:10.1093/infdis/2.2.238
All the experiments trying to experimentally induce influenza, chickenpox and measles have all failed. Well, it should come as no surprise to you that scientists and doctors tried to do the same with Scarlett fever, and failed time and time again.
Source: HEKTOEN, L. (1923). THE HISTORY OF EXPERIMENTAL SCARLET FEVER IN MAN. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 80(2), 84. doi:10.1001/jama.1923.02640290014005
https://jamanetwork.com/.../jama/article-abstract/232168...
In 1817, Themmen undertook five experiments where he exposed incisions on the arms of healthy children with the blood, tears and perspiration of infected children. None of the children contracted measles.
In 1799, Dr. Green reported that he successfully infected three children by exposing them to the fluid of measles scabs, however there are no reliable records on this(1).
In 1905,
Ludvig Hektoen reports that he was able to successfully infect two healthy people with the blood of infected measles patients(1). It should be noted that the blood was mixed with other substances, such as ascites fluid before it was injected. This experiment is considered to be the best evidence that proves beyond any doubt that the measles virus causes disease(2).
There are few specific details about the signs and symptoms that these patients actually exhibited, so there is some doubt as to whether they really had measles(3).
In 1915,
Charles Herman swabbed the nasal mucosa of 40 infants with cotton buds covered in the nasal secretions of infected measles patients. The majority of the infants had no reaction, 15 infants had a slight rise in body temperature and a “few” were said to develop some red spots on their skin. At 1 year of age, 4 of these infants had intimate contact with infected people. None of the infants became sick and this is said to be due to the infants having “immunity”(4).
In 1919, Sellards tried to inoculate 8 healthy men (with no previous exposure to measles) with the blood of measles patients, using the same methods as Hektoen. None of the men became sick(3,5). It is interesting reading the authors commentary, where he describes how he intensified his efforts to try and infect the patients, but was still unable to infect them.
A few weeks later, the volunteers were exposed to an infected measles case, yet none of them became sick.
Nasal secretions were then taken from measles patients and syringed up in to the nasal passages of the healthy participants. None became sick(3,5).
Sellards also conducted another experiment to try and infect another 2 healthy human volunteers with measles by injecting them subcutaneously and intramuscularly with the blood of two infected patients. Neither man became sick(3,5).
In 1919,
Alfred Hess makes a comment about Sellards results. He states “It is remarkable that Sellards was unable to produce this highly infectious disease by means of the blood or nasal secretions of infected individuals, not long ago I was confronted with a similar experience with chicken pox, thus we are confronted with two diseases, the two most infectious of the endemic diseases in this part of the world, which we are unable to transmit artificially from man to man”(6).
In 1924, Harry Bauguess wrote a paper and stated “A careful search of the literature does not reveal a case in which the blood from a patient having measles was injected into the blood stream of another person and produced measles”. He reports two cases where he observed people contract measles from blood transfusions.
In one case a critically ill 9-month-old child received a blood transfusion from her mother, who was in perfect health. Approximately 13 days later, the child developed a rash and the diagnosis of measles was made. The child then developed bronchopneumonia and died about 10 days later. Bauguess explains that the reason why the child contracted measles, was because two days after the transfusion, the mother developed measles. It was concluded the child contracted measles from the mothers blood(6).
In a second case, Bauguess reports another critically ill child who was 3-months-old receiving a blood transfusion. The mother was in perfect health at the time of the transfusion. The child seemed to be recovering, however about 10 days later the child began to become ill again and developed a rash, which was diagnosed as measles. Just like the previous case, two days after the transfusion, the mother developed measles. It was said that the child contracted measles from the mothers blood(6).
References:
1. Hektoen L. Experimental Measles. J Infect Dis. 1905;2(2):238-255. doi:10.1093/infdis/2.2.238
2. Degkwitz R. The Etiology of Measles. J Infect Dis. 1927;41(4):304-316. doi:10.1093/infdis/41.4.304
3. SELLARDS AW. A REVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATIONS CONCERNING THE ETIOLOGY OF MEASLES. Medicine (Baltimore). 1924;3(2):99-136. doi:10.1097/00005792-192403020-00001
4. Herman C. Immunization against measles. Arch Pediat. 1915;32(503).
5. Sellards A. Insusceptibility of man to inoculation with blood from measles patients. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp. 1919;257.
6. Hess AF. NEED OF FURTHER RESEARCH ON THE TRANSMISSIBILITY OF MEASLES AND VARICELLA. J Am Med Assoc. 1919;73(16):1232. doi:10.1001/jama.1919.0261042006002
7. BAUGUESS H. MEASLES TRANSMITTED BY BLOOD TRANSFUSION. Am J Dis Child. 1924;27(3):256. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1924.019200900610
_________
In March of 1919 Rosenau & Keegan conducted 9 separate experiments in a group of 49 healthy men, to prove contagion. In all 9 experiments, 0/49 men became sick after being exposed to sick people or the bodily fluids of sick people.
https://jamanetwork.com/.../jama/article-abstract/221687...
Rosenau 1919 spanish flu experiments
[PDF] EXPERIMENTS TO DETERMINE MODE OF SPREAD OF INFLUENZA | Semantic Scholar
Https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/EXPERIMENTS-TO-DETERMINE-MODE-OF-SPREAD-OF-Rosenau/40e4027b4d2f0b9b26a963f10022ea79ffed84e4?
