Blindsided by Rabies with Michael Wallach on the Skeptico Podcast
A few weeks ago, I was invited by Michael Wallach, the director of the amazing docu-series The Viral Delusion, to join him as a guest on the Skeptico podcast. It was an interesting experience to say the least. We were under the impression that the conversation would be focused on the gain of function/lab leak theories as well as HIV and we had prepared ourselves to discuss these topics. However, the conversation instead took a detour when the host, Alex Tsakiris, changed the focus to rabies instead, an area he felt was left unexplained by those of us stating that “viruses” do not exist. He presented us with a graph showing statistics of rabies cases declining with the use of vaccines. Unfortunately, at the time that we were interviewed, Alex was unable to provide us with a source for the information that he shared with us. Neither Michael nor I had ever seen this graph before, however it really wasn’t the issue as vaccine statistics do not prove a “viral” cause.
Unfortunately, the rabies graph became the bulk of our time on the show. Michael Wallach did an excellent job explaining the problems with the lack of evidence behind the rabies “virus” as well as the fraud of Louis Pasteur. I wanted to chime in more to help out (not that Michael needed me to) but sadly Alex was not really interested in what I had to say about the subject. You can view our conversation with Alex on the Skeptico podcast here:
Michael Wallach, Rabies, Damn Rabies |561|
As I was unable to speak much on the topic with Alex, I want to present some information here that may help to answer his questions as to why rabies cases appeared to decline as the vaccine was introduced. However, before addressing the graph, the first thing that needs to be understood is that at no time has a rabies “virus” ever been properly purified and isolated directly from the fluids of any animal nor any human and then proven pathogenic by adherence to the scientific method. In fact, as he performed his experiments in the 1870’s and 1880’s, Louis Pasteur provided no theoretical basis for the vaccination of rabies as he admitted that he had failed to isolate the microbe that was presumed responsible for the disease. He also massaged and manipulated his data in order to justify his claims as to the success of rabies vaccination. Pasteur was a fraud who was more concerned with fame and prestige rather than performing valid scientific research. I wrote about his unethical practices involved with the early rabies research as well as how the rabies vaccines actually produced the severe neurological symptoms often associated with the disease here.
Later attempts to propagate the “virus” in the 1950’s, which were claimed to be successful, were done in hamster brain and kidney cultures. Interestingly, it was noted that no cytopathogenic changes, the very criteria used by virologists to claim ‘viruses” are present within these cultures, occured whatsoever.
Even by the CPE standards used by virologists as a measure for the successful isolation of a “virus,” they had failed to “isolate” rabies in their cultured samples. As no rabies “virus” has ever been scientifically proven to cause the disease, there is no basis to claim that the symptoms associated with rabies are caused by a “virus.” Still, in spite of being given this information, Alex continued to focus on his graph as if the effect credited to the vaccine was somehow proof of a “viral” cause. However, one can not look to an effect in order to claim a cause. This is a logical fallacy known as affirming the consequent. It is often stated like this:
In other words, if rabies is caused by a “virus,” the vaccine will lower cases. The cases declined with vaccine use, therefore rabies is caused by a “virus.” Obviously, this is not a logical statement as there are many variables and factors unaccounted for that could lead to the appearance of a vaccine having a positive effect on rabies cases. It should also not need to be stated that just because a vaccine appeared to work does not mean that the cause of rabies was a “virus.” A rabies “virus” must be scientifically proven to exist first in order to be tested for as the cause of the symptoms of disease associated with it. This has never been done.
We therefore must ask ourselves a very important question:
- Did the rabies vaccines really cause rabies cases to fall or are there other potential reasons for the apparent decline?
Let’s try to answer this by looking at the graph Alex provided on the air. Fortunately, I was able to find the source for the image. It came from the CDC’s own data from the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in July 2019. The study was titled Vital Signs: Trends in Human Rabies Deaths and Exposures — United States, 1938–2018.
What we can find out is that rabies cases were exceedingly rare over the entire graph period, with only 588 cases of human rabies reported in the United States from 1938 to 2018. In fact, there was a sharp decline in rabies cases a few years prior to the mass vaccination of dogs in 1947, which is often the case when looking at the decline in disease before the introduction of vaccination. Of course, the vaccine is given the credit even though the cases were well in decline beforehand.
