With the dawn of a new year, we find ourselves facing the third straight annual “Covid-19” fear propaganda extravaganza. If you thought back at the beginning of 2021 that the emergence of the rushed experimental vaccines would eradicate this “virus,” you now realize you were horribly, horribly wrong and you should probably feel a bit ashamed for being so easily duped. If now, at the beginning of 2022, you believe boosters will be your savior, please slap yourself across the face immediately and come to your senses so it will not be necessary to do so again come January 1st, 2023.
As we reflect back on the past 365 days while we set off to attempt to commit to our New Year’s Resolutions for the next 30 days, we must ask ourselves some very important questions. What new horrors will be unleashed upon the frightened and ignorant public this year? Which college fraternity variant will make itself known to terrify the masses? Will it be Pi, Sigma, Upsilon, Omega? What implausible theory for the creation of this “virus” will spread like wildfire throughout the “Truther” community? How many layers of masks will it take before we pass out from stupidity? What new contradictions, backtracks, and flip-flops will the CDC/WHO be embarrassing themselves with this year…and how many people will continue to fall for this hoax despite the numerous red flags?
If you want to free yourself from this cycle of insanity, it is important to keep some very critical information in mind in order to protect yourself from being swept back in. I have highlighted this information and provided a brief summary along with links to further flesh out what I am saying. My hope is that this will either help you to break the chain this year if you are still on the fence or that you may share this with someone who needs to hear this so that they may do the same. Together, we can end this theater of absurdity and get off this sick cycle carousel once and for all:
1. “SARS-COV-2” has never been purified/isolated directly from a sick human nor proven pathogenic in animal models.
While myself and others may sound like a broken record by continuing to harp on this point, it is absolutely essential and the key to ending this hoax once and for all. Like every “virus” before it, “SARS-COV-2” has never been purified/isolated directly from sick humans. No particles have ever been purified (i.e. freed from contaminants, pollutants, foreign material) by subjecting the human sample to accepted purification methods such as ultracentrifugation, filtration, precipitation, etc. and checked to ensure purity BEFORE being exposed to the unpurified cell culturing process. There are no isolated (i.e. separated from everything else) particles which can be used as a valid independent variable in order to prove pathogenicity.
Cell Culture Soup
What you get with “SARS-COV-2” is unpurified bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) taken from the lungs of one person containing potentially billions of similar and/or identical particles. This sample was sequenced without purification/isolation which means the RNA used to create the genome is unknown and comes from numerous sources. The unpurified sample was added to toxic cell cultures and combined with monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum, antibiotics/antifungals, unknown “nutrients,” and various chemicals/additives.
The Case Against Cell Cultures
Electron Microscope Images
The images you see of the “virus” were taken from this cultured concoction where researchers found particles similar to what they wanted to find after further alterations were done through the processes of fixation, embedding, and staining. The particles shown as “SARS-COV-2” are a representation of the “virus” as, without first purifying and isolating the particles assumed to be the culprit, there can be no claim that the particles are the “virus.” In fact, there are numerous identical particles said to resemble a “coronavirus” which are not considered one due to their location within the body.
This cultured soup is used to attempt to prove pathogenicity by experimentally recreating the same disease in animals which is seen in humans. However, researchers are still looking for a suitable animal model as they have been unable to cause the exact same symptoms of disease when injecting this poison into various animals. Keep in mind, injecting toxic culture goo into an animal is not a natural route of exposure yet this has not stopped these researchers from trying. The original “SARS-COV-2” papers all failed to even attempt animal studies and admitted to not fulfilling this essential evidence required in order to claim a new “virus.” Without this proof of pathogenicity, there is no “virus” despite the claims made.
Lack of “SARS-COV-2” Animal Models
Where is the “SARS-COV-2” Animal Model???
2. PCR tests have never been calibrated and validated against the gold standard of purified/isolated “virus” particles.
Lack of “Virus” Isolates
Two of the main PCR tests used to (mis)diagnose cases of “Covid-19” were both admitted to be deigned without using the gold standard of purified/isolated “virus” to develop the tests.