In November 1919, 8 separate experiments were conducted by Rosenau et al. in a group of 62 men trying to prove that influenza is contagious and causes disease. In all 8 experiments, 0/62 men became sick.
Another set of 8 experiments were undertaken in December of 1919 by McCoy et al. in 50 men to try and prove contagion. Once again, all 8 experiments failed to prove people with influenza, or their bodily fluids cause illness. 0/50 men became sick.
In 1919, Wahl et al. conducted 3 separate experiments to infect 6 healthy men with influenza by exposing them to mucous secretions and lung tissue from sick people. 0/6 men contracted influenza in any of the three studies.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30082102?seq=1...
In 1920, Schmidt et al conducted two controlled experiments, exposing healthy people to the bodily fluids of sick people. Of 196 people exposed to the mucous secretions of sick people, 21 (10.7%) developed colds and three developed grippe (1.5%). In the second group, of the 84 healthy people exposed to mucous secretions of sick people, five developed grippe (5.9%) and four colds (4.7%). Of forty-three controls who had been inoculated with sterile physiological salt solutions eight (18.6%) developed colds. A higher percentage of people got sick after being exposed to saline compared to those being exposed to the "virus".
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/102609951
In 1921, Williams et al. tried to experimentally infect 45 healthy men with the common cold and influenza, by exposing them to mucous secretions from sick people. 0/45 became ill.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/
In 1924, Robertson & Groves exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. The authors concluded that 0/100 became sick as a result of being exposed to the bodily secretions.
https://academic.oup.com/.../article.../34/4/400/832936...
In 1930, Dochez et al. attempted to infect a group of men experimentally with the common cold. The authors stated in their results, something that is nothing short of amazing.
"It was apparent very early that this individual was more or less unreliable and from the start it was possible to keep him in the dark regarding our procedure. He had inconspicuous symptoms after his test injection of sterile broth and no more striking results from the cold filtrate, until an assistant, on the second day after injection, inadvertently referred to this failure to contract a cold.
That evening and night the subject reported severe symptomatology, including sneezing, cough, sore throat and stuffiness in the nose. The next morning he was told that he had been misinformed in regard to the nature of the filtrate and his symptoms subsided within the hour. It is important to note that there was an entire absence of objective pathological changes".
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869798/
In 1937 Burnet & Lush conducted an experiment exposing 200 healthy people to bodily secretions from people infected with influenza. 0/200 became sick.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2065253/
In 1940, Burnet and Foley tried to experimentally infect 15 university students with influenza. The authors concluded their experiment was a failure.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1940.tb79929.x
Part 3 - Animal contagion studies in measles. After decades of trying to prove the infectivity of measles in humans with many different experiments, scientists moved on to trying to infect monkeys. In 1911, Anderson and Goldberg tried to replicate the result of a previous study they had conducted years prior, where they report successfully infecting monkeys with measles. These results have been questioned by other authors(7).
In this experiment they conducted three separate experiments where they tried to experimentally infect monkeys with measles. In experiment one, 0/18 monkeys became ill after being injected with nasal secretions of measles patients. In experiment two, two monkeys had measles scabs aka “scales” from infected people syringed in to their nostrils. Neither monkey became sick. In experiment three, measles “scales” were injected in to two monkeys and neither became ill. In 1911, Nicolle and Conseil reported to have successfully transferred measles from humans to monkeys, despite the monkeys having no signs or symptoms of measles, apart from a slightly raised temperature(7).
In 1912, Tunnicliff injected a monkey with the blood of a measles patient. The monkey did not develop any symptoms(9).
In 1914, Jurgelunas tried to infect three monkeys with the blood and five monkeys with the nasal secretions of measles patients, however none of the monkeys became ill. He also put two monkeys in to a measles ward in a hospital and none of the monkeys became ill(7).
In 1918 and 1919, Sellards and Wentworth tried to experimentally infect five monkeys with the blood of measles patients. None of the monkeys became sick(7).
In 1919, Sellards injected the blood of two measles patients into two monkeys. Only one of the monkeys developed symptoms, however the symptoms were not suggestive of measles(3).
In another set of experiments by the same author (Sellards), swabs covered in the mucous of infected measles patients were rubbed over the conjunctiva, nasal and pharyngeal mucous membranes of two monkeys. Neither monkey became ill(3).
In a second experiment, two additional monkeys were also inoculated the same way and neither monkey became sick(3).
In 1920, Blake and Trask report that they were able to successfully infect monkeys with measles by exposing them to blood of infected people(7).
In 1921, Blake and Trask report that they successfully inoculated 8/10 monkeys with measles, after exposing them to the mucous secretions of infected people. Interestingly, other authors state that the rash observed in these monkeys didn’t differ significantly from the maculopapular rashes that are usually observed in healthy monkeys(3).
It is therefore unlikely the monkeys had contracted measles.
In a review paper in 1924, Sellards states “There is certainly, at present, no exact proof of the susceptibility of monkeys to measles” and “Personally I am not willing to accept as established the various characteristics of the virus of measles as worked out this way. Thus the important conclusion that the virus is filterable rests primarily upon more or less vague results obtained in three monkeys. I prefer to consider the filterability of the virus as an entirely open question”(3).