So what could have caused this sharp drop before and after vaccine introduction? If you have looked into the decrease in diseases claimed to have been caused by other “viruses,” it is easy to spot a certain trend. Often times, the symptoms of disease claimed to be declining due to vaccination are reclassified either as a new or related disease caused by a new or related “virus.” Smallpox was rebranded as chicken and/or monkeypox, polio became acute flaccid myelitis, syphilis morphed into AIDS, influenza transformed into “Covid,” etc. etc. etc. This trend of rebranding and relabelling the same symptoms of disease as either new diseases or similar ones can easily be seen with rabies and the rabies-related “lyssaviruses.” While the rabies “virus” is considered a “lyssavirus,” there are numerous other “viruses” under this same heading that are considered “rabies-like viruses” that do not cause rabies per se but instead “rabies-like” disease:
Rabies and Rabies-Related Lyssaviruses
“Closely related lyssaviruses circulate among bats in the Eastern Hemisphere, and can cause an illness identical to rabies. Rabies vaccines and post-exposure prophylaxis can provide some protection against some of these viruses, but not others. Rabies-related lyssaviruses can be found even in countries classified as rabies-free.”
“Information about rabies-related lyssaviruses is currently limited to a small number of case reports and a few reports of experimental inoculation; however, the illness
appears indistinguishable from rabies. Bats may either have mild or no clinical signs and survive the infection, or develop severe neurological signs and die.”
According to the CDC, these rabies-related “viruses” include:
- Lagos bat
- Mokola “virus”
- Duvenhage “virus”
- European bat “virus” 1 & 2
- Australian bat “virus”
This is a nice convenient scapegoat which allows a country to declare itself rabies-free even though the same symptoms of disease still persist. For example, in Austraila you will find disclaimers such as this:
According to Austrailia, they are rabies-free even though the same symptoms of disease persist within the country. These cases are blamed on the Australian bat “virus” which is claimed to cause a “rabies-like” disease. Quite convenient, right? However, what if the classification system for these “lyssaviruses” were to change? Would a country that is considered rabies-free lose its illustrious status?
Lyssaviruses and rabies: current conundrums, concerns, contradictions and controversies
“With increasing ICTV debate toward unification of virus taxonomy based on genetic distances, in the near future there may be a re-classification attempt, in which all phylogroup I viruses are segregated into one species (for example, Rabies lyssavirus?) and all phylogroup II viruses are segregated into another. Of course, such re-classification would miss important characteristics used for species demarcation at present and may have potential socio-economic or bio-political consequences for certain areas. For example, some places where RABV is not thought to circulate, such as in Australia or Western Europe (but where other lyssaviruses are present among bats), might lose their self-defined “rabies-free” status, on the basis of viral taxonomic re-organization, creating greater confusion, with potential public health, veterinary, or economic repercussions, if suddenly recast into the same disease status as Africa, Asia and the New World. Arguably, the term “rabies” appears to garner greater weight and seriousness than the less familiar designation “bat lyssavirus”.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325067/
The loose definitions allow countries such as Austrailia to claim rabies-free status even though the disease still persists there. If the definition and/or classification changes, so to will their status. This is similar to how America is allowed to claim it has been polio-free since 1979 while there are cases every year of acute flaccid myelitis and other polio-like diseases which present with the same sets of symptoms. We could easily relabel those polio-like diseases as polio and lose the polio-free designation.
While the same set of rabies symptoms can be blamed on the closely related “lyssaviruses,” they can also be blamed on unrelated “viruses” and conditions that are said to be caused by different “viruses,” bacteria, genetic abnormalities, and even poisons.. For instance, animals can be diagnosed with distemper instead of rabies. These two diseases have often been confused for one another as the symptoms are indistinguishable:
Raccoons – distemper and rabies
“Canine distemper in raccoons starts slowly, with respiratory infections then they develop pneumonia. In the final stage of the disease, the raccoon may begin to wander aimlessly in a circle with bizarre behaviour as a result of brain damage. Many of these symptoms are similar to rabies – which can only be determined by laboratory testing.”
https://www.delta-optimist.com/archive/blog-raccoons-distemper-and-rabies-3068619
What is canine distemper virus in dogs?
“CDV is a highly contagious paramyxovirus that affects dogs and wildlife including raccoons, skunks, grey foxes, and ferrets. This virus is closely related to the human measles virus, and can lead to respiratory, gastrointestinal (GI), and central nervous system (CNS) problems. CDV is often confused with other infectious diseases, including rabies, because the organ systems affected and clinical signs are similar.”
Canine Distemper: Ensure Your Dog is Protected
There are many other diseases such as encephalitis and different neurological disorders which are also said to mimic rabies in animals. Even poisoning is stated to mimic the severe stages of the disease:
Diseases that can look like Rabies
“Encephalitis is one condition that can look somewhat like the early stages of rabies. In this condition, with is immune based in most dog breeds of dogs, the dog’s own immune system begins to attack the brain. The result is a dog that may be confused, appear to stagger and bump into things, or even a dog that seems very disoriented and lost even in familiar settings. The dog may also have temperament changes and may snap at owners or become very agitated when they have previously been calm and friendly.”
