I have written about that in a previous post. I am sharing this article because I have been attacked and maligned as a virologist and believe this is important information to share. If it does not apply to you then feel free to move along.
I agree with you that viruses exist, it does not take science to know this is for sure but I doubt the efficacy of any solution you can give to let's say a person with arthritis, who got the illness from an "unknown" virus, how to cure him/herself from that virus.
why is Ivermectin effective against covid 19? why is the virus behaving like a parasite?
Oh, I have watched your video, you are from Hawaii, and you fought for the Truth! Do you know of some good antiviral antiparasitic herbs we can shop for without restrictions? thank you!!
Read the below statement. I have been waiting a long time for confirmation that their sequence they claim is sars cov 2. Nobody has recreated the sequence published by Wu et al.
A friend gave me some good advice...don't argue with a donkey. All the evidence is there, you just have to look for it. Please go spread your cognitive dissonance somewhere else.
Anyway can you run the 37 pairs of sequence as described by Wu et al. Will your results be the same as theirs. Where has this been done by other virologist. Surely others need to verify this to pass scrutiny by those who publish papers.
I'm not sure what you mean by "run the 37 pairs of sequence". Are you talking about blast search or something else? Please elaborate. And I have questioned many things, perhaps you haven't read any of my other blogs. Please read my introductory Substack to see how I questioned and blew the whistle on the lies and COVID corruption.
> …Viruses, by their very nature, can only multiply within living cells but not in pure culture…
In general, they can live and survive only within living cells - we are told. If this is the case, why all virus research is done in laboratory conditions? Why not in a living person?
> …The particles of many viruses have very characteristic shapes…
Majority of viruses is said to be submicroscopic. Which means that we cannot see them. How do we know their physical properties if we cannot observe them in their live form, especially in their native environment?
EM is out of question because a) it records only dead “things”, b) the sample preparation process destroys everything of the original material, c) the field of vision which allows “observation” is absurdly miniature, and most important - d) the absence of repeatability of the process (both sample preparation and actual observation).
Full-scale EM would be great - but it would have to include ongoing _live_ observation over extended periods of time of the same sample and the same (FOV) portion of the sample. A movie, if you like. Is it possible with EM?
Are there any lab techniques which allow such recordable, continuous, movie-like observation of live viruses?
For the record, I am not for or against. I can see a lot of gaps and assumptions, along with plenty of unanswered questions. Or questions answered in a funny non-scientific way, like “we know that…” or “so many authors wrote about it…”
Virus are able to be seen by staining if they are large enough or by electron microscope.
Replication of a Virus is in a culture of living cells. That is why you get asked if you are allergic to eggs. Grown in chicken eggs.
A long and laborious process. The way they built the vaccine was a faster way as they could build the fragments they needed to get the body to recognize the Virus and attack it. You can't see microfauna without a microscope that doesn't mean they aren't there. Virus research is done in labs as you want to keep it there rather than take it home with you.
Some subcellular structures are also submicroscopic. Maybe, some of them do not exist, or are laboratory artefacts, like the endoplasmic reticulum.
That scientists cannot see them does not mean they are not real. Rather, invisibility simple means that it's possible that they are not real. Which is why there are other evidences, not related to vision, that make the case for the existence of such structures. Maybe the arguments for that are also wrong. If the existence of invisible in vivo subscellular structures is a scientific claim, then it has to be in principle falsifiable. And if it becomes falsified, then we need another story.
For viruses, their invisibility in vivo is not a necessary condition to prove they don't exist, but it is sufficient, in my opinion.
The real quesiton is if there is proof that the claims that there are repetitive patterns of genome in the presence of diseased tissue, and that these patterns are related to the cause the disease in the tissue. If there is no evidence of that, then the theory is necesarilly falsified too, and we can say that it's now proven that it's not those patterns that caused the disease.
I don’t mind “invisibility” - it’s obvious that some things and processes exist below the optical resolution of the eye and of the optical instrument. However, if we devise a technical prosthesis to enhance our “vision”, it is by its nature guesswork, not measurable and verifiable science - because we are unable to verify it with measures other than those used to “see” it.
Complexities will arise, because if we cannot verify the observed object, we cannot assess errors and the impact of the instruments in relevance to this object. We will then modify and change our instruments without ever knowing how this affects the object. It’s like the replication caused by concentrated light shown in “The Andromeda Strain”…
Since we have no reference object (seen without artificial instruments), we don’t really know what we are looking at. The field of vision of an EM sample compared against the size of the human body is beyond negligible (aside from the fact that EM does not “see” an intact natural tissue) - which practically invalidates the whole theory, instrument and work with EM.
It seems to me that we have found the barrier (optical resolution) beyond which the Nature does not allow us to uncover its secrets. We are not ready, in the (meta)physical sense. We certainly are not mature and responsible enough to go there. And we pay the price - genetic and viral work generates damages (plus a lot of money for researchers :-)). The SC2 story, with more and more mechanisms of injury being uncovered every day is the best proof.
What we are witnessing is a fascinating development of medical research, anyway.