In the years that follow, doctors and scientists try to infect rabbits and guinea pigs with measles but get results similar to those of the monkey trials. They then move in studies with rats and mice, again with mixed and unfavorable results.
References: 3. SELLARDS AW. A REVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATIONS CONCERNING THE ETIOLOGY OF MEASLES. Medicine (Baltimore). 1924;3(2):99-136. doi:10.1097/00005792-192403020-00001 7. Blake FG, Trask JD. STUDIES ON MEASLES. J Exp Med. 1921;33(3):385-412. doi:10.1084/jem.33.3.385 8. ANDERSON JF. THE INFECTIVITY OF THE SECRETIONS AND THE DESQUAMATING SCALES OF MEASLES. J Am Med Assoc. 1911;LVII(20):1612. doi:10.1001/jama.1911.04260110112015 9. Tunnicliff R. Observations on the Phagocytic Activity of the Leukocytes In Measles. J Infect Dis. 1912;11(3):474-479. doi:10.1093/infdis/11.3.474 10. Hess AF. NEED OF FURTHER RESEARCH ON THE TRANSMISSIBILITY OF MEASLES AND VARICELLA. J Am Med Assoc. 1919;73(16):1232. doi:10.1001/jama.1919.0261042006002
___________________
There are a number of things that are known to cause "flu-like symptoms", all of which occur when a person is detoxifying after exposure to poisonous or toxic substances. Well known causes of influenza like illness include; - Smelters chills / Monday morning fever (heavy metal toxicity / exposure) - Dippers flu (acute pesticide exposure) - Polymer fume fever (acute Teflon exposure) - Caffeine withdrawal - Organophosphate exposure - Phenol exposure - Smokers flu (nicotine withdrawal) - Alcohol detoxification - Chemotherapy (RADIATION POISON) - Anti-depressant medication discontinuation - Sick building syndrome So we know that flu-like symptoms are associated with the detoxification process. Some people suggest that the flu is simply a "spring clean" that our body goes through to detoxify itself. ....More than 150 years of germ theory, not a single piece of evidence, using an isolated virus has ever proven that germs do in fact cause disease. There was considerable research undertaken by people like Antione Bechamp, Claude Bernard, Gunther Enderlein and Gaston Naessans in support of the "terrain theory", however this research was never given the time or attention it deserved by the mainstream, as it challenged the "belief" that germs cause disease. When a claim is made that X causes Y, yet dozens of pieces of research, including controlled trials show X doesn't cause Y, then an alternative cause should be investigated, rather than continuing to say X causes Y because of dogma or long held belief. This literature review from 1924 provides many hypotheses about what may cause influenza. It really is a fascinating read. The reason I highlight this piece of work, is because it was published back when people still thought critically and the scientific method was alive and well. A Review of the Literature on Influenza and the Common Cold Front Cover - James Gayley Townsend
https://books.google.com.au/books/about/A_Review_of_the_Literature_on_Influenza.html?id=8FIkTBdeJOwC&redir_esc=y&fbclid=IwAR0iUML7PTxb4vrIakUQ3Cyz73a8tDYZDNCwNZdu_QHIYxtWRnh_swzvTw8
https://books.google.com.au/books/about/A_Review_of_the_Literature_on_Influenza.html?id=8FIkTBdeJOwC&redir_esc=y&fbclid=IwAR0iUML7PTxb4vrIakUQ3Cyz73a8tDYZDNCwNZdu_QHIYxtWRnh_swzvTw8 _____________________________
Dr. Stefan Lanka: The history of infection theory
(English transcript) By: Abrupt Earth Changes *see also AEC’s new essay “Covid-19 is the new Mediaeval Leprosy: a Historical Comparison of Isolation, Religious Fervor and Medical Tyranny” AEC brought to light this brilliant transcription of Stefan Lanka’s interview The title of Lanka’s original video is “Grippe pandemie und Tamiflu” copy here. DoCuments: klein-klein-media.de Translation from German and original subtitled video: Sacha Dobler, AbruptEarthChanges.com “My name is Stefan Lanka, I am a biologist and virologist. I discovered the first virus, which was in the ocean. That’s how I became involved in this matter. First, I recognized that this virus doesn’t cause any harm. Secondly, the Austrian professor Fritz Pol alerted me to the fact, that something was wrong with the entire AIDS affair and the virus might not even exist at all. I checked this and realized, that was indeed the case. I thought this couldn’t be and I remained silent for half a year, for I assumed, I misunderstand something. I couldn’t imagine that the entire world would go along with this.” 2:00 Then I started researching and became involved in the infection theory. I realized that everything was wrong, it initially started with an error, that then turned into fraud, political fraud already under Otto von Bismarck, this can easily be proven and reconstructed. This fraudulent concept was abandoned after World War II, then reestablished by the Americans in order to provoke fear and to conduct population control. Copy of the translated video: 2:45 Further, I recognized, as I will demonstrate here, how the infection theory gave rise to the gene theory and the so-called molecular technology and gene manipulation and -technology. Today’s model of the infection theory is used in the form of vaccines, of fear from material contagion, in the form of pandemics, just as in the current one, which is predicted to erupt any moment, or it will erupt in the second phase or even later and that it will then be encountered with the drug called Tamiflu. Incidentally, Tamiflu stands for toxic amiflue, there was an apparent glitch in the naming process of this chemo-therapeutic drug. 03:32 I’m going to tell the story, how everything developed, in order for you to comprehend, how an error turned into a fraud, a fraud turned into a crime, and how through the industrialization of this crime, the madness developed, a kind of madness that endangers all of us, the entire human race. 04:03 We begin at a point in history of ancient Greece there this concept infection developed. It is the basis of today’s system of medicine that is ruled by systematic fighting and poisoning. It is also why we are supposed to swallow Tamiflu even preemptively and, after the pandemic is declared, it should be take in large quantities. 