The Drosten PCR Test:
“We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.”
The CDC Test:
“The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen.”
Without any actual purified/isolated “SARS-COV-2,” the PCR tests currently being used and abused to diagnose one with a non-existent “virus” can not be calibrated and validated properly. This means that any claims of sensitivity and specificity are false. Why does this matter? A tests’ sensitivity is its true positive rate. This refers to a tests accuracy in regards to determining one positive when judged against the gold standard. Specificity is the true negative rate which refers to the accuracy of a test to determine one negative against the gold standard. See the problem yet? Without the gold standard of a purified/isolated “virus,” there can be no claims regarding accuracy for any of these tests.
The lack of a gold standard has been admitted repeatedly. Here are just two brief examples:
“RT-PCR assays in the UK have analytical sensitivity and specificity of greater than 95%, but no single gold standard assay exists.“
“No test gives a 100% accurate result; tests need to be evaluated to determine their sensitivity and specificity, ideally by comparison with a “gold standard.” The lack of such a clear-cut “gold-standard” for Covid-19 testing makes evaluation of test accuracy challenging.”
Not Suitable For Diagnosis
PCR has problems even beyond the lack of the gold standard. These “tests” were never intended for diagnosis. All that the manufacturers are allowed to claim is that the test can find small fragments of RNA assumed to come from a theoretical “SARS-COV-2” genome created by computer algorithms using unpurified BALF. Finding small fragments of RNA is not finding a “virus.”
From the CDC PCR Test:
“Results are for the identification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.”
“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.
• The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection.
• The performance of this test has not been established for screening of blood or blood products for the presence of 2019-nCoV.
• This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
Cycle Threshold (Ct) Values
The PCR Cycle Threshold (Ct) values used to determine a positive/negative result are chosen by the manufacturers of each test, are entirely arbitrary (i.e. random), and vary from test to test and from lab to lab. A person with a Ct value of 36 could be positive on one test while considered negative on another. While these values are used to label one positive or negative, they can not be used to determine how infectious one is, how much “virus” is present, nor the severity of symptoms. This is because these values range from person to person. Someone requiring hospitalization may have a high Ct value (signifying low “viral” load) while someone asymptomatic may have a low Ct value (signifying high “viral” load). Thus, even though the CDC/WHO/FDA claim these values can determine one positive/negative, the results are essentially meaningless beyond this label.
PCR Ct Values: Arbitrary & Meaningless
The Prevalence Conundrum
Another glaring problem for the PCR tests is the issue of disease prevalence. In order for any PCR test result to be considered accurate, disease prevalence (i.e. how many cases are in a specific population) must be known first. This is normally determined clinically based on specific symptoms related to the disease. The problem for “SARS-COV-2” is that there are no specific symptoms related to this disease. Symptoms can range from none whatsoever to overlapping with allergies, the common cold, the flu, and pneumonia. Thus, “SARS-COV-2” can not be determined based on clinical symptoms alone and so the PCR test is used to identify cases in order to figure out disease prevalence. This creates the conundrum: if prevalence is needed to be known first in order to determine PCR accuracy, yet PCR is needed to identify cases to figure out prevalence, how can either measure which relies upon the accuracy of the other be considered valid?
PCR and the Prevalence Problem
3. Antibodies are theoretical, non-specific, and unreliable.
One of the main arguments in favor of vaccination and a measurement used to indirectly claim the existence of “viruses” is the existence of antibodies. It is believed that results from antibody tests are specific to the “virus” the researchers are looking for and that these results are reproducible and have meaning. Nothing could be further from the truth. Antibodies are entirely theoretical. There are at least five different theories attempting to explain how they work. Like “viruses,” proteins assumed to be antibodies have never been properly purified/isolated from a human. Also like “viruses,” the function of these invisible particles has never been observed. Researchers claim various chemical reactions signify the presence of so-called antibodies and then infer meaning from the results.