That's the problem of guesswork: it can be true, it can be false, it can be unknowable, we are certain only of uncertainty, and it's best to not think in backwards concepts as true/false or right/wrong or health/illness. We have to be progressive, which means: the denial of logic.
The easiest way out of this debate is to simply admit fictionalism. Everything is a made-up model, probably false, but science does not care about false or true anymore, and neither should anyone.
Thus, there is no slandering, no denialism, no insults, no trolling, no abuse, no theft, no murder. Everything is imaginary, including your emotions. The only thing that matters is total political control.
of course, they do, they are the physical representation of the Evil himself. I think when Abraham lived there were not that many viruses and parasites so people could easily live beyond 120 years of age...I also feel that a virologist should not exist if they can not offer a solution to a problem, other than a vaccine! Every virus lab should be closed immediately foerever
Thank you for bringing this on substack. I would have missed it if not for you.
Michael Palmer and Sasha Latypova are friends, and they are a bit divided on this issue. It's nice to see Professor Palmer publishing his opinions. It's a good example for everyone to see that actual experts can have friendly disagreements.
I have plenty of doubt that the Koch postulates have ever been satisfied for any germ, ever.
The key aspect to all this interesting dispute is the nature of bacteria. They are seen as causal agents of disease (pathogens) by most experts on this topic. And a minority of experts say that's not the case: first there is damage, then bacteria go to mop up the place, not doing any harm to healthy tissue. Thus, there is a confusion: bacteria are innocent of causing the damage, the view of the latter group.
If the minority is correct, then many things we do are worse than useless, and very harmful and we should stop doing them.
One example: a person may inhale some toxin in the air. For instance, a plumber working on a drain may be inhaling harmful gases liberated by bacteria from the drain. Then he may get "the flu". Maybe even develop pneumonia. And the doctors will find many bacteria there, because there was damage. But the bacteria were already there, when the person was healthy. They only proliferated as they were eating the damaged tissue. The fallacy is: if they are here in the crime scene, they caused it.
Is this view wrong? That's the debate we need, rigorous and unprejudiced, as Professors Palmer and Bhakdi write.
Where is the evidence that bacteria actually cause pneumonia? This is a necessary but not sufficient phenomenon to be demonstrated before studying the truth or falsehood of the idea of contagious disease. When we get that, we move on to research contagious disease.
We have to avoid name calling and other errors. Focus on the logic and the evidence. Let's hear the arguments for the truth of the premises, which must be questioned at least as much as the data, and also investigate the formal validity of the argument.
The other case is the non-existence of pathogenic viruses, and it should be treated a bit differently than the case of pathogenic bacteria, because bacteria have been shown to exist, but viruses have not been shown to exist yet. And I think is very reasonable to ask virologists to do direct isolation instead of the supposedly efficient cell cultures of viruses. Why are they efficient if the cultured virus has not been isolated directly?
In this regard, what if there small pieces of DNA or RNA in infected tissue simply because cells are dying? I think this is a legitimate question to research.
And if you see patterns, and you want to impute meaning to them (the meaning being that the patterns of genome sequences actually are meant to invade cells and hijack replication machinery and resources and finally lyse cells) then that's a positive claim that needs to be proved too. Not only the existence of viruses as entities that transport meaning, but that the meaning is there.
Virologists need to show that the damage is not random, to show that pathogenic viruses somehow mean to do the harm the virologists claim they are programmed to do.
Unlike Astrologers, who do not need to prove that the stars and the planets cause anything, because everyone agrees that it mere fantasy and a form of entertainment, trying to assign meaning to numerical patterns that do not bear meaning nor explain any event in reality, the Virologists need to have positive proof that the numerical patterns they see do in fact explain events, because most people do not see Virology as fantasy or entertainment. (How could it ever be entertainment when it is so radically boring?)
That's the issue.
What if all the other things that depend on virology being true (existence and contagion) are badly affected if it turns out that virology is false? It does not take much time to realize that some of those things will be false if they exclusively depend on the truth of virology, and other things may not be wrong if they have other legs to stand on.
For example, what if herpes viruses cause neurological damage that may or may not manifest as psychiatric symptoms, but herpes viruses do not exist in reality? The answer is that the neurological damage depends on its observation by a pathologist, and not on the models of virology. Doctors did not start saying that they were seeing herpes viruses causing a pathology, rather, they saw they saw the actual observable pathology and then they needed an explanation. The herpes viruses are one of the explanations invented or discovered to explain that. So denying herpes viruses is not a negation of the observation that there is an actual and measurable pathology or damage.
But why would anyone confuse a mere falsable theory with an actual observation?
i can count at least 10 “reasonable objections” to the “isolation” of this purported “gnatobiotic virus” the first one being the assertion that the scientist determining the existence asserts “we can see no reasonable objection,””! from there, the bamboozle kicks in
These claims are circular and are replete with logical fallacies, least of which is conflating virus with bacteria and toxins— the whopper is that “virus” can’t replicate without a host—incredible. i inhale a “whole virus” and presto, it comes alive and does its dance!? come on! you have a PhD. Also this notion of “virons” and “size variation” is pure unadulterated hooey! that is a cover for the “electron
microscopy” images. which is all they are— the comparison against electrophoresis which is meaningless.