04:55 Before we delve into ancient Greece: Goethe tried to warn of the 2006 influence pandemic, and also of AIDS and of the swallowing of Tamiflu. He did this in Faust I, not in the first edition, that went through censorship, not in the second, but in the third or fourth edition he included this essential passage, in which he describes how even back then a single doctor killed thousands of people: First he describes in alchemist’s language, how the Tamiflu and chemotherapy of his time was produced: organic mercury compounds, mixed with sirup, Latwergen stands for sirup mixtures, and these will be the hellish Latwergen in alchemistic language and how they were produced. Here are the important lines: (Here was the Tamiflu, the patients died (will die?) And no one asked: who recovered? No one asked: is the theory correct? Does the virus exist at all? ) And we’ll treat the black plague also, a political disease just as AIDS, influenza, SARS, BSE, just as small pox, the collective term of leprosy, from which black plague was derived, and also the collective term of polio. Goethe. He has not been taken seriously ’till today. Whenever there is a tsunami or an earthquake, I think to myself: Goethe is speaking again. For he warned and this warning was dismissed. 06:49 How did it get to this, what is the mistake, the overall false assumption? The general false assumption, on which the entire western academic medicine is based on, is this: In the frameworks of the doctrine of juices, it was believed that disease was brought about by an unbalance of juices or fluids in the body. We have many different fluids in the body, about 270 different types, in the joints, in the eye, sweat glands, digestive glands, fluids of the inner ear, brain fluids,spinal fluids and so on. It was assumed that a non-equilibrium of juices would lead to the development of disease-causing toxins. And it was believed from experience, that the administration of small amounts of poisons would cause in the body the reaction of production of an antidote, anti-poison. This idea derived from the experience with the cell toxin alcohol. Consumed in small quantities it can be fun, it can also diminish anxieties and the like, but if a young person who never had been in contact with alcohol, drinks half a bottle of liquor, when he is paralyzed enough to not be able to spit, then his stomach must be pumped empty, otherwise he dies of alcohol poisoning. Jelzin and others, they make world politics after two liters. 08:12 This observation was the basis premise : to ingest a poison little by little. You can try it yourself, quit drinking alcohol for half a year, and then drink two glasses of wine, you’ll almost fall over. But not because the body made the anti-poison, but because the body is trained, it has prepared the enzymes to quickly process and neutralize and excrete the alcohol. This doctrine of juices in this form is the explicit basis of the entire western academic medicine, including the false believe in an immune system. Why? They believed, that a disease-causing poison could develop, and if one preemptively took a poison, then the body would make an anti-poison, so one would obtain immunity. And whenever the disease-causing poison arrives, then I’m already invulnerable. That’s why Rasputin and Napoleon (this can be measured in the hair) frequently took different kinds of toxins in small quantities in order to be immune against a poison attack. But then in the 19th century, when it was possible to detect small amounts of toxins, it was found that in no illness, toxins can be detected. In non of them, until today. 9:56 So the theory proved to be wrong. But the entire thinking was based on it, that means to give mercury compounds preemptively, as in Goethe’s times, so whenever the disease-causing toxin comes about in form of an epidemic, the person is already invulnerable. This perception of epidemics already developed in the history of ancient Greece. It was claimed that the illness demon would possess and defile a person. From this, the Greek word miasma is derived. Defilement, one is tarnished by the illness demon and one can transmit the disease to others. The disease demon infects me, reproduces within me, and can be passed on to others and disease-causing toxins would be produced. That’s why anti-poisons are administered preemptively, just as Goethe describes it, and the survivors applauded. “And now from the withered old must hear How men praise shameless murderers.“ As It were, Goethe revived Paracelsus in the figure of Faust, but he is ashamed of having been celebrated by peasants before, as they call after him: “You saved our lives!“ but thousands perished. He was ashamed of this and sat down with his Atlantus Wagner on this certain rock near the village and meditates and recounts what he did, and what his father had done. 11.56 It had been observed that bacteria produce toxins. This was investigated, and they were all very certain, that bacteria could only produce toxins in the dead body. That is because bacteria run their metabolism in an aerobic environment and produce substances in the intestines during digestion such as necessary vitamins. But when these bacteria are deprived of oxygen, which is the case in a dead body after a couple of days, then a few of them can survive, they change their metabolism. Just as the yeast changes its metabolism under exclusion of oxygen to produce the toxic alcohol, in this way these bacteria produce their toxins, but only under complete exclusion of oxygen. 13:03 This was well known, bacteria cannot be the cause of disease. Professor Henle further solidified this knowledge, he phrased his postulates and said: If you claim that bacteria can be transmitted and then produce their poisons, then you need to identify that bacterium in every case of a disease, which you claim was caused by this bacterium. And that was not the case. Bacteria are only insufficiently identifiable in a test-tube, it can be done only with a few of them. Of all bacteria, which we know based on their performance, only about 2 % are cultivatable and multipliable. And what is defined as a bacterium in the laboratory is not the same as the original bacterium outside. Why? 14:11 Because the idea of bacteria in the lab representing one single type, is a laboratory artifact. For, bacteria exchange information among one another continuously and they change their form and function. This was recently confirmed in a large study: bacteria, as individual as they are in terms of their biochemistry, they