"There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false" -- John P.A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc, Professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health, 'Why Most Published Research Findings Are False', 2005 (source)
Germ Theory vs Terrain Theory - Dr. Sam Bailey
My study of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 "virus" that we are told is responsible for the "pandemic", which by definition is not a pandemic, led me to an attack being waged upon what appears to be a massively flawed "germ theory" model which is responsible for the field of virology and, in turn, organizations like the Centers For Disease Control And Prevention (CDC), as well as a very large and profitable portion of the pharmaceutical industry which rakes in many billions of dollars annually due to vaccines alone, but also drugs like antibiotics.
Germ theory is called a theory because that's exactly what it is. It has apparently never been scientifically proven that a virus can, or has ever caused disease, nor that it can be transmitted from person to person, yet it is the standard model by which the entire "science" of virology is built upon and from which vaccines are derived.
Virologists isolate what they call "viruses" by starving, poisoning and adding genetic material to infected cells and as the cells break down they release byproducts as a result. Some of these byproducts are then identified as "the virus" that is making people sick. They then sell their work and from here the vaccine manufacturers take over.
The Truth About Virus Isolation - Dr. Sam Bailey
What apparently no virologist has done (or if they have, their work was not published) since roughly 1945, is a control experiment where the same procedure is performed upon healthy cell tissue to see if the results can be duplicated when the "virus" is not present, that is until 2021 when Dr. Stefan Lanka, a virologist, did exactly what every virologist should have been doing all along. What Dr. Lanka found is that exactly the same byproducts are produced by healthy cells when they are subjected to the same poisoning and starvation methodology that virologists employ. Lanka stated that he found the SARS-CoV-2 virus in these byproducts... and Ebola... and that one could isolate any other "virus" they wanted to.
In a previous article on the nature of the virus, I have discussed the heroic efforts of German virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka, who won a landmark case in 2017 which went all the way to the German Supreme Court. Lanka proved in the highest court of the land that measles was not caused by a virus, and that there was in fact no such thing as a measles virus.[...]
Lanka’s main point throughout the article is this: when modern scientists are working with diseased tissue, they think the presence of a virus is causing the disease, instead of realizing that the tissue in question has been cut off and isolated from its host, then doused with antibiotics, and that this separation and poison make it diseased and kill it, rather than any virus. Lanka writes:
“All claims about viruses as pathogens are wrong and are based on easily recognizable, understandable and verifiable misinterpretations … All scientists who think they are working with viruses in laboratories are actually working with typical particles of specific dying tissues or cells which were prepared in a special way. They believe that those tissues and cells are dying because they were infected by a virus. In reality, the infected cells and tissues were dying because they were starved and poisoned as a consequence of the experiments in the lab.”
” … the death of the tissue and cells takes place in the exact same manner when no “infected” genetic material is added at all. The virologists have apparently not noticed this fact. According to … scientific logic and the rules of scientific conduct, control experiments should have been carried out. In order to confirm the newly discovered method of so-called “virus propagation” … scientists would have had to perform additional experiments, called negative control experiments, in which they would add sterile substances … to the cell culture.”
“These control experiment have never been carried out by the official “science” to this day. During the measles virus trial, I commissioned an independent laboratory to perform this control experiment and the result was that the tissues and cells die due to the laboratory conditions in the exact same way as when they come into contact with alleged “infected” material.”
A colleague in New Zealand (Michael S.) and I (CM) have been submitting Freedom of Information requests to institutions in various countries seeking records that describe the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.
Our requests have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) isolation/purification performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.[...]
Thus far (May 22, 2021) 25 Canadian institutions have provided their responses:
Every institution has failed to provide even 1 record describing the isolation aka purification of any “COVID-19 virus” directly from a patient sample that was not first adulterated with other sources of genetic material. (Those other sources are typically monkey kidney aka “Vero” cells and fetal bovine serum).
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) appears to be the most widely used "test" to diagnose the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The problem is that PCR was never designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as was clearly stated by its inventor, Kary Mullis.
PCR is used to replicate a sample of DNA or RNA and the results of the PCR procedure depend heavily upon how many times a sample is cycled and herein lies the problem: if you cycle the sample enough times, almost anyone can test positive for COVID-19, or any other "virus". At 20 or so cycles few people would test positive for COVID-19, but when you increase the number to roughly 40 or more cycles, then many people will test positive for the disease and all of a sudden you have a pandemic; a "PCR pandemic" as some doctors have called it. Remember all the hub-bub on the news about the skyrocketing number of COVID-19 cases? It's all we heard about for months. Well, low and behold, the World Health Organization (WHO) and "doctor" Anthony Fauci stated that labs were cycling their samples too many times which, according to studies, led to false positive detection rates as high as 85%. When the cycle count was lowered, so too were the number of "cases", though there were still enough to keep the "pandemic" hysteria going. This change in policy took place on the day that president Biden was inaugurated.