Sorry, unconvincing—all the claims are circular…it is all “in silico” “PCR” genomic sequencing bamboozle—it is a religion—like all religious precepts unprovable
Yes like God, never proven to exist. They may exist but as nobody has isolated a virus and shown it to be the only cause of a particular illness.. Go to the initial paper from Wu et al. They identified 37 pairs of unknown in samples, they then used a computer to draw up a complete sequence.
Again I ask you to get the 37 pairs they claim are from a virus, using the same methodology recreate the exact same complete virus they claim exists. Can you as a virologist do this or anyone you know who is a virologist.
I will pray for you. There is evidence of God all around you, all you have to do is open your eyes and heart to see.
Computers do not just spit out sequence. The key thing you are missing is that the very first thing we do for sequencing is PCR. We use gene specific primers meaning primers specific for the gene of interest and do PCR then send that for sequencing using the same PCR primers. Please look up and educate yourself on Sanger Dye terminating sequencing. Not only that but these sequences are not found in the cells or humans, they are specific for that virus. Sequence becomes protein and those proteins can be identified as well and are virus specific.
I also stand over your right to believe in God, unfortunately I read the Bible since I was 8. So the Jews were alleged to be slave in Egypt. They got their God to kill the first born of the Egyptians. And much more. They still celebrate it today. All Christian religions are based upon Jewish religion. Have a read about mother Theresa in India revered around the world but really just a person bent on torturing people. To understand how people are duped, maybe understand the Milgram experiments.
I can't understand why nobody want to run the 37 pairs of the sequence. The last 4 years is based on it.
Within the next 15 years they will do it again and virologist (Pandora and the others) will stand by and watch and mutter under their breaths. Mumble and grumble about rights been taken away.
When they said in early 2020 we will follow the science, but only science that agrees with out overlords.
the abrahamic religions were devised by the judaic death cult to bring about a "victory" over those that do not share a genetic quirk, which can be researched easily enough, it predisposes toward certain "diseases" and yet is strangely resistant to other "maladies".
Too few ask who is behind these "vaccines", it is the same group as above mentioned who are also highly advanced in ehtnic targetted bio weaponry as acknowledged by the Chinese circa 1995 when they were seeking bio-weapons that did not harm the "yellow people" as they put it.
The inbred genetic quirk of the "ashkenazi" has, i believe been used to manufacture the bio weapon that is happily chomping through the worlds population at a pretty steady rate, meanwhile we ramble and pontificate on minutae, completely missing the point.
Understanding what drives a death cult is hard to fathom unless one has that trait already, the adoption of a lost, babylonian religion circa 9thC including its aspirations toward world dominance/conquer and the protection afforded by the ritual slaughter of children to a demonic entity figure highly..
Yet when presented with evidence of why theses "people" have been sytematically flung out over a hundred countries over the past few hundred years seems irrelevant to many that have utterly swallowed the BS they have been fed since the started "school" about "how it all is", including all the metaphorical fabrication re middle east circa year dot...
If humanity could perhaps understand that the entity it so earnestly and readily calls "god" should be more accurately described as a "demon" we could all find a way to work ourselves out of this mess..
We live in a world society where numerous millions of children go "missing" every year and are quietly never explained, some meet natural ends, many, many others do not and understanding cause and effect re what happens to these innocents is not discussed and is rapidly ridiculed when broached in what they term "modern educated society"
Re the 37 pairs personally i would begin preparing myself for the unmittigated shit fest that is about to be foisted upon us under the guise "bird flu", i should say attempted shitfest and reserve some "hope".
As an ex professional poultry farmer and lecturer i can tell you with certainty that they have had H5 N1 lined up as disease "x" since definitively 2010 when they gave it a dry run here in the uk and likely as a disease of interest since it was first noticed as being of interest circa early 70`s
Culling humans in large numbers has been in vogue for millenia, modern conectivity and top down rule seems to be attempting to reach new levels of "success" in this field..
We must also too undertake that our belief that "life" is constrained/limited to only biological entities is false and that what we are currently dealing with and soon to be presented with will shatter that illusion
intersting footnote, Ghandi was a rothschild plant aimed to pacify the Indians against a violent uprising which would have evicted those stealing Indias` wealth decades sooner.. strange what you find out these days, like the mother "t" thing, nasty old trout
viruses exist and God exists too, many things exist you can not see, but that only means your eyesight is corrupt, and not the theory. If you can only follow the logic you would know that many illnesses come from viruses, just ask some pro sports people, how they felt when they caught some nasty virus, some of them had to end a career....or look up arthritis ...... it's all of viral origin. The completely different topic though is vaccines, those are NOT the solutions. never have been.
There's no proof of contagion of a virus. God may exist, but I don't have to believe in him.
The issue arises when a religious leader or world health organisation deems i have to believe......