are very similar in terms of their nucleic acid. They adapt. If we extract a bacterium and cultivate it in isolation, it looses its properties after some time and it can’t survive. Thus, I must produce a large quantity of them, freeze them and then I always work with those. But this already constitutes a massive intervention into nature, and doesn’t represent the reality of bacteria exchanging their information amongst one another, and thus the definition of types that was imposed on them, was not scientifically justifiable. That was the first problem. For instance, they didn’t manage to find the famous tuberculosis bacterium, the cultivation of which was successfully done by Robert Koch: It could only be found in about half the cases. That remains the same to the present day. 15:46 The second Henle Postulate states: this isolated pathogen must be observed, in case of a bacterium it must be multiplied, and it must be observed whether or not it can do what is assigned to it. In all these experiments they found, the bacteria couldn’t produce toxins in the living organism, only after a few days in the dead body, after an animal or human died. That was also determined, throughout the entire scientific community without exception. 16:23 Henle formulated the third Postulate, which states: Then, the pathogen that was isolated and multiplied, must be injected into an organism and the same disease must develop. And this has never happened, never ever. 17:00 But how did it happen, that suddenly Robert Koch was celebrated as the discoverer of the transmissibility of diseases? That is the question. 17:03 The question is easily answered. Robert Koch deserved reputation for having managed to make photography adaptable to visual microscopy and to make photographs of bacteria. Photography itself had been rediscovered in Europa in 1885. This brought him much reputation deservedly. Photography was considered to be sacred, no one could imagine that a negative could be retouched, that double exposures could be used, that it could be manipulated. It was deemed as inherently scientific and objective. They simply made claims along with photography, and this acted in a very hypnotic way, much like television today, so people just accepted these claims. 18:00 He simply photographed bacteria that can be found everywhere. From this, two different concepts derived. Of course, these bacteria don’t cause disease, but the Third Postulate (which states bacteria much cause the same disease) was violated by Koch, he introduced the scientific fraud, that plays the central role until today, in cases like AIDS, vaccination, influenza pandemic, and so on including Tamiflu. 18:41 He said, the inoculation of the test animal with this bacteria culture leads to the development of a SIMILAR illness. Not the same, but a SIMILAR illness. And this is one of the general acts of fraud of the entire infection theory: development of a SIMILAR illness. Read for yourself, that’s homework number one, don’t just believe me, go the library, read what Robert Koch did. Anthrax, just one example: he kills mice with corps toxins. This corps poison you can make at home: leave a potato salad standing outside in the summer for a weak, spoiled egg meal, bacteria spores are floating in the air everywhere, they settle, grow, reproduce, they consume the oxygen. They transfer into the anaerobic state, mostly in the centre of the potato salad or the egg meal or in a dead body. And then, toxins are produced. The toxins themselves they can kill, if this is fed to a person little by little, and the foulness is covered up with strong spices or taste enhancers. In his way, a person can be chronically poisoned, or be caused to suffer severe diarrhea and cramps. 20:10 Koch produces these toxins in a meat broth, as you can replicate at home, he injects them into the vein of a mouse, the mouse dies, the milt is swollen, he extracts the milt of the mouse, and transplants it under the skin of a frog. The frog convulses and dies and this is called skin anthrax. Robert Koch, scientific fraud. 20:42 Now you can imagine which animal experiments were made to claim lung anthrax. The milt of the killed mouse was implanted into the lungs of the frog. That is what is done until the present day, that is what is done in the influenza pandemic: Animals are being killed with incisions of the trachea, liquids are inserted continuously, the animals die, and then it is claimed, it was the virus. You can study this on our influenza virus information flyer, which is attached to this file. On this you will find the literature on how they operate concerning influenza. No control group animals, if they were to inject ordinary liquids into the animals, the exact same were to happen. 21:32 The second thing that was derived from Germany and Robert Koch, was this: Robert Koch relied on new colorants to be ably to dye bacteria. And naturally, he received these dyes from the colorant industry. Then, all other medical researcher took the same colorants, took healthy tissue, they acidified the tissue and discovered they had the same coloring reaction and the exact same bacteria can be seen and photographed, just as Robert Koch did. 22:12 But then they also discovered, these dyes killed bacteria by making holes in them, they inhibit the DNA of the bacteria, these can no longer reproduce, the bacteria die. From this, antibiotics were derived, from colorants. BASF, BAYER, IG Farben, Hoechst, Merk and so on. The pharma- industry was derived from colorant manufacturers based on the infection hypothesis. The American capital built up their parallel structures in Switzerland, in order to keep up with the revolutionary knowledge of the Germans, who were assumed to be capable of having something important just as the H. Bosch process, were nitrogen is extracted from air. By this, the Germans no longer relied on importing sodium nitrate from Chile for bombs and grenades, as the oceans were blocked. That’s the historic background. 