Non-specificity and Variability
There are numerous problems relating to the lack of purification/isolation of antibodies. For starters, antibodies are not specific. These particles are only supposed to react to a certain “virus” yet they often cross-react with various other unintended targets. While a certain antibody is meant to target protein X, these theoretical particles may instead target protein Y, ignoring X altogether. Related to this is the problem of batch-to-batch variability. Different batches of antibodies which are supposedly the same will produce differing outcomes from the previous batch. Together, this means that the results are unreliable and are certainly non-specific.
Because of the above issues with non-specificity and variability, antibody results are often non-reproducible and irreplicable. This has led to an avalanche of untrustworthy research that is referenced and used in future research by different teams. A crisis in the sciences has resulted as many studies are being built upon false and erroneous results. However, even though this problem has been known for the last decade plus, it has only grown worse with time. There continues to be a lack of standardization and quality control in antibody research while the manufacturers continue to be secretive in the creation of these substances and are not held accountable for defective products.
The Reproducibility Crisis in Antibody Research
No Correlation of Protection
Even if we were to disregard the lack of purification/isolation of antibodies, the issues regarding specificity and variability, and the non-reproducible/irreplicable results, it has been admitted over and over again that there is no known correlation of protection for “SARS-COV-2.” This means that the measurement of antibodies is entirely meaningless as there is no known level for which antibodies would equal protection from disease. Just eliciting antibodies through vaccination is not a measurement of success as there is no meaning behind any of the numbers. Even more problematic is that while some may have a rise in antibodies after vaccination, others may not. The results vary from person to person and over different periods of time.
Antibodies: No Correlation of Protection
All of this is to say that, like the PCR test results, antibody measurements are inaccurate, untrustworthy, and meaningless. Due to a lack of purification/isolation of both the antibodies and the “virus,” there is no gold standard to calibrate and validate the tests against. It is admitted that these tests are even more unreliable than the PCR test, although the argument should be made that they are all equally unreliable.
The true accuracy of tests for COVID-19 is uncertain
“Unfortunately, it’s not clear exactly how accurate any of these tests are. There are several reasons for this:
- We don’t have precise measures of accuracy for these tests — just some commonly quoted figures for false negatives or false positives, such as those reported above. False negative tests provide false reassurance, and could lead to delayed treatment and relaxed restrictions despite being contagious. False positives, which are much less likely, can cause unwarranted anxiety and require people to quarantine unnecessarily.
- How carefully a specimen is collected and stored may affect accuracy.
- Because these tests are available by EUA, the usual rigorous testing and vetting has not yet happened, and accuracy results have not been widely published.
- A large and growing number of laboratories and companies offer these tests, so accuracy may vary.
- All of these tests are new because the virus is new. Without a long track record, assessments of accuracy can only be approximate.
- We don’t have a definitive “gold standard” test with which to compare them.”
The above section is from a Harvard article from January 2021 yet it still applies today. The “Covid-19” tests are entirely inaccurate until proven otherwise.
FDA and the CDC Destroy Antibody Testing and Immunity
4. Vaccinations for a non-existent “virus” with unproven and rushed experimental mRNA injections is unnecessary, dangerous, and deadly.
When you take into account the lack of purification/isolation of “SARS-COV-2” as well as antibodies, the lack of the gold standard to calibrate and validate PCR and antibody tests, and the ensuing inaccuracy and meaninglessness of the tests used to label one positive, it should be a no-brainer to avoid the rushed, experimental mRNA injections based upon fraudulent information/methods. The fact that these mRNA injections have been shown to have negative effects in trials should also make anyone reconsider taking the toxic plunge. Everything relating to the use of mRNA vaccine relies on theories of how lab-created synthetic particles will work upon injection into the body. None of what is claimed, such as the mRNA creating a spike protein for the antibodies to attack, is observable. The vaccine requires that the theoretical “SARS-COV-2” exists so that the computer-generated sequence used to create the synthetic mRNA vaccine has relevance in order to promote the theoretical creation of the spike protein within the body which needs to be attacked by the theoretical antibodies. Again, none of this is observable.