“Canine distemper is another disease that may be mistaken for rabies since the symptoms are so close to being the same. Even wild animals such as raccoons, foxes and coyotes can have distemper that can even further confuse the issue. Since it is still a highly contagious disease it is essential to get your dog to the vet if he or she has had any contact with wild animals or other dogs that seem to be disoriented, have a discharge from the eyes or nose, paralysis and stumbling types of movements. Typically the wild animal will be non-threatened by human presence, which in itself is a sign of abnormal behavior. It is important to realize that distemper, unlike rabies, cannot be passed from an animal to a human. However it is important to stay away from any animal that appears to have any symptoms similar to rabies or distemper.”
“Other neurological conditions, some which are fatal and contagious and some that are strictly a result of a genetic or inherited condition can mimic the early signs of rabies. In rare cases animals that are poisoned and those with neurological conditions can exhibit the same signs as advanced stages of rabies including paralysis, drooling, sensitively to light and sound, dramatic changes in behavior and even refusal to eat or drink.”
https://terrificpets.com/articles/102287565.asp
As can be seen from the above three sources, canine distemper and other diseases such as encephalitis can be confused with rabies due to the identical nature of the symptoms. These diseases still persist within dogs and other animals while rabies, or at least “dog rabies,” has been said to have been eliminated from the US and other countries. In other words, the rabies label is no longer applied upon diagnosis even though the same symptoms of disease circulate in animals within the country.
This merry-go-round among the same symptoms of disease does not stop with animals either. There are many conditions in humans that also mimic rabies. These diseases are outlined in this final source:
Beware: there are other diseases that can mimic rabies:
- Diseases that can mimic encephalitic rabies:
- viral encephalitis (i.e. Japanese, eastern equine, West Nile)
- delirium tremens
- acute substance intoxication (i.e. cocaine, amphetamines)
- acute psychoses
- bacterial meningitis
- cerebral malaria
- post-rabies vaccination encephalopathy
- bite of an elapid snake (i.e., cobra)
- tetanus
- Diseases that can mimic paralytic rabies:
- polio
- Guillain–Barré syndrome
- botulism
- diphtheria
- bite of an elapid snake (i.e., cobra)
Rabies
In Summary:
- Louis Pasteur admitted to not isolating the agent presumed to cause rabies
- In the 1950’s, attempts to isolate the “virus” in cultures of hamster brains and kidneys were deemed successful despite the lack of observing any cytopathogenic effect (CPE)
- Many “viruses” that are said to be eliminated or controlled through vaccination were rebranded and relabelled as either similar diseases caused by related “viruses” or new diseases caused by new “viruses”
- Regarding rabies, closely related “lyssaviruses” circulate among bats in the Eastern Hemisphere and can cause an illness identical to rabies
- Rabies-related “lyssaviruses” can be found even in countries classified as rabies-free
- The illness associated with these rabies-related “lyssaviruses” appears indistinguishable from rabies
- Some places where rabies is not thought to circulate, such as in Australia or Western Europe (but where other “lyssaviruses” are present among bats), might lose their self-defined “rabies-free” status, on the basis of “viral” taxonomic re-organization,
- This would create greater confusion, with potential public health, veterinary, or economic repercussions, if they were suddenly recast into the same disease status as Africa, Asia and the New World
- The term “rabies” appears to garner greater weight and seriousness than the less familiar designation “bat lyssavirus”
- Canine distemper is a rabies-like illness in animals
- In raccoons, it starts slowly, with respiratory infections then they develop pneumonia
- In the final stage of the disease, the raccoon may begin to wander aimlessly in a circle with bizarre behaviour as a result of brain damage
- Many of these symptoms are similar to rabies – which can only be determined by laboratory testing
- Canine distemper is often confused with other infectious diseases, including rabies, because the organ systems affected and clinical signs are similar
- It is mistaken for rabies since the symptoms are so close to being the same
- Even wild animals such as raccoons, foxes and coyotes can have distemper that can even further confuse the issue
- Encephalitis is another condition that can look somewhat like the early stages of rabies
- The result of this brain swelling is a dog that may be confused, appear to stagger and bump into things, or even seems very disoriented and lost even in familiar settings
- Other neurological conditions, some which are fatal and contagious and some that are strictly a result of a genetic or inherited condition can mimic the early signs of rabies
- In rare cases animals that are poisoned and those with neurological conditions can exhibit the same signs as advanced stages of rabies including paralysis, drooling, sensitively to light and sound, dramatic changes in behavior and even refusal to eat or drink
- In humans, there are many diseases which mimic rabies:
- Diseases that can mimic encephalitic rabies:
- “viral” encephalitis (i.e. Japanese, eastern equine, West Nile)
- delirium tremens
- acute substance intoxication (i.e. cocaine, amphetamines)
- acute psychoses
- bacterial meningitis
- cerebral malaria
- post-rabies vaccination encephalopathy
- bite of an elapid snake (i.e., cobra)
- tetanus
- Diseases that can mimic paralytic rabies:
- polio
- Guillain–Barré syndrome
- botulism
- diphtheria
- bite of an elapid snake (i.e., cobra)
- Diseases that can mimic encephalitic rabies:
For some reason, people seem to think rabies is a “gotcha” for those of us claiming that “viruses” do not exist. This disease is thrown out as proof that vaccines are effective and that because of this, the “virus” must therefore exist. However, a big problem for anyone championing rabies as proof for the existence of “viruses” continues to be the lack of any purified and isolated “virus” particles coming directly from the fluids of a rabid host. Louis Pasteur openly admitted to failing to meet this burden of proof even though he subjected animals and humans to experimental injections. Attempts by researchers in the 1950’s to propagate the “virus” in tissue and cell cultures did not produce the characteristic cytopathogenic effect said to be necessary in order to determine if a “virus” is present in a culture. Thus, there is no scientific proof for the existence of the rabies “virus,” even by virology’s own standards.
As the rabies “virus” can not be shown to exist, any data relating to a decrease in cases due to a vaccine which is then used as proof for the existence of a rabies “virus” is entirely irrelevant. There are many reasons to doubt case statistics as these can be easily manipulated and massaged in order to create whatever narrative is desired. It can be seen that the same symptoms associated with rabies still exist today as there are many other diseases either said to be caused by rabies-related “viruses” or completely unrelated “viruses” that share the exact same symptoms associated with rabies. These diseases are more commonly diagnosed in areas where rabies is said not to be circulating. It is very apparent that virology loves to rebrand and relabel the same symptoms of disease as multiple “new and different” diseases in order to create the perception that the treatments work. This is why places like Austrailia get to claim to be “rabies-free” even though a rabies-like disease said to be caused by a rabies-like “virus” still exists there. This lowers the cases as the older diseases are claimed to be either eradicated and/or under control due to “successful” vaccination campaigns and thus they are not looked for as a diagnosis. There is no way that these statistics can be trusted when the definitions and labels of what is or is not rabies seemingly changes at will.
In any case, the rabies statistics are a moot point. Until someone can provide proof of the purification and isolation of the particles assumed to be rabies directly from the fluids of a rabid host which were proven pathogenic in a natural way, these case numbers are utterly meaningless. The conversation with Alex on the Skeptico podcast should have never even reached vaccination statistics unless he provided a paper showing the evidence for the existence of a rabies “virus” first. Unfortunately, while Michael did an admirable job defending our position, we were not prepared for the graph and did not get the chance to look over the data and present our counter-argument. Hopefully we can get the chance to go on again and discuss the issue in further detail in the future. However, if not, this response will have to suffice.
100 Responses
reante
You guys got victimized because you come from a (‘luddite’) position of weakness that will only ever exist at the margins.
The position of strength fights (industrial) fire with fire: ‘viruses’are obviously just exosomes, which are subcellular disease communication bodies. When a ‘rabid’ dog bites a person, it has high concentrations of ‘rabid’ exosomes in its saliva because licking (itself mostly) is a powerful way of transmitting the communication of ‘rabies,’ so that a more-highly coordinated healing can take place in the trillion-fold eukaryotic cellular culture that we call ‘dog.’
When ‘rabid’ ‘dog’ bites ‘human,’ and ‘human’ be similarly weak due to shared chronic destitution of the local Terrain — thanks to civilization — injected exosomes plus the intensely shared psychospiritual encounter (fear-anger bonding) between two closely co-evolved species under the right circumstances may result in a similar symptomology in the ‘human.’ Tipping points exist.
We’re talking about a linkage system here, with the exosomes being the brake fluid in the line running between the master and slave (cylinders). You can’t get something from nothing. AND viruses do not exist. 🙂
You ‘luddites’ get victimized because you reject truths that scare you.
Rabies ‘vaccines’ are cultured ‘rabies’ exosomes injected into people such that their intelligent bodies are forced to associate that exosomal class with trauma, due to the adjuvants that accompany the cultured exosomes they call “attenuated virus.” These are cultured exosomes with lipid membranes soaked in fat-soluble poisons… This forced association causes the intelligent body to suppress future production of these exosomes, which amounts to the allopathic culture’s standard operating procedure of future symptom-suppression (future healing suppression).