You can just believe in both. That's your choice
I am asking that the 37 pairs, Wu et al say are from a virus be input in to a computer. Where the computer can make the calculation of the full sequence of sars cov 2. This competed sequence should be exactly the same as Wu et al published work. Where has this been completed by a virologist. Then we can look at contagion, it never been shown in a clinical research study. It's based upon assumption and faith.
Anyway I appreciate your comments, is good to have open and consise dialogue on this important issue.
what you just said is a complete lack of logic: Truth may exist but I do not have to believe in it. Yeah, that is why we are in the problem we are now. Nobody cares about the Truth. And the Truth will set you free and the society as well. Your opinions can form a cult. Everyone is living his/her own cult these days, and you never heard about the tactic: divide et impera.....so you would know your idea about believing whatever you want is not the most intelligent one. you are not free, nor is the society free, that is consequence of loving your lies: i.e. opinions. If your life would depend the next minute on your opinion maybe you would think twice at least before saying , and not be so appreciative of the right to have your opinion but the Truth. Societies fall apart when the Truth becomes irrelevant or whatever!
Wu et al published a paper where they say they found 37 pair of a sequence using a computer. They used another computer to draw the 30,000 + full sequence. I am asking that someone with clinical experience and knowledge use the published 37 pairs of the sequence they claimed. Build the full sequence and compare to Wu et al (2020). If it doesn't match, there is an issue. I want the science examined. Where has this been replicated.
A paper published looked at 1 million people and compared them. People who had no covid are claiming they have long covid symptoms. To get long covid, you need to have had covid in the first place. So does long covid exist, establish if covid exists first.
what you just said has 0 logic per se, if you want to win the war, you have to be a fighter for something? what do you fight for? for your opinion? If you are not able to give life for your opinion, than the side that is willing to die for what they do will win. If you have not noticed this is not a little game of opinions but 20 mio people have died. This is life: a batlle between good and evil, life and death in case you do not know where you are :) i will write a post now from those ideas: why are we drifting into dictatorship.....exactly becasue of people who can not fight for the Truth!
I am asking that the 37 pairs, Wu et al say are from a virus be input in to a computer. Where the computer can make the calculation of the full sequence of sars cov 2. This competed sequence should be exactly the same as Wu et al published work. Where has this been completed by a virologist. Then we can look at contagion, it never been shown in a clinical research study.
i have long covid and it does exist.....ignorance is bliss! do you ask this out of curiosity? actually you are very rude person and you would make a terrible MD....so just like i said you are no different to dictators who planned all fo this, you only have 0 power to execute your sick ideas
Thats a great example of 'science ' at work. About 200 years of doctors, scientists and pathologists disecting bodies. They come to a conclusion based upon the evidence available to them with a precentage of error. They know what to expect to a degree certainty what goes and how it goes. Similar to DNA when they do DNA sampling, precentage of acceptable error.
I have conversed with Jennifer in asking for a straight forward reconstruction of the virus as claimed in Wu et al 2020. Using the 37 pairs of a sequence that they claim is in the virus. If science is correct it should be the same. Any errors if found (where the full sequence Wu found is different than the result that who ever preforms the computer modelling) questionsneed to be asked of Wu et al.
This just confirms one thing that their computer model is correct. The other issue is no respiratory virus has ever been shown to be contagious.
She is avoiding answering my question. However its interesting that she believes that a pcr test can detect a virus. It appears that 80% of positive tests have no symptoms what so ever.
Therefore its an invalid method of determining if a person has a virus. In that discussion she points to where people who have a positive test have certain lung issues. Maybe its the virus, but was lung damage actually caused by the treatment people received ot treatment withheld during their sickness.
There is no published evidence that sars cov 2 is contagious.
Between 1946 and 1989 the Welcome foundation ran experiments on people. The unit was called the ' common cold unit '.
We can't ask David Tyrell of why he never published a paper proving the contagion of the common cold as he passed in 2005
There many papers that show the flu is not contagious.
Milton J. Rosenau, March 1919 - 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/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
I can send on the others if you wish.
But basically at the end of the day there issues with wu et al paper that experts won't question publicly.
Why don’t you write about something that matters like how to get healthy fit and stay that way?
I have written about that in a previous post. I am sharing this article because I have been attacked and maligned as a virologist and believe this is important information to share. If it does not apply to you then feel free to move along.
I agree with you that viruses exist, it does not take science to know this is for sure but I doubt the efficacy of any solution you can give to let's say a person with arthritis, who got the illness from an "unknown" virus, how to cure him/herself from that virus.
why is Ivermectin effective against covid 19? why is the virus behaving like a parasite?
Oh, I have watched your video, you are from Hawaii, and you fought for the Truth! Do you know of some good antiviral antiparasitic herbs we can shop for without restrictions? thank you!!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9957644/#:~:text=Treatment%20with%20Lianhua%20Qingwen%20capsules%20was%20not%20significantly%20associated%20with,than%20in%20the%20control%20group.
thank you so much now i just need get my hands on it somehow :) not that easy
I was waiting for the information that Covid19 was not natural. Where was that?