23:24 But why did the German government employ Robert Koch? He already had to flee from Berlin before because he had killed thousand with his magic drug tuberculin against tuberculosis. This drug’s ingredients were kept secret against the law. He fled, Otto von Bismarck called him back, he desperately needed a pretext against the British who had seized the Suez canal illegally and thus had significant military and political advantages, for they didn’t have to sail around Africa, but they came through the Suez canal from India with their troops and goods, such as spices, serving as anti-oxidants, and the like and they sailed through the calm Mediterran sea. The German tried to deprive the English form this advantage with the allegation they were bringing home anthrax, smallpox, the black pledge from India. Thus, quarantine was demanded, they weren’t allowed to dock at any Mediterranean port and at Gibraltar they were shot at. Therefore, Robert Koch, who was on the run, was called back and was offered 100,000 Reichsmark in order to create the argument that the English would bring in black plague, small pox and anthrax, the latter we already discussed. We noted, that this colorant business lead to the emergence of antibiotics, later to the chemotherapy and the weaponized gasses, including the pharma- industry with its entire capital, with more revenue then all military budgets globally combined. 25:18 Robert Koch committed scientific fraud by not upholding the first postulate. He could cultivate some bacteria, which he didn’t find in every case of a disease. This is still done in the same way today. He could never reproduce the disease as in the third postulate, and neither could he again isolate the same pathogen from these organisms. That is the date when the brutal animal experiments were introduced. 26:02 How did the idea of a virus come to life? Koch’s French counterpart was Luis Pasteur, scientific fraudster employed by the French, as the French were at war with Germany in 1872. The dead were later declared as victims of a small pox epidemic. The Germans claimed it came from France, the French said it came from Germany. Pasteur, knew from Bechamp and other scientist, what bacteria could do and what they couldn’t do, he first denied the new knowledge in order to play along with the church, he claimed he had proven the primordial creation, only to later take a reverse stand, once he was employed by the state, he said it was all wrong, bacteria are in a continuum, there are spores, they cannot be created in the primordial soup. Pasteur sold these insights as his own, but he knew what bacteria can and what they cannot do, and has earned some merits for this. 27:16 But the same Pasteur, who knew, that bacteria cannot cause diseases, applied a trick. In order to maintain the model of the doctrine of juices and disease, which the entire western medicine is based on, a disease-causing toxin had to be postulated. Especially since this concept of pandemics had been used many times to suppress upheavals, to control starvation situations and so on. It all started, with the early Vatican creating fear of diseases, by claiming the disease is coming from the disease demon, just as in ancient Greece. Thus, in order to establish total control, the early Vatican claimed that illness was a punishment by God. 28:26 This concept was interrupted for a few years by the Stauffers, when emperor Otto, at the re-foundation of the Holy Roman Empire on Jan 1st, 1000 AD employed the French Humanist Gerbert de Aureac for the purpose of establishing a medical system, which was obviously not present before. For, the military faction, the western Roman wing, had separated from Rome, that is well known. They had only military knowledge, but no technical knowledge, they were separated from the universities and culture. The early gothic was able to build small windows only, no tall buildings, the building plans were useless, whenever the knowledge of craftsmen and engineers, which always must go together, didn’t converge. This is visible in early gothic architecture. 29:33 So, they recruited Gerbert de Aureac, alias Pope Silvester. He brought in the Arabs in each garrison from which the monasteries were derived from, with the aim to obtain the ancient knowledge of the Chinese via the Arabs, who themselves had further developed medicine. For, in China the concept of contagion didn’t exist, there is the concept of too much and too little energy, there is the influence, latin influenza, by the decrease and increase of light and warmth in spring and autumn, but the idea of contagion plays no role. Contagion is not part of arjuvedic medicine. The concept of contagion is typically war- oriented, European. 30:12 The idea of disease being something vile was already retracted from by Galenus, the great physician of Marcus Aurelius. He refrained from this concept and stated that they had recognized: it wasn’t sin that makes people sick, but rather that diseas may cause sins. And today, if we think about the insights of German New Medicine by Dr. Hamer, this is becoming very up to date. We find psychoses, that can be visualized in CT scans, as a result of diverse constellations, that is, activities in the brain in different locations and sudden alterations from mania to depression and other properties. Gerbert de Aureac again pursued this (oriental) approach and the foundation of the empire was humane. However, this was quickly changed to the contrary, when Pope Silvester died a few years later. After this, health tribunals were installed throughout the entire Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. 31:26 The Vatican didn’t manage to confiscate all the documents in all archives from this time, especially in the later protestant regions. From these city chronicles and book we learn that there were health tribunals in the entire Holy Roman Empire, headed by a priest, accompanied by community or city councilors, and they decided who was a sacred sick person, or who was an evil sick person, who was punished by god and therefore needed to be expelled. The German word for leprosy is Aussatz, which means to cast away. This leprosy/ expulsion- concept is identical in all regions in which the data was preserved throughout the Holy Roman Empire in the beginning of the 11th century. The definition included natural illnesses such as hair loss, acne zits, swellings and so on, but it also included trickier diagnoses such as the claim someone had a nightmare. He might have called out in his sleep or the like, and even more wicked (this could be called the first AIDS test in medieval times): goose bumps as a reaction to a draft. That was a criterium to be expelled, the person was tattooed (marked), received the last oiling, and was forced to leave all inhabited territories, and was forbidden to come near a settlement the by threat of death penalty. 