The Uncharted Dangers of mRNA Vaccines
Safe and Effective?
Previous experiments with nucleoside analogues have shown toxic effects on animals and humans involved in different trials such as myopathy (caused by mitochondrial toxicity), lactic acidosis, pancreatitis, lipodystrophy, liver steatosis, nerve damage, and death. mRNA vaccines have been shown to cause liver toxicity and adverse inflammatory responses as well. The ingredients used in the creation of these vaccines are known toxins with proven severe reactions. Warning labels have already been added for anaphylaxis, blood clots, and myocarditis. Guillain-barre syndrome has become associated with the use of these experimental injections. The long-term consequences of their use is unknown as is the data used to decide safety and efficacy. In fact, the FDA seeks to delay for 75+ years full production of Pfizer’s pre-licensure safety data while the CDC continues to hide the deidentified post-licensure safety data for the “Covid-19” vaccines in the CDC’s v-safe system as detailed in this article:
If these vaccines are safe and effective, why the secrecy? Why are vaccine makers immune from liability? Vaccination has a long history of being dangerous and ineffective. It should be obvious that they should be avoided at all costs.
Ring in the New Year Fear Free
The “SARS-COV-2” hoax should have ended before it ever began if the scientific community had been honest about the lack of a purified/isolated “virus.” Without this evidence, there can be no genome. Without the genome, there can be no PCR test. Without the PCR test, there can be no cases. Without the cases, there can be no lockdowns, quarantines, social distancing, masks, and restrictions. Without these measures, there will be no reminder of fear and no need for vaccines. Without this evidence, there can be no mandates and thus no control.
There is no reason to give up any of our freedoms for a false sense of security. There was never any threat from any “virus.” The only threat is a manufactured one created around the inaccurate results of what is the equivalent of a DNA Xerox machine never intended as an instrument of diagnosis. This has always been a Testing Pandemic and never a “viral” one. It’s time to stop believing the proganda fed to us by proven criminal organizations and to stand united together to say “We will not be fooled any longer.” Let’s make a New Year’s Resolution to finally pull back the curtain on this charade and hold the monsters behind it accountable so that we can finally heal together and move forward. Divided we fall but together we will prevail.
Thank you Misto for all of the insights, framing what these psuedo scientists have been doing, providing a baseline for what should be done and providing sources.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are very welcome! There is nothing I love more than using their own sources against them. 😉
So why are they doing it?
Money? Digital ID? Collapsing the economy because dollar is crashing? Depopulation because oil is running out? All of these?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Most likely all of the above. Based on their actions and various statements, it seems greater control is the ultimate goal. There is a lot chatter of a reset of some kind as well.
So who do we hold accountable? who will bring “them” to justice? How do we stop this from ever happening again? How can the “average earther” fight back? … thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only way they will be held accountable is if enough people wake up from the lies and discover the truth. Only when there is enough anger and outrage from the majority will those in charge be forced to listen. They want us divided and distracted so we can not come to an informed consensus to demand justice. The best thing we can do is continue to push back against the lies by educating others to the fraud that has been perpetrated on us for centuries. More seem to be understanding this lie the longer the “pandemic” goes on. There is still hope
Vašemu výkladu věřím. Jen by mě zajímalo, jak člověk dostane to co nazývají chřipkou. Lidé mají stejné příznaky. Z čeho ta toxicita vzniká? To samé by mě zajímalo, z čeho je to co nazývají coronavirus. Ti lidé musí mít to samé, když téměř všichni ztratí čich. Má to souvislost třeba s nějakým zářením? Jinak vůbec nic nenapadám, jen mě to zajímá. Omlouvám se, pokud to někde je na Vašem webu napsáno a já to přehlédl. Moc děkuji za odpověď, či nějaké nasměrování. Díky za Vaši práci.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi, thanks for the comment! I’m going to repost your response in English and provide an answer in English with it translated in Czech. Hopefully this will work:
“Nice day, I believe in your interpretation. I just wonder how you get what they call the flu. People have the same symptoms. What does the toxicity come from? The same thing I wonder is what they call a coronavirus. These people have to have the same thing when almost everyone loses their sense of smell. Does it have to do with any radiation, for example? Otherwise, I can’t think of anything at all, I’m just interested. I’m sorry if it is written somewhere on your website and I missed it. Thank you very much for the answer or some guidance. Thanks for your work.”