That is not the topic of this article. Many article have been written on that topic. All one has to do is take the time to look them up.
But you stated that was one of the lies and addressed the others so I thought I missed it.
I did not write this article, I shared it. Please read the byline and see the authors of this article and the source.
Read the below statement. I have been waiting a long time for confirmation that their sequence they claim is sars cov 2. Nobody has recreated the sequence published by Wu et al.
Everything else is smoke and mirrors.
https://open.substack.com/pub/smithvirologist/p/do-viruses-exist?r=125qke&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=56771491
A friend gave me some good advice...don't argue with a donkey. All the evidence is there, you just have to look for it. Please go spread your cognitive dissonance somewhere else.
Much appreciated that comment. 🫂
Anyway can you run the 37 pairs of sequence as described by Wu et al. Will your results be the same as theirs. Where has this been done by other virologist. Surely others need to verify this to pass scrutiny by those who publish papers.
I'm not sure what you mean by "run the 37 pairs of sequence". Are you talking about blast search or something else? Please elaborate. And I have questioned many things, perhaps you haven't read any of my other blogs. Please read my introductory Substack to see how I questioned and blew the whistle on the lies and COVID corruption.
> …Viruses, by their very nature, can only multiply within living cells but not in pure culture…
In general, they can live and survive only within living cells - we are told. If this is the case, why all virus research is done in laboratory conditions? Why not in a living person?
> …The particles of many viruses have very characteristic shapes…
Majority of viruses is said to be submicroscopic. Which means that we cannot see them. How do we know their physical properties if we cannot observe them in their live form, especially in their native environment?
EM is out of question because a) it records only dead “things”, b) the sample preparation process destroys everything of the original material, c) the field of vision which allows “observation” is absurdly miniature, and most important - d) the absence of repeatability of the process (both sample preparation and actual observation).
Full-scale EM would be great - but it would have to include ongoing _live_ observation over extended periods of time of the same sample and the same (FOV) portion of the sample. A movie, if you like. Is it possible with EM?
Are there any lab techniques which allow such recordable, continuous, movie-like observation of live viruses?
For the record, I am not for or against. I can see a lot of gaps and assumptions, along with plenty of unanswered questions. Or questions answered in a funny non-scientific way, like “we know that…” or “so many authors wrote about it…”
Virus are able to be seen by staining if they are large enough or by electron microscope.
Replication of a Virus is in a culture of living cells. That is why you get asked if you are allergic to eggs. Grown in chicken eggs.
A long and laborious process. The way they built the vaccine was a faster way as they could build the fragments they needed to get the body to recognize the Virus and attack it. You can't see microfauna without a microscope that doesn't mean they aren't there. Virus research is done in labs as you want to keep it there rather than take it home with you.
Some subcellular structures are also submicroscopic. Maybe, some of them do not exist, or are laboratory artefacts, like the endoplasmic reticulum.
That scientists cannot see them does not mean they are not real. Rather, invisibility simple means that it's possible that they are not real. Which is why there are other evidences, not related to vision, that make the case for the existence of such structures. Maybe the arguments for that are also wrong. If the existence of invisible in vivo subscellular structures is a scientific claim, then it has to be in principle falsifiable. And if it becomes falsified, then we need another story.
For viruses, their invisibility in vivo is not a necessary condition to prove they don't exist, but it is sufficient, in my opinion.
The real quesiton is if there is proof that the claims that there are repetitive patterns of genome in the presence of diseased tissue, and that these patterns are related to the cause the disease in the tissue. If there is no evidence of that, then the theory is necesarilly falsified too, and we can say that it's now proven that it's not those patterns that caused the disease.
Good point, the last paragraph, I mean.
I don’t mind “invisibility” - it’s obvious that some things and processes exist below the optical resolution of the eye and of the optical instrument. However, if we devise a technical prosthesis to enhance our “vision”, it is by its nature guesswork, not measurable and verifiable science - because we are unable to verify it with measures other than those used to “see” it.
Complexities will arise, because if we cannot verify the observed object, we cannot assess errors and the impact of the instruments in relevance to this object. We will then modify and change our instruments without ever knowing how this affects the object. It’s like the replication caused by concentrated light shown in “The Andromeda Strain”…
Since we have no reference object (seen without artificial instruments), we don’t really know what we are looking at. The field of vision of an EM sample compared against the size of the human body is beyond negligible (aside from the fact that EM does not “see” an intact natural tissue) - which practically invalidates the whole theory, instrument and work with EM.
It seems to me that we have found the barrier (optical resolution) beyond which the Nature does not allow us to uncover its secrets. We are not ready, in the (meta)physical sense. We certainly are not mature and responsible enough to go there. And we pay the price - genetic and viral work generates damages (plus a lot of money for researchers :-)). The SC2 story, with more and more mechanisms of injury being uncovered every day is the best proof.
What we are witnessing is a fascinating development of medical research, anyway.
That's the problem of guesswork: it can be true, it can be false, it can be unknowable, we are certain only of uncertainty, and it's best to not think in backwards concepts as true/false or right/wrong or health/illness. We have to be progressive, which means: the denial of logic.