30:58 That was the leprosy concept (i.e. Aussatz, expulsion) beginning with the 11th century. Then, after the onset of the Small Ice Age in 1308, when great pressure of migration from the north arrived, as the northern apple and wheat plantations became less productive due to severe cold, large tensions, hunger catastrophes and so on, arose in the new Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. Especially after the strong earthquake with epicenter in Friuli of 1348, which devastated many Mediterranean cIties. This was interpreted by the orthodox as a proof of the antichrist, as law and order collapsed because the central hub of global trade, Venice, as well as all trade lines and currencies, also collapsed. At this point, this exact concept with the exact same disease definition was adapted by the priests and city officials, to declare entire groups of the population as punished by god and they were claimed to have the black plague. Entire city quarters were quarantined, put under lock down, starved to death, slaughtered and poisoned, just as Goethe describes it. 34:34 They simply renamed Leprosy into black plague. Later, as the Vatican’s power of definition was reduced by national revolutions, French Revolution, American Revolution, the same concept was renamed into small pox, but the same principle remained. Today, it is carried on in unacceptable disease definitions such as AIDS. At any rate, the public was terrified to no ends, whenever epidemics were declared, for this meant they could be put into quarantine, they could be killed, they could be forced to take medications, just as Goethe described. Meanwhile, thousands died because there was no food, there were social upheavals. And the survivors applauded. This medical system was always immediately repressive in times of crisis and in its history it always regarded disease as something vile, evil: the illness demon, that takes hold of someone and grows and rages like a cancer, and above all, can even be spread and transmitted to others like an evil spell, the disease demon. This fear was extremely ingrained in society, and the medical system, from which the pharma industry as the most powerful entity on this planet, arose, will not give up this power on their own account. For this, we need to become active citizens. For this, I will provide you with more information. The idea of a virus was realized, and from this idea the field of gene technology was derived. 36:32 To pick up with Pasteur again: Pasteur knew that bacteria could not cause diseases, period. Enough studies and experiments were conducted and published in Germany and elsewhere, among other by Max von Pettenkofer, who demonstrated what cholera was and how cholera was easily prevented. Pasteur worked on contract to find an argument to not let the English through the Mediterranean Sea, he came up with the idea to claim there was a new pathogen, and this one would make its disease-toxins also in the living human body and this he called: poison! Latin: virus. 37:22 That was the idea. He said it is a thousand times smaller then bacteria, we use such dense filters where bacteria can’t pass through. He presses the liquid, the poison from a dead animal, through the filter, he injects the liquid into the brain of a dog that was tied onto a pole vertically. He used a third of the volume of the dogs brain, the liquid comes out the over side, the dog convulses, barks, foams from the mouth and dies. That was called rabies, that’s what Pasteur did. 38:20 Pasteur also claimed to have the antidote to his virus, to push the vaccine concept. This vaccination agenda was propagated primarily in France, for the Germans had their antibiotics and chemotherapy. Pasteur committed fraud in all his undertakings. But he was humane enough to document his deceits in diaries parallel to his primary lab books. He decreed that these records must never be publicized. His family naturally obtained great wealth. But the last male ancestor of Pasteur didn’t obey to that decree and leaked the records to the Princeton university and in 1993 Professor Gerard Geisson published an analysis in the English language that revealed that Pasteur had committed massive fraud in all his studies. For instance, vaccinated animals, if they survived, had not been poisoned, the control group animals that died without vaccines were poisoned massively and so on. That was Pasteur. 39:30 Pasteur is the inventor of the idea of a smaller pathogen that cannot be seen in the optical microscope, but that always makes its poison, the disease- causing poison. This supported the standard model of illness which was use for centuries, a model that is based on the premise of war, not on the premise of symbiosis, as is the real workings of Nature. In order to solidify this model and to have political leverage against England, Pasteur postulates the idea of a virus. But Pasteur didn’t anticipate that there would be a microscope in the future, an electron microscope, which has a much higher magnification as the optical microscope, that would allow to see small structures not visible before. And with this electron microscope, available to science after WW II, it was possible to visualize structures one thousands of the size of a bacterium. They observed spores, that were still capable of staying alive. It was recognized that bacteria generate spores, when they die slowly. If they die rapidly, when they are for example heated or dried out, then they produce even smaller particles that can’t live by themselves, but they consist of proteins and bear a nucleic acid in the center, and they will provide other bacteria, the ones that survived, with nutrients, so the latter can overcome the crisis situation. 