My response in English:
The symptoms of the flu, as you pointed out, are exactly the same as “Covid.” The toxification leading to these symptoms can come from many places. It is usually not just one cause and is an accumulation of toxins. In my opinion, the biggest factor in any respiratory disease such as the flu. Pneumonia, “Covid,” etc., is air pollution. This has increased every year and the areas hit hardest with “Covid” are heavily polluted such as China, Italy, New York, India, etc. They also supposedly found the same “SARS-COV-2” RNA sequence in air pollution and throughout the environment. Harmful PM2.5 nanoparticles in the air from cars, planes, and factories are known to cause every symptom associated with both the flu and “Covid.”
Air pollution, while a major factor, is not the only cause. Other causes include pesticides on food, fluoridated/chlorinated water, toxic pharmaceuticals/vaccines, recreational drugs and alcohol, smoking, lack of sleep and exercise, increased stress, environmental radiation, cleaning supplies/chemicals, etc. Mostly it is a combination of many of these and the accumulation of toxins in the body determines the severity of the symptoms.
As for loss of smell, this is a known symptom that has been around for centuries. It is not new or specific to “Covid.” It is known as anosmia and it has been associated with allergies, the common cold, and the flu. If I had to make an educated guess, damage to the olfactory senses from air pollution is a major factor in this symptom.
My response in Czech:
Příznaky chřipky, jak jste zdůraznil, jsou úplně stejné jako u „Covidu“. Toxifikace vedoucí k těmto příznakům může pocházet z mnoha míst. Obvykle to není jen jedna příčina a je to nahromadění toxinů. Podle mě je největším faktorem každé respirační onemocnění jako je chřipka. Pneumonie, “Covid” atd., je znečištění ovzduší. To se každým rokem zvyšuje a oblasti nejvíce zasažené „Covidem“ jsou silně znečištěné, jako je Čína, Itálie, New York, Indie atd. Také údajně našli stejnou sekvenci RNA „SARS-COV-2“ ve znečištění ovzduší a v celém prostředí. Je známo, že škodlivé nanočástice PM2,5 ve vzduchu z aut, letadel a továren způsobují každý symptom spojený s chřipkou i “Covidem”.
Znečištění ovzduší, i když je hlavním faktorem, není jedinou příčinou. Mezi další příčiny patří pesticidy na potravinách, fluoridovaná/chlorovaná voda, toxická léčiva/vakcíny, rekreační drogy a alkohol, kouření, nedostatek spánku a pohybu, zvýšený stres, radiace z prostředí, čisticí prostředky/chemikálie atd. Většinou jde o kombinaci mnoha Závažnost příznaků určuje akumulace toxinů v těle.
Pokud jde o ztrátu čichu, jedná se o známý příznak, který existuje již po staletí. Není to nic nového ani specifického pro „Covid“. Je známá jako anosmie a je spojována s alergiemi, nachlazením a chřipkou. Pokud bych měl kvalifikovaně odhadnout, hlavním faktorem tohoto příznaku je poškození čichových smyslů znečištěným ovzduším.