The easiest way out of this debate is to simply admit fictionalism. Everything is a made-up model, probably false, but science does not care about false or true anymore, and neither should anyone.
Thus, there is no slandering, no denialism, no insults, no trolling, no abuse, no theft, no murder. Everything is imaginary, including your emotions. The only thing that matters is total political control.
of course, they do, they are the physical representation of the Evil himself. I think when Abraham lived there were not that many viruses and parasites so people could easily live beyond 120 years of age...I also feel that a virologist should not exist if they can not offer a solution to a problem, other than a vaccine! Every virus lab should be closed immediately foerever
Dear Jennifer:
Thank you for bringing this on substack. I would have missed it if not for you.
Michael Palmer and Sasha Latypova are friends, and they are a bit divided on this issue. It's nice to see Professor Palmer publishing his opinions. It's a good example for everyone to see that actual experts can have friendly disagreements.
I have plenty of doubt that the Koch postulates have ever been satisfied for any germ, ever.
The key aspect to all this interesting dispute is the nature of bacteria. They are seen as causal agents of disease (pathogens) by most experts on this topic. And a minority of experts say that's not the case: first there is damage, then bacteria go to mop up the place, not doing any harm to healthy tissue. Thus, there is a confusion: bacteria are innocent of causing the damage, the view of the latter group.
If the minority is correct, then many things we do are worse than useless, and very harmful and we should stop doing them.
One example: a person may inhale some toxin in the air. For instance, a plumber working on a drain may be inhaling harmful gases liberated by bacteria from the drain. Then he may get "the flu". Maybe even develop pneumonia. And the doctors will find many bacteria there, because there was damage. But the bacteria were already there, when the person was healthy. They only proliferated as they were eating the damaged tissue. The fallacy is: if they are here in the crime scene, they caused it.
Is this view wrong? That's the debate we need, rigorous and unprejudiced, as Professors Palmer and Bhakdi write.
Where is the evidence that bacteria actually cause pneumonia? This is a necessary but not sufficient phenomenon to be demonstrated before studying the truth or falsehood of the idea of contagious disease. When we get that, we move on to research contagious disease.
We have to avoid name calling and other errors. Focus on the logic and the evidence. Let's hear the arguments for the truth of the premises, which must be questioned at least as much as the data, and also investigate the formal validity of the argument.
The other case is the non-existence of pathogenic viruses, and it should be treated a bit differently than the case of pathogenic bacteria, because bacteria have been shown to exist, but viruses have not been shown to exist yet. And I think is very reasonable to ask virologists to do direct isolation instead of the supposedly efficient cell cultures of viruses. Why are they efficient if the cultured virus has not been isolated directly?
In this regard, what if there small pieces of DNA or RNA in infected tissue simply because cells are dying? I think this is a legitimate question to research.
And if you see patterns, and you want to impute meaning to them (the meaning being that the patterns of genome sequences actually are meant to invade cells and hijack replication machinery and resources and finally lyse cells) then that's a positive claim that needs to be proved too. Not only the existence of viruses as entities that transport meaning, but that the meaning is there.
Virologists need to show that the damage is not random, to show that pathogenic viruses somehow mean to do the harm the virologists claim they are programmed to do.
Unlike Astrologers, who do not need to prove that the stars and the planets cause anything, because everyone agrees that it mere fantasy and a form of entertainment, trying to assign meaning to numerical patterns that do not bear meaning nor explain any event in reality, the Virologists need to have positive proof that the numerical patterns they see do in fact explain events, because most people do not see Virology as fantasy or entertainment. (How could it ever be entertainment when it is so radically boring?)
That's the issue.
What if all the other things that depend on virology being true (existence and contagion) are badly affected if it turns out that virology is false? It does not take much time to realize that some of those things will be false if they exclusively depend on the truth of virology, and other things may not be wrong if they have other legs to stand on.
For example, what if herpes viruses cause neurological damage that may or may not manifest as psychiatric symptoms, but herpes viruses do not exist in reality? The answer is that the neurological damage depends on its observation by a pathologist, and not on the models of virology. Doctors did not start saying that they were seeing herpes viruses causing a pathology, rather, they saw they saw the actual observable pathology and then they needed an explanation. The herpes viruses are one of the explanations invented or discovered to explain that. So denying herpes viruses is not a negation of the observation that there is an actual and measurable pathology or damage.
But why would anyone confuse a mere falsable theory with an actual observation?
i can count at least 10 “reasonable objections” to the “isolation” of this purported “gnatobiotic virus” the first one being the assertion that the scientist determining the existence asserts “we can see no reasonable objection,””! from there, the bamboozle kicks in
These claims are circular and are replete with logical fallacies, least of which is conflating virus with bacteria and toxins— the whopper is that “virus” can’t replicate without a host—incredible. i inhale a “whole virus” and presto, it comes alive and does its dance!? come on! you have a PhD. Also this notion of “virons” and “size variation” is pure unadulterated hooey! that is a cover for the “electron
microscopy” images. which is all they are— the comparison against electrophoresis which is meaningless.