41:22 This was observed in the cases of bacteria, in other very simple organisms, in fungi, in amoeba. In my own research, I first found it in a very simple algae from the ocean. But it was never observed in a human or animal or plant. You can verify this with little effort. beginning of part2 42:40 As a first step, you can check the virus question by asking: How are viruses detected nowadays? If a virologist claims he isolated an influenza virus, then he refers to the chicken egg and the chicken embryo, as we can see in the media for the planning for the current H1N1 influenza pandemic. They work with chicken eggs, they kill chicken embryos, that’s the modern form of animal tests. This method goes back to Robert Koch. If the embryo dies, they say it was a virus and that they had isolated the virus. They took something from a diseased animal or a human, they inject it into the egg and then, depending on how the embryo dies, on what location it is becoming spotted first, they will claim it was this type of virus or that one. That is proclaimed to be isolation, when chicken embryos are killed. 42:44 Needless to say, there is no control group: if you inject a sterile solution of the same amount, the chicken embryo dies as well. You can also verify it by taking a look at the photos that claim to depict viruses and you will find they are identical with images from completely normal cells, that is with electron micrographs from normal cells. Here, we see a section from the centre of a cell, which is very productive, the so-called Golgi apparatus, that produces various substances, and these are separated in small vesicles, they are all of different sizes, but they have no nucleic acid within them. 43:32 A larger fat particle is called a small pox virus, here we see the bacteria within the cells, the mitochondria, which process the oxygen, here we see two small ones. These particles are mitochondria, a muscle cell has 1000, a liver cell has 2000 mitochondria, and these were extracted from the cell in a thin cross section, embedded in artificial resin and cut in a very thin slice with a diamond blade. When they are protruded with an electron beam, we see the cap of such a mitochondrion. And such particles are then sold as virus without ever having isolated them, without having shown them in an isolated condition, in order to demonstrate that these look identical to what is shown in the photo of the cell. 44:32 Here, for instance, the photo that circulated as the photo of HIV, published by Montagnier. Here, we see how particles are excreted or absorbed from the cell into or out of the cell cavity. In biology, we call this endocytosis or exocytosis. Whenever something goes into or out of the cell liquid. This has nothing to do with particles that have a stable structure, that carry nucleic acid within them, that can leave the organism, such as the viruses or bacteria, that are called phages, or with the things I discovered in the ocean, they are harmless. These particles here are normal components of cells. In the case of the funny photos that are presented as influenza virus: these are simply mixtures of fats and proteins. If these are shaken in an ultrasound bath and then visualized (they decompose quickly) they don’t have an nucleic acid and they are of various sizes. That’s how you can tell fraud. 45:45 Further, they don’t even claim that they observed this within the cells or that the particles were isolated. What is striking in the current swine flue pandemic: they are trying to present more pictures of particles that are more or less equally shaped. You can reseach this by demanding a scientific publication, in which it is proven and documented that the virus exists, it was seen in the organism, it was isolated from the organism, purified from all foreign components. Just as on world savings day [or when you fill out your Tax form], your Euros must be isolated, buttons and chewing-gums are not excepted. Then the isolated particles must be analyzed biochemically. In the first step, a scientific publication can be recognized in the title of the scientific journal and of course the two dates, first the date of submission of the paper to the editor and second the date when it was checked and accepted by three work group, that were not previously know to the authors… I have not been able to determine if or when I will have the time to translate the second part of the presentation. If it will be completed, I will link to it on this article. via: Sacha Dobler of Abrupt Earth Changes https://joedubs.com/the-history-of-infectious-disease-by-stefan-lanka/?fbclid=IwAR2ftgw9p_dqBujSHy3Cyrh5F1wFeAZAqYy_HzDCHXPnOnyKzKH9HinSaYk _____________________________ There are no experiments where an isolated varicella zoster viruses has been shown to cause disease, so it is difficult to say that it is indeed the cause. I don't claim to know what causes these diseases, it seems that no one really does, however there are some hypotheses that have been put forward by others. There is the work of Nobel prize winner and French virologist Luc Montagnier. He conducted experiments where he was able to transfer the DNA of bacteria and "viruses" from one test tube to another test tube using electromagnetic frequencies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26098521/ There is also the work by Rupert Sheldrake on the phenomena known as morphic resonance. Sheldrake says, morphic resonance is "the idea of mysterious telepathy-type interconnections between organisms and of collective memories within species" and accounts for phantom limbs, how dogs know when their owners are coming home, and how people know when someone is staring at them. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ruperts-resonance/#:~:text=Morphic%20resonance%2C%20Sheldrake%20says%2C%20is,someone%20is%20staring%20at%20them We also know the human body is abe to communicate silently via the observations of women synching their menstrual cycles when living together. It is understood there is a "non-contagious" mechanism that causes this for example.
WATCH THE PLAYLIST AND REVIEW THE LINKS.
Germ Theory Debunked - Virus Hoax - Playlist <-My YT Playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZgnJ2bt7kE...
Links 20-page excerpt from the book "Neohygiene" by Dan Hall http://rawschool.com/disease/
Does 2019 Coronavirus Even Exist? https://www.greenmedinfo.com/.../does-2019-coronavirus...
How Plumbing (Not Vaccines) Eradicated Disease https://www.organiclifestylemagazine.com/how-plumbing-not...
The Deceptions of Virology - Why Corona Virus is Not Contageous https://www.thebernician.net/the-deception-of.../...
35 Sources showing the COVID19 / corona virus is over hyped, and likely fraud. https://revealingfraud.com/.../35-sources-the-covid19.../...
Comentarios