Today, the WHO, as predicted by many, lowered the cycle count threshold for a positive COVID-19 test, which will cause up to 90% less positive COVID-19 tests in the weeks and months ahead. It’s convenient that this happened on the day Biden takes office as President of the US.
The new guidance states that “the cycle threshold needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load,” insinuating that the previous guidelines cycle count thresholds detected far too much virus, causing false positives.
The New York Times studied the amount of “Coronavirus” in positive PCR tests back in August and found that in most instances, the amount of virus present is insignificant. These tests have indicated positive COVID-19 results for chicken wings, dogs, pawpaws, a goat, and zoo animals such as lions.
So what then causes outbreaks of disease?
Well, let's consider bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow disease) where governments ordered the slaughter of millions of cattle because of a mass outbreak of a deadly "virus". The cows had some sort of problem with regard to a parasite and governments ordered that the cows be washed (or dipped) in a pesticide to kill the parasite. The pesticide contained a powerful neurotoxin that made its way into the spinal cord and the brain and thus 'mad cow disease'. When governments quietly stopped the use of this chemical, mad cow disease largely evaporated.
The following statement appeared in the Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology, 1991, edited by Wayland J. Hayes and Edward R. Laws: "It has been alleged that DDT causes or contributes to a wide variety of diseases of humans and animals not previously recognized as associated with any chemical. Such diseases included ... poliomyelitis, ... such irresponsible claims could produce great harm and, if taken seriously, even interfere with scientific search for true causes..."
Hayes and Laws were informing their readers about the heretic, Dr. Morton S. Biskind. In 1953, when Biskind’s writings were published, the United States had just endured its greatest polio epidemic. The entire public was steeped in dramatic images–a predatory poliovirus, nearly a million dead and paralyzed children, iron lungs, struggling doctors and dedicated nurses. The late president Franklin D. Roosevelt had been memorialized as a polio victim who was infected with the deadly poliovirus near the beautiful and remote island of Campobello. The media was saturated with positive images of scientific progress and the marvels of DDT to kill disease-carrying mosquitos. Jonas Salk was in the wings, preparing to be moved center stage.
Through this intellectually paralyzing atmosphere, Dr. Biskind had the composure to argue what he thought was the most obvious explanation for the polio epidemic: Central nervous system diseases (CNS) such as polio are actually the physiological and symptomatic manifestations of the ongoing government- and industry-sponsored inundation of the world’s populace with central nervous system poisons.[...]
"In 1945, against the advice of investigators who had studied the pharmacology of the compound and found it dangerous for all forms of life, DDT (chlorophenoethane, dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) was released in the United States and other countries for general use by the public as an insecticide...
"Since the last war there have been a number of curious changes in the incidence of certain ailments and the development of new syndromes never before observed. A most significant feature of this situation is that both man and all his domestic animals have simultaneously been affected. In man, the incidence of poliomyelitis has risen sharply...[...]
In contemporary Britain, a farmer turned scientist, Mark Purdey, has found substantial evidence that mad cow disease, a form of polio-like encephalitis, was caused by a government mandated cattle treatment consisting of organophosphate pesticide and a compound similar to thalidomide. Unlike most scientists, Mark Purdey became legally embroiled with the government during his research, and "... was shot at, blockaded in his home to prevent him giving a lecture, and saw a new farmhouse go up in flames the day he was due to move in."
DDT has been replaced with pesticides and herbicides like glyphosate which was developed by Monsanto. Glyphosate is a carcinogen that is found virtually everywhere including in water, the food supply and breast milk. From a health perspective, glyphosate is the new DDT.
Dr. Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., is a Senior Research Scientist at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. She has a B.S. degree from MIT in biology and M.S., E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from MIT in electrical engineering and computer science. Dr. Seneff has published over 200 peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals and conference proceedings. Her recent interests have focused on the role of toxic chemicals and micronutrient deficiencies in health and disease, with a special emphasis on the pervasive herbicide, Roundup, and the mineral, sulfur. Her investigations have led to a strong hypothesis that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is the key factor in the autism epidemic and in many other neurological, metabolic, oncological and autoimmune diseases. She has authored over thirty peer-reviewed journal papers over the past few years on these topics, and has delivered numerous presentations around the world.