Sorry, unconvincing—all the claims are circular…it is all “in silico” “PCR” genomic sequencing bamboozle—it is a religion—like all religious precepts unprovable
That they are unprovable does not mean they are false. If you fail to see this, then you should study more about logic.
Yes like God, never proven to exist. They may exist but as nobody has isolated a virus and shown it to be the only cause of a particular illness.. Go to the initial paper from Wu et al. They identified 37 pairs of unknown in samples, they then used a computer to draw up a complete sequence.
Again I ask you to get the 37 pairs they claim are from a virus, using the same methodology recreate the exact same complete virus they claim exists. Can you as a virologist do this or anyone you know who is a virologist.
I will pray for you. There is evidence of God all around you, all you have to do is open your eyes and heart to see.
Computers do not just spit out sequence. The key thing you are missing is that the very first thing we do for sequencing is PCR. We use gene specific primers meaning primers specific for the gene of interest and do PCR then send that for sequencing using the same PCR primers. Please look up and educate yourself on Sanger Dye terminating sequencing. Not only that but these sequences are not found in the cells or humans, they are specific for that virus. Sequence becomes protein and those proteins can be identified as well and are virus specific.
I ask again have you input the 37 pairs of the sequence as described by Wu et al into a computer. What does it tell you and if its not the same. Why.
Comouters: do as they are told!
VW - https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-what-volkswagen-did-and-how-they-got-caught-2015-9?op=1
Post Office UK - https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/10/world/europe/uk-itv-mr-bates-vs-post-office.html
I also stand over your right to believe in God, unfortunately I read the Bible since I was 8. So the Jews were alleged to be slave in Egypt. They got their God to kill the first born of the Egyptians. And much more. They still celebrate it today. All Christian religions are based upon Jewish religion. Have a read about mother Theresa in India revered around the world but really just a person bent on torturing people. To understand how people are duped, maybe understand the Milgram experiments.
I can't understand why nobody want to run the 37 pairs of the sequence. The last 4 years is based on it.
Within the next 15 years they will do it again and virologist (Pandora and the others) will stand by and watch and mutter under their breaths. Mumble and grumble about rights been taken away.
When they said in early 2020 we will follow the science, but only science that agrees with out overlords.
Anyway Jennifer have a lovely week.
Regards
interesting, practical viewpoint.
the abrahamic religions were devised by the judaic death cult to bring about a "victory" over those that do not share a genetic quirk, which can be researched easily enough, it predisposes toward certain "diseases" and yet is strangely resistant to other "maladies".
Too few ask who is behind these "vaccines", it is the same group as above mentioned who are also highly advanced in ehtnic targetted bio weaponry as acknowledged by the Chinese circa 1995 when they were seeking bio-weapons that did not harm the "yellow people" as they put it.
The inbred genetic quirk of the "ashkenazi" has, i believe been used to manufacture the bio weapon that is happily chomping through the worlds population at a pretty steady rate, meanwhile we ramble and pontificate on minutae, completely missing the point.
Understanding what drives a death cult is hard to fathom unless one has that trait already, the adoption of a lost, babylonian religion circa 9thC including its aspirations toward world dominance/conquer and the protection afforded by the ritual slaughter of children to a demonic entity figure highly..
Yet when presented with evidence of why theses "people" have been sytematically flung out over a hundred countries over the past few hundred years seems irrelevant to many that have utterly swallowed the BS they have been fed since the started "school" about "how it all is", including all the metaphorical fabrication re middle east circa year dot...
If humanity could perhaps understand that the entity it so earnestly and readily calls "god" should be more accurately described as a "demon" we could all find a way to work ourselves out of this mess..
We live in a world society where numerous millions of children go "missing" every year and are quietly never explained, some meet natural ends, many, many others do not and understanding cause and effect re what happens to these innocents is not discussed and is rapidly ridiculed when broached in what they term "modern educated society"
Re the 37 pairs personally i would begin preparing myself for the unmittigated shit fest that is about to be foisted upon us under the guise "bird flu", i should say attempted shitfest and reserve some "hope".
As an ex professional poultry farmer and lecturer i can tell you with certainty that they have had H5 N1 lined up as disease "x" since definitively 2010 when they gave it a dry run here in the uk and likely as a disease of interest since it was first noticed as being of interest circa early 70`s
Culling humans in large numbers has been in vogue for millenia, modern conectivity and top down rule seems to be attempting to reach new levels of "success" in this field..
We must also too undertake that our belief that "life" is constrained/limited to only biological entities is false and that what we are currently dealing with and soon to be presented with will shatter that illusion
intersting footnote, Ghandi was a rothschild plant aimed to pacify the Indians against a violent uprising which would have evicted those stealing Indias` wealth decades sooner.. strange what you find out these days, like the mother "t" thing, nasty old trout
ROFL
Believe whatever you want. I don't argue with donkeys. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4dQxwvyyxE
viruses exist and God exists too, many things exist you can not see, but that only means your eyesight is corrupt, and not the theory. If you can only follow the logic you would know that many illnesses come from viruses, just ask some pro sports people, how they felt when they caught some nasty virus, some of them had to end a career....or look up arthritis ...... it's all of viral origin. The completely different topic though is vaccines, those are NOT the solutions. never have been.