I hope this translated correctly! If not, blame Google. 😉
Děkuji za Vaší odpověď. Nechci Vám ,,spamovat” na stránkách, proto píši zde. Ještě bych měl pár dotazů, ale chápu, že nemůžete odpovídat jen mně. Přesto se zeptám. Nemá to celé s koronavirem spojitost i s 5G sítí? Jak je možné, že se třeba nakazí jen rodiče a třeba ne dítě, i když jsou pořád spolu a jí a pijí stejné věci? Je to proto, že dětský organismus není životem ještě tak zatížený? A dále bych se zeptal na papilloma virus…je to shluk jen nějakých toxických částic? Protože na základě něčeho musí gynekologové pacientky posílat na operace děložního čípku. Nám se třeba papilloma virus podařilo zlikvidovat přístrojem zvaným Zapper a doktor nechápal, jak se to stalo a říkal, že to ještě neviděl. Předem děkuji
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Thank you for your reply. I don’t want to “spam” you on the site, that’s why I’m writing here. I would still have a few questions, but I understand that you can’t just answer me. Still, I’ll ask. Isn’t the whole coronavirus connection with the 5G network? How is it possible that only the parents get infected and maybe not the child, even though they are still together and eat and drink the same things? Is it because the child’s organism is not yet so burdened by life? And next I would ask about papilloma virus… is it just a cluster of some toxic particles? Because on the basis of something, gynecologists have to send patients for cervical surgery. For example, we managed to eliminate the papilloma virus with a device called Zapper, and the doctor did not understand how it happened and said that he had not seen it yet. Thank you in advance.”
My response in English:
The 5G connection is theoretical at this point. While EMF radiation plays a part in toxification and illness, it has never been shown to be a main or singular cause of the symptoms associated with “Covid.”
Older adults have had more accumulated exposure to toxins both environmental and emotional. Children may go through a similar detox process as an adult but it tends to be more mild.
As for HPV, the “virus” itself has never been proven to exist nor cause disease. It is a scam to push cervical exams and toxic vaccines. I did quite a few posts about HPV on Facebook but I have not uploaded them here yet. Hopefully I will in the near future. If you are on FB, this is the link to my posts:
My response in Czech:
Připojení 5G je v tomto bodě teoretické. I když EMP záření hraje roli v nemoci, nikdy nebylo prokázáno, že je hlavní nebo jedinou příčinou.
Starší dospělí byli více vystaveni toxinům, jak environmentálním, tak emocionálním. Děti mohou projít podobným detoxikačním procesem jako dospělí, ale bývá mírnější.
Pokud jde o HPV, u samotného „viru“ nebylo nikdy prokázáno, že existuje ani nezpůsobuje onemocnění. Je to podvod s cílem podstrčit vyšetření děložního čípku a toxické vakcíny. Napsal jsem na Facebook několik příspěvků o HPV, ale ještě jsem je sem nenahrál. Doufám, že v blízké budoucnosti budu. Pokud jste na FB, toto je odkaz na mé příspěvky:
I’m sorry, I do not know how to switch your name from my end. I believe you would have to do so under your account.
Je mi líto, nevím, jak změnit vaše jméno z mého konce. Věřím, že byste tak museli učinit pod svým účtem.
Thank you for this. The idea that viruses don’t actually exist is new to me, but I am open-minded and will continue to research and learn more. I was leery of the COVID vaccine (actually leery of all vaccines, but the covid one even more so) and did not get it for myself or my daughter, although my mother eventually gave in and got vaccinated. Three weeks after she got her second shot and should have been at peak “immunity”, we all three came down with “Covid”. I began to seriously question the whole corona virus thing and search for answers. I found this site: https://swprs.org/covid19-facts/ ( https://swprs.org/ ) which seems much saner and more reliable than the news. Your blog offers much fascinating information, even in the comments. I will continue to read your other posts. Thank you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the kind words and support! I am happy if this information helps in any way. It has been a long journey for myself uncovering this scam but it has been rewarding letting go of the fear and anxiety. My hope is that this information can do the same for you. 🙂
Great stuff, Mike. I’m always happy to add another to the Good List!