Let us also look at another pandemic, the Spanish Flu, which had nothing to do with Spain...
In an effort to prove that the Spanish flu could be transmitted among humans, virologists took snot and other samples from sick people and tried multiple times to infect healthy people. Another experiment involved horses. In one experiment they injected the infected material directly into the healthy people and, in the end, all three of the human experiments, as well as the horse experiment, failed to infect a single person or horse.
The landmark study of Milton J. Rosenau, MD, “Experiments to Determine Mode of Spread of Influenza,” was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1919.
They isolated microbial mixtures from the throat and noses of carefully selected influenza cases from an outbreak location. The researchers then administered these to 10 young U.S. navy volunteers without prior exposure to influenza. None fell sick.
They drew blood from influenza patients and transferred it to the navy volunteers. None fell sick.
They collected influenza patients’ mucous membranes with swabs and filtered them to exclude larger microbes like bacteria. They then injected the filtrate into the navy volunteers. None fell sick.
They brought the navy volunteers to meet influenza patients. They shook hands and conversed. The patients also exhaled (as hard as possible) onto the volunteers’ face for five times. Then the patients cough directly onto the volunteers. None fell sick.
The bubonic plague (Black Death) outbreak is another example...
In this case it was found that there was a high amount of volcanic activity which released toxins that poisoned the air and water and that this may have been responsible for the pandemic.
An enormous volcanic eruption coughed millions of tonnes of smoke into the atmosphere in the Sixth CenturyIt blocked out the Sun, day and night, for 18 months, causing snowfall in China, continental-scale crop failure, extreme drought, famine and disease throughout most of the northern hemisphere.
Again, there is apparently no proof that viruses cause disease. Disease seems to be caused primarily by toxins (AIDS is a great example where drug use plays a huge role), poor life choices and a lack of proper nutrition and sanitation, any of which can certainly affect specific races, or populations in a given geographic area, or the world at large, and thus we have pandemics which are then attributed to "viruses". There is also a scientifically proven mental component where, if a person thinks they're going to sick, they very well may. You could think of this phenomena as placebo effect, except in reverse.
Have you ever wondered how it is that doctors and nurses and other healthcare professionals can spend their working life in close proximity to diseased people without getting sick themselves?
Dr. Tom Cowan wrote a very interesting book titled, The Contagion Myth - Why Viruses (including "Coronavirus") Are Not the Cause of Disease. I highly recommend this book, which is available for free from the Internet Archive (here is a direct link to the PDF version). Following is an excerpt regarding how viruses are supposed to be isolated according to Rivers' postulates (a modified version of Koch's postulates) and how virologists "isolated" the alleged SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses:
Let’s look then at what was done to prove that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was the cause of this new set of symptoms. Four papers published in China are cited as proof that the new and novel coronavirus is the probable cause of this new disease. For an in-depth analysis of these papers, please refer to a presentation by Andrew Kaufman MD, in which he dissects in great detail the methods and conclusions of these seminal studies.
To review these four studies, let’s look again at Rivers’ postulates for determining whether a particular virus causes a disease.
- The virus can be isolated from diseased hosts.
- The virus can be cultivated in host cells.
- Proof of filterability—the virus can be filtered from a medium that also contained bacteria.
- The filtered virus will produce a comparable disease when the cultivated virus is used to infect experimental animals.
- The virus can be re-isolated from the infected experimental animal.
- A specific immune response to the virus can be detected.
None of these four studies met all six postulates. Of the four studies said to prove that a coronavirus causes this disease, not one of them satisfied the first three postulates, and none of them even addressed postulates four and five. One paper claimed to find an immune response (postulate six) by looking at antibody levels from the patient.
The first two papers are honest enough to claim only an association of coronavirus and the disease; the third paper claims that the coronavirus is “identified as the causative agent.” The fourth paper, from McMaster University, falsely claims that the coronavirus is the causative agent of the disease and that the virus “set in motion the pandemic,” with no evidence to back up these statements.
These papers never show that all the people with Covid-19 had the same set of symptoms; they never purify any virus from the sick people; they never demonstrate the absence of the virus from well people; and they never show that the transmission of purified virus could make well people become sick. This is scientific fraud of the first order.
It’s interesting to look more closely at how virologists work to "prove" something like causation by coronavirus. One example is a paper published in 2003 in Nature, titled "Koch’s Postulates Fulfilled for SARS Virus." Researchers claimed that Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome is caused by a coronavirus. The title itself is misleading, if not dishonest, because the researchers satisfied neither Koch’s nor Rivers’ postulates.