And what IS a poison-soaked exosome? Well it’s what they call a virus of course. A Trojan horse. Vaccines are trojan horses.
This is fighting fire with fire.
Don’t think we didn’t notice the host, here, calling you guys flat earthers, and more than once. I told you this was coming. And whether I played the role of human polymerase in catalyzing it or not is irrelevant because in the internet age skeletons do not stay in the closet like they did in olden days. Tom and Andy are not going to be happy with being publicly called ‘flat-earthers’ of the Terrain while having actual flat-earthers in their Club.
Tom and Andy and all you all in The Club are ‘flat-earthing’ the Terrain out of self-interest in exactly the same way as the luddites only selfishly opposed industrialism when civilization suddenly was working against them instead of for them. They wanted their nice, cushy little established, agrarian OT Capitalist lives back. Sounds a lot like today’s ‘resistance’ movement now doesn’t it?
The Terrain is anti-civilization, obviously, because civilization is anti-Terrain and pro-terraforming.
If you guys want to be bigshots in the national socialist engineered reformation coming our way (to be led by Tulsi Gabbard) then dropping the flat-earth bullshit, and dropping the anti-exosomal (‘flat-earthing’) of the Terrain is the way forward, because exosomes are the missing link in the linkage. Zach Bush is way better positioned than you guys.
BTW, if it seems like I’m trying to help you guys I’m not. I’m just on a hill glassing the valley, watching a herd of flatlanders, as a hobby I guess. Helping you in this context would be hurting you. Any advice I’d give would just be to walk away.
Mike Stone
We were not victimized in the slightest. As I said, Michael did a great job defending the position. It was definitely unfair of Alex to present us a graph with no source/context and ask us to explain it away. That seemed like a set-up. But as I said, it is irrelevant as there is no proof of purified/isolated rabies “virus.”
“Rabies ‘vaccines’ are cultured ‘rabies’ exosomes injected into people such that their intelligent bodies are forced to associate that exosomal class with trauma, due to the adjuvants that accompany the cultured exosomes they call “attenuated virus.”
Yeah, you literally have zero evidence for any of this. Again, great story, but back it up with evidence that adheres to the scientific method showing exosomes exist and function as you believe.
“BTW, if it seems like I’m trying to help you guys I’m not.”
Throwing out your own pet theories and criticizing flat-earthers was definitely not seen as any help by me, so no worries there. 👍
kordelas kordelas
What we would do without you? You are our last hope.
reante
Good one. I’m also just a girl (with tears in my eyes) standing in front of a boy asking him to love her lol.
kordelas kordelas
You should do this on some dating portal.
George
“Vaccine adjuvants are chemicals, microbial components, or mammalian proteins that enhance the immune response to vaccine antigens. Interest in reducing vaccine-related adverse effects and inducing specific types of immunity has led to the development of numerous new adjuvants. Adjuvants in development or in experimental and commercial vaccines include aluminum salts (alum), oil emulsions, saponins, immune-stimulating complexes (ISCOMs), liposomes, microparticles, nonionic block copolymers, derivatized polysaccharides, cytokines, and a wide variety of bacterial derivatives. The mechanisms of action of these diverse compounds vary, as does their induction of cell-mediated and antibody responses. Factors influencing the selection of an adjuvant include animal species, specific pathogen, vaccine antigen, route of immunization, and type of immunity needed.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12774966/
You can inject adjuvants and get an immune response without cell breakdown material such as exosomes. This is because the body recognizes them as non-self and reacts to get rid of them.
Injecting dead cell debris into the body probably will not cause an immune response because the body gets rid of dead cell debris all the time.
They added adjuvants to the culture products used in vaccines because they did not get an immune response without them. That is the point of adjuvants and demonstrates the stupidity of the whole process.
reante
Yeah the numerous adjuvants have numerous mechanisms of action. And some mechanisms act apart from toxifying the cultured exosomes. Glue sniffing gets you high in part because your body has to get amped-up to deal with the fast-acting intoxication route that is ‘huffing.’ I notice this amped-up reaction myself sometimes when working on farm equipment and the related chemicals. This is analogous to the more water-soluble adjuvant mechanisms of action not designed to saturate the exosomes themselves.
reante
And, George – exosomes are not “cell breakdown material.” They are not debris. They are whole, subcellular bodies manufactured by the cell for communication purposes.
Mike Stone
“exosomes are not “cell breakdown material.” They are not debris. They are whole, subcellular bodies manufactured by the cell for communication purposes.”