There's no proof of contagion of a virus. God may exist, but I don't have to believe in him.
The issue arises when a religious leader or world health organisation deems i have to believe......
You can just believe in both. That's your choice
I am asking that the 37 pairs, Wu et al say are from a virus be input in to a computer. Where the computer can make the calculation of the full sequence of sars cov 2. This competed sequence should be exactly the same as Wu et al published work. Where has this been completed by a virologist. Then we can look at contagion, it never been shown in a clinical research study. It's based upon assumption and faith.
Anyway I appreciate your comments, is good to have open and consise dialogue on this important issue.
what you just said is a complete lack of logic: Truth may exist but I do not have to believe in it. Yeah, that is why we are in the problem we are now. Nobody cares about the Truth. And the Truth will set you free and the society as well. Your opinions can form a cult. Everyone is living his/her own cult these days, and you never heard about the tactic: divide et impera.....so you would know your idea about believing whatever you want is not the most intelligent one. you are not free, nor is the society free, that is consequence of loving your lies: i.e. opinions. If your life would depend the next minute on your opinion maybe you would think twice at least before saying , and not be so appreciative of the right to have your opinion but the Truth. Societies fall apart when the Truth becomes irrelevant or whatever!
Long covid has nothing to do what I asked first.
Wu et al published a paper where they say they found 37 pair of a sequence using a computer. They used another computer to draw the 30,000 + full sequence. I am asking that someone with clinical experience and knowledge use the published 37 pairs of the sequence they claimed. Build the full sequence and compare to Wu et al (2020). If it doesn't match, there is an issue. I want the science examined. Where has this been replicated.
A paper published looked at 1 million people and compared them. People who had no covid are claiming they have long covid symptoms. To get long covid, you need to have had covid in the first place. So does long covid exist, establish if covid exists first.
Thanks again for your time and patience
what you just said has 0 logic per se, if you want to win the war, you have to be a fighter for something? what do you fight for? for your opinion? If you are not able to give life for your opinion, than the side that is willing to die for what they do will win. If you have not noticed this is not a little game of opinions but 20 mio people have died. This is life: a batlle between good and evil, life and death in case you do not know where you are :) i will write a post now from those ideas: why are we drifting into dictatorship.....exactly becasue of people who can not fight for the Truth!
Let me repeat what i said earlier.
I am asking that the 37 pairs, Wu et al say are from a virus be input in to a computer. Where the computer can make the calculation of the full sequence of sars cov 2. This competed sequence should be exactly the same as Wu et al published work. Where has this been completed by a virologist. Then we can look at contagion, it never been shown in a clinical research study.
take a look i wrote this for you :) https://open.substack.com/pub/hrabmv/p/how-societies-drift-towards-lack
i have long covid and it does exist.....ignorance is bliss! do you ask this out of curiosity? actually you are very rude person and you would make a terrible MD....so just like i said you are no different to dictators who planned all fo this, you only have 0 power to execute your sick ideas
If the police find a dismembered body they can put it back together and determine who it is. The same is true with a virus.
Thats a great example of 'science ' at work. About 200 years of doctors, scientists and pathologists disecting bodies. They come to a conclusion based upon the evidence available to them with a precentage of error. They know what to expect to a degree certainty what goes and how it goes. Similar to DNA when they do DNA sampling, precentage of acceptable error.
I have conversed with Jennifer in asking for a straight forward reconstruction of the virus as claimed in Wu et al 2020. Using the 37 pairs of a sequence that they claim is in the virus. If science is correct it should be the same. Any errors if found (where the full sequence Wu found is different than the result that who ever preforms the computer modelling) questionsneed to be asked of Wu et al.
This just confirms one thing that their computer model is correct. The other issue is no respiratory virus has ever been shown to be contagious.
Here is my previous discussion with Jennifer.
https://open.substack.com/pub/smithvirologist/p/part-iii-discussion-with-hhs-whistleblower?r=125qke&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=54973586
She is avoiding answering my question. However its interesting that she believes that a pcr test can detect a virus. It appears that 80% of positive tests have no symptoms what so ever.
Therefore its an invalid method of determining if a person has a virus. In that discussion she points to where people who have a positive test have certain lung issues. Maybe its the virus, but was lung damage actually caused by the treatment people received ot treatment withheld during their sickness.
There is no published evidence that sars cov 2 is contagious.
Between 1946 and 1989 the Welcome foundation ran experiments on people. The unit was called the ' common cold unit '.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/stories-48923865
We can't ask David Tyrell of why he never published a paper proving the contagion of the common cold as he passed in 2005
There many papers that show the flu is not contagious.
Milton J. Rosenau, March 1919 - 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/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
I can send on the others if you wish.
But basically at the end of the day there issues with wu et al paper that experts won't question publicly.