Here’s what they did: first they took respiratory secretions from some sick people; in other words, they took sputum from people with a cough. They centrifuged the sputum, which separates the cellular part (where presumably the virus is residing in the cells) from the liquid part. They discarded the liquid part. This is what they referred to as "purification." Then they took this centrifuged, unpurified sediment from sick people, containing God-only-knows-what, and inoculated that into vero (monkey kidney) cells. Here we have to understand that if virologists want to get enough "virus" to use experimentally, they must grow it in a biological medium such as an animal or at least cells from an animal. Unlike bacteria, which can be grown in petri dishes, viruses are not alive, and they can "grow" only in other living cells. For convenience and because cancer cell lines are "immortal," they generally grow their "viruses" in cancer cells; however, in this case they used kidney cells. This practice is fraught with obvious problems for proving it is the virus and not the kidney or cancer cells that are causing disease when these viruses then get injected into the test animals. Also, it is well known now that as part of their "detoxification" strategy, cells, especially cancer cells produce particles called exosomes, which are identical to "viruses." (More on this in chapter 6.)
Again, the researchers took unpurified sediment from the nasal mucus of sick people and grew that in vero cells until they got a sufficient quantity of cellular material to work with. Then they centrifuged this mess again, not even attempting to purify any virus from the mixture. Finally, they took this witch’s brew of snot sediment, kidney cells, and who-knows-what-else and injected that into two monkeys. They didn’t do a control group by injecting saline into other monkeys or injecting vero cells into monkeys, or even injecting the liquid supernatant from the centrifuged material into monkeys. They just injected this cellular- debris-laden goop. One monkey developed pneumonia and the other appeared to have respiratory symptoms possibly related to a lower respiratory disease. That, claim the researchers, is the proof that a "coronavirus" can cause disease.
To be fair, in a related study, researchers did the exact same procedure, except to make it more reflective of how the new "virus" actually spreads, they took unpurified, lung-cancer-grown, centrifuged snot and (again, without any controls) squirted it down the throats and into the lungs of hamsters. (Where is PETA when you need them?) Some, but not all, of the hamsters got pneumonia, and some died. We have no idea what would have happened if they had squirted plain lung cancer cells into the lungs of these hamsters, but probably not anything good. And even more perplexing, some of the hamsters didn’t even get sick at all, which certainly doesn’t square with the deadly, contagious virus theory.
In short, no study has proven that coronavirus, or indeed any virus is contagious, nor has any study proven anything except that virologists are a dangerous, misguided group of people and that hamster- and monkey-rights people are not doing their jobs!
From the article, Gaslighting: The Truth About 'Gain of Function', we read:
Much has been made of the “Wuhan Lab Leak” theory and the notorious ‘gain of function’ talking point in recent months, as Americans and other people in the west look desperately for any scapegoat to pin the blame on for the alleged ‘global pandemic’ which has befallen the world over the last 15 months. They want someone external to blame – anyone but their own naive selves and their corrupt government-media-pharma complex.
In the alternative media, much of the early hype was generated by various ‘whistleblowers’ who used the spectre of ‘gain of function’ in order to confer a certain mystique and incredible superpowers to the ‘novel’ coronavirus, and when added to a narrative featuring Dr Fauci and the Wuhan Institute of Virology – it had all the makings of a Hollywood blockbuster.
However, upon closer inspection, the hype surrounding this seemingly gargantuan field of research does not live up to the reality of what appears to be a rather unremarkable area of research. While strides have been made in bacteria ‘gain of function’ research, very little if any actual progress has been made in the virus department.
In this video presentation, New Zealand’s Dr Sam Bailey dispels some of the popular myths surrounding ‘gain of function’ research, and shows why this popular conspiracy theory is actually being used to further advance the increasingly overblown ‘global pandemic’ narrative which is still being used by governments to terrorise and lockdown their populations and bleed economies dry. Watch:
Crucial resources for further study (i'm listening them in the order in which i think they are best viewed):
This couple spent in excess of 10 years assembling a well referenced and very detailed book on the subject of 'germ theory'.
Host Alec Zeck of The Way Forward presents a live summit to dissect and debunk the monkey business surrounding both monkeypox and the theory of pathogenic viruses at large. Featuring in order of appearance, Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Sam Bailey, Mike Stone of viroliegy.com, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Christine Massey, Dr. Mark Bailey, Dr. Kevin Corbett, Saeed Qureshi, Eric Coppolino and Dr. Amandha Vollmer.