Along with Lanka, Cowan, Bailey, Kaufman, Christine Massey, SpaceBusters, Unite4truth(.com). Do you know about the Big Debate forming? Chris Massey and Dr. Kaufman have been in talks with Steve Kirsch and others.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the kind words and support! I actually just did a post about the debate today.
Sadly, it seems Steve lost his nerve. That would have been an interesting debate for sure.
Ironically enough, I work as laboratory technician at my country’s national laboratory institution, and all I do there is detecting SARS cov-2 from human samples using the RT-PCR test. And it would be overwhelmingly hard for me to express the deep feeling of guilt and disingenuousness that I have to bear everytime I get to work. And guess what it was only a matter of few period of times for me to realize the whole melodrama like propaganda that has been promulgated since the first day. But to my misfortune, I have to keep my pathetic mouse shut be good as quiet thanks to the unsuspecting workmates and neighbors’ condescending reactions towards my honest admission about the pseudoscientific nature of the pandemic. So Mike I would do anything to make that many-people-waking-up-to-the-illusion into reality but I am afraid it would seem to take one’s lifetime to make that happen. I just want to be realistic, nothing more..huge thanks
I want to say thank you so very much for your hard work compiling all of this evidence in an easy to read but yet highly detailed and thorough literature review. It sticks to the truisms of flawed scientific methodology and never gets sucked into the same conspiratorial assumptions that the pseudoscience of virology is guilty of . It has been an irreplaceable goldmine of information for me as I have awoken to the Fraud of Germ Theory.
I wanted to bring to your attention a couple of papers that I heavily researched that you may not be aware of? In 2013 Jonathan Van Tam, The sometime Chief Medical Officer of the UK government conducted the largest modern Human trial on Influenza A found here : https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1008704
He took 52 patients and bathed their nose and throats with “purified Virus”…. only 42 tested positive after the challenge a handful showed mild (non indicative) symptoms. Interestingly though this study put these “infected” people in close quarters with 75 people to try and get them to “transmit” the virus under controlled conditions (half with masks, half “control”(like that was going to make a difference )). The interesting thing is that not only did none of them got sick.(obviously).. but not a single person even tested PCR positive out of the 75… a complete and conclusive homerun to proving germ theory is junk…. I went onto twitter and started gaining massive traction in early 2021 pointing this out… 1000s of retweets in a couple of weeks then BANG a permanent ban for 18 months.
I have just been allowed back onto to Twitter and started to repost this stuff and immediately got set upon by the pharmaceutical trolls. The most amazing thing happened. I started asking, in my usual manner for proof that Viruses cause disease and for the first time in ages they all come back linking me to this: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01780-9#Fig4
A new study conducted in 2022 by the one and only Mr. Van Tam this time a human exposure trial to COVID! And this time he removes the entire part where he tries to prove transmission🤣😂🤦. The study makes for pretty entertaining reading in its cowboy approach and results. They give 10 poor participants Remdisivir (cause Renal failure) prior to virus challenge. Out of 34 people they give a “purified virus” which they claimed has killed millions only 18 tested PCR positive, 16 with trace symptoms (they had to admit 0 symptoms needed to be treated) of slight headache, runny nose etc.. there was not a control group in sight and 0 distinction between trace symptoms with and without Remdisivir.
I found it interesting that they felt the need to put this paper out. It is obviously pseudoscience junk to any critical eye, but I would like to think that with your help, we are putting pressure on these charlatans and snake oil salesmen. All power to you. Love from UK , Jamie
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Jamie! Thanks for the kind words and support! I greatly appreciate it. 🙂
I did not know about Van Tam’s influenza study from 2013. I will definitely give that a read and may do an article on that as it sounds great. Thanks for sharing!
I did know about his awful “SARS-COV-2” challenge trail. It was pretty pathetic. I wrote about it here:
It amazes me that anyone took that study seriously! 🤣