OK Reante, you made the positive claim. Now please provide evidence that adheres to the scientific method which backs up your claim.
reante
Sorry friend, see my response to KK on spherical questions.
Mike Stone
That is called a cop-out. It is readily apparent that you do not have evidence to present backing up your belief.
reante
Wrong Mike. You asking the question is you asking me to participate in YOUR cop-out. Homie don’t play dat.
Mike Stone
No, my asking you is for you to back up your positive claim. If you are going to state something as true, you should be able to back it up with the evidence that led you to this conclusion. It is very telling that you can not do this and that you would rather resort to excuses in order to avoid the question.
reante
Nice try, Mike. You can’t erase the past not should you want to, yet here you are trying to.
Mike Stone
What past am I erasing?
reante
All the times we’ve dead-ended in our conversation because you refuse to use your intelligence to pattern simple truths. I know you know what I’m talking about.
Mike Stone
I only know that you continue to evade providing any evidence which supports your theroies/position.
reante
You snooze you lose.
kordelas kordelas
So far you lost every argument here.
David
Except diseases have never been shown as transmissable from human to human nor animal to human ….even using your brake fluid analogy
reante
Thanks for participating David. Not enough participation around here.
You’re looking at it wrong. If symptoms (‘disease’) are healings according to Terrain Theory — and they truly are healings — then exosomes are evolutionary healers (vehicles for proteomic healing communications). If the recipient organism is in no need of healing, the exosomal messages are ‘read’ and not amplified to neighboring cells, because without the need for healing the healing message is not relevant. We’re just talking about biofeedback here. Allopathic (opposition to the suffering that healing entails) culture inverts that natural dynamic.
You do agree in healing communication don’t you? After all, that’s the reason we’re all here in this commentariat, to participate in healing communication.
Do you see now?
reante
“Unfair.”
There’s no crying in baseball Mike. As if you guys haven’t seen the industry’s vaccine graphs before. You seen one you seen em all.
You were only caught off-balance because you were out of balance. The Truth is never out of balance. The conclusion is that you guys have more work to do, and I’m not talking about having more time to come up with a better rabies schtick and going back on this dude’s show cause he done gotcha already. This is part blowback for ‘the challenge.’ You guys are probably 5pc of the ‘resistance’ and you’re trying to ‘flat-earth’ the other 95pc into the Truth, and without the missing link (exosomes) it looks every bit like gaslighting because in ‘flat-earthing’ the Terrain you can’t even defeat the plausible deniability that their ‘vaccine effectiveness’ charts present. All you can say is, “oh they just call it something else now,” and “oh they didn’t use the scientific method,” or, worst of all, “the trend had already started to decline before the vaccine was introduced,” lol. That’s not good enough. You need to explain the allopathic vaccine parlor trick because though we can’t know how effective that trick is, the reason-based, watertight evidence for it in heliocentric reality is more than sufficient to defeat the plausible deniability that you currently can’t get at.
If you don’t cotton-to, and wield, the whole truth, then their high-level evil will use more truth than you in service of their future falsehood that co-opts the Terrain as part of the Green Wing of their national socialist platform, thereby rendering you ‘flat-earthers.’
kordelas kordelas
Can you prove any exosome?
reante
You don’t get to ask spherical questions, remember?
kordelas kordelas
Are you claiming that Earth is spherical?
George
“. . . The physiological purpose of generating exosomes remains largely unknown and needs investigation. . .”
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau6977#:~:text=Exosomes%20are%20extracellular%20vesicles%20generated,various%20aspects%20of%20cell%20biology.
kordelas kordelas
Your article does not prove any alleged exosome.
Mike Stone
“There’s no crying in baseball Mike. As if you guys haven’t seen the industry’s vaccine graphs before. You seen one you seen em all.”
I was not upset that we discussed the graph. However, if Alex is going to present evidence, it should be sourced to make sure it is legitimate and it should be seen in context of the study it comes from. Before the interview, Alex provided us with articles and topics he wanted to discuss. This study was not among them.
“You were only caught off-balance because you were out of balance.”
Did you watch the interview? We were not caught off balance. Michael did a great job representing our position. Sure, it would have been great to know ahead of time that Alex wanted to focus on rabies. It seemed very sketchy to send articles and topics to discuss beforehand and then for him to present on air an unsourced graph to us that was not among the sent items to discuss.
“All you can say is, “oh they just call it something else now,” and “oh they didn’t use the scientific method,” or, worst of all, “the trend had already started to decline before the vaccine was introduced,” lol. That’s not good enough.”
If you read what I wrote, the main argument against the graph is the lack of purified/isolated rabies “virus.” Without this evidence, the graph is irrelevant as is trying to explain it. In any case, what makes the explanations I did provide invalid? They are far more plausible than your exosome theory.
Jeffrey Strahl
“if Alex is going to present evidence, it should be sourced to make sure it is legitimate and it should be seen in context of the study it comes from. Before the interview, Alex provided us with articles and topics he wanted to discuss. This study was not among them.” That’s downright unethical. Reminds me of a CE final i took, the instructor gave us 15 problems ahead of time, said 8 of them were gonna be on the final. NONE of them were. He wasn’t there, he sent his TA to administer it, and he had not seen the final till he opened his packet right in the exam room (a big hall), exactly as he was ordered to do. Not that stuff like this bothers people like Reante very much. 🙂
You guys did well, considering, i however would have hammered him on his use of a graph to prove a virus, and his statement that the virus had been isolated and the vaccine developed out of that.
Mike Stone
Yes, I wish we could have focused more on the lack of purification and isolation of a rabies “virus.” It seemed Alex did not want to hear any of that.
Sunface
Mike, What I have noticed is that the success claim off a vaccine is always made based on the downslope of the bell curve when what ever it is that they are vaccinating against is petering out. The graph you showed from the Vital Signs: Trends in Human Rabies Deaths and Exposures shows exactly the same.
George
Free download of the book
Bechamp or Pasteur
Select PDF
https://archive.org/details/bechamp-or-pasteur
See chapter 17 (book Two) Hydrophobia pages 291 – 303
PC
Great work and putting your point across.
A graph is not science but we live in a society of graphs and statistics
The huge problem is the scientific illiteracy even among the so called ‘scientist’ and medically trained.
As someone mentioned , if you throw 100,000 apples and one does not fall to the ground the observed gravity is false.
So maybe would be good in interview first to remind people what is science.
——
Dr Jordan Grant takeaway
Science , Pseudoscience and the Germ Theory of Disease- Dr Jordan Grant
( 2022 Conference)
Science does not
deal with ‘what is ‘questions.
descriptions
shape of objects
how good a medicine works – statistical studies.
Science deals with the cause of a natural phenomenon.
People talk about science and many do not have a clue what the scientific method is.
In Biology / Medicine
Systematic Review
Randomised Control Trials
Cohort Studies
Case Control Studies
Case Series, Case Reports ,
Editorials, Expert Opinions
None of this is scientific, it is all observation and statistics, it is not science.
This is what most physicians and academics think is science.
They can be useful eg. sometimes best one can do is statistics as opposed to trial and error but it is not science .
——-
Rabies could be explained by some biological shock trauma that the dog may experience and one of it was the cruel experiments that caused the biological shock and the symptoms.
And am sure same happens in real life ,maybe that is why stray dogs are more likely to manifest rabies symptoms as live in a tougher environment.
A post .
“ GHK Testimonial:
Our dog Blanca, the cause of chickenpox:
Blanca is now seven months young, playful, yet cautious when playing with children. She changed her needle-like milk teeth months ago.
Our youngest son is two years old and plays, fights, argues, and cuddles extensively with Blanca; they are a perfect match.
Constantly Blanca challenged us to play by biting our feet or hands, but so carefully that there would never have been even a scratch. Also, our little one always understood this as an appeal to play, but he was never afraid of her and always accepted this appeal to play.
About two weeks ago, however, there was once a minor injury. Our little one came to us and showed us a noticeable scratch across the palm of his hand. He came to each of us several times and showed us the injury he had received from playing with Blanca.
The scratch was not yet fully healed when we noticed red dots on our son’s body, which were becoming increasingly numerous. Hands and arms, feet and legs, popo, and mainly on his backside, but not on his face, chest, and belly. The red dots were so obvious and numerous that we could no longer go out with him among people, because everyone diagnosed him spontaneously with chicken pox, and everyone was afraid of contagion. Television does its job perfectly.
For two days, we puzzled in vain about what could be the separation conflict causing all these red spots since his mother is with him all day. Suddenly we noticed that our son now reacts differently to Blanca’s invitation to play. This light biting was suddenly no longer a request to play for him but a reason to complain and defend himself. Suddenly he didn’t want Blanca’s kind of invitation to play at all, and his behavior was different.
Since he had suffered this scratch across the palm of his hand, visible for several days, he wanted to be separated from Blanca’s teeth. Blanca’s teeth were track now, which can also hurt; accordingly, he wanted to be separated from the teeth.
Not from the dog in general; he still likes to cuddle, play and fight with her. He even counts daily whether all teeth are still present with Blanca, but as soon as she asks him to play with them, the game is over for him. Every touch with the teeth a punctual separation conflict.
After we realized this, it took us two days to get Blanca out of asking to play with her teeth, especially with our son. Since then, the red dots became less every day, until after one week, they disappeared completely.
As we were told several times, anyone who does not know GHK would have spontaneously diagnosed chickenpox. But those who know GHK know that there is no such thing as contagion. Every symptom has its cause, so what does he want to be separated from?
Some observation was enough to recognize what he suddenly didn’t want anymore, Blanca’s teeth. The scratch on his palm also coincides with the appearance of the first red dots.
As before, our son still loves dogs. He goes to any dog, no matter how big, and pets them. But he has no red dots now because Blanca keeps her teeth with her.
https://ghk-academy.info/lp/the-greatest-secret-of-medicine-2/”
———
When it comes to treatment working , I assume it applies to animals too.
So assume it is the the same in dog, works in some dogs and not others, trial and error.
Maybe the dogs would have healed without the medication.
“ All medicine is designed to make you more comfortable, suppress symptoms without addressing the real cause .”
https://www.gnmonlineseminars.com/how-remedies-really-work/
How do SBSe behave when taking a drug?
https://media2-production.mightynetworks.com/asset/43349252/How_do_SBSe_behave_when_taking_a_drug_.pdf?_gl=1*39bajm*_ga*MTIzMTkzOTQ4OC4xNjI1NzM1OTcw*_ga_T49FMYQ9FZ*MTY1OTU1MTc1MS4xMTY5LjEuMTY1OTU1MTc3MS4w
PC
As Alex Tsakiris just presented unsubstantiated assumptions, beliefs and superstitions to claim there is rabies.
—-
Looked up on rabies in GNM.
“Epileptic seizures that occur with “paralytic rabies” are caused by a motor conflict of “feeling stuck” evoked by the bite of an animal. Animals often suffer also a bite conflict (“not being able to bite” the opponent) showing a dropped jaw due to the paralysis of the jaw muscles.”
https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/muscles.html#Epileptic_Seizure
—-
There was also an article about vaccination .
A study on vaccinations for dogs
Animal lovers insist that animals are more sensitive than humans. Animals react faster and more directly to things that are bad for them. Animals react more promptly to vaccinations. Horse owners react extremely upset after the experience of two years of compulsory vaccinations for show horses. This is because horses are getting diseases that were known to be caused by poisoning before the introduction of compulsory vaccination. The stud owners are in a dilemma. Because an unvaccinated horse is not admitted to the tournaments and a vaccinated one cannot participate in a tournament because of the vaccination problems.
What is obviously not possible with humans has been done with animals, especially with dogs.
For her book: “Canine Health Census Vaccine Survey” Catherine Ó Driscoll researched vaccination problems in dogs. The study began in October 1996 and a questionnaire was developed with the assistance of Christopher Day, Jean Dodds DVM, and Dr. Viera Scheibner. The questionnaire was advertised in Dog World Magazine and people were asked to complete it. At the time of publication, 607 vaccination problems were reported among nearly 2678 dogs.
This represents more than one fifth of the population. The main interest of the study was to determine if there was a temporal relationship between the illnesses and the previous vaccination. The rationale was that if no correlation between vaccination and disease could be established, the dogs’ illnesses would have to be evenly distributed in the period between two vaccinations.
The percentage of illnesses should then not exceed 25 %. In fact, the evaluation of the
reporting forms shows that 55% of the diseases occurred in the first three months after vaccination. This means that the incidence of disease was more than twice as high in the first quarter of the year after vaccination
. In detail, the following breakdown emerged from the study:
Cancer- 31% within 3 months after vaccination.
Cramps- 63% within 3 months after vaccination
Meningitis- 75% within 3 months after vaccination
Heart disease- 26.8% within 3 months after vaccination
Kidney damage- 40.5% within 3 months after vaccination
Paralysis- 52% within 3 months after vaccination
Abdominal paralysis- 64.7% within 3 months after vaccination
Liver damage- 47% within 3 months after vaccination
Impaired concentration of the dog – 68.4% within 3 months after vaccination Autoimmune disease – 54.8% within 3 months of vaccination. If vaccinations had no effect on the reported diseases of dogs, the disease rates would have to be around 25%. This is the case for heart disease, which is the only disease reported.
Dogs that contracted the diseases they were vaccinated against: Hepatitis- 63.6% within 3 months of vaccination.
Parainfluenza- 50% within 3 months of vaccination
Parvovirosis – 68.2% within 3 months after vaccination distemper – 55.6% within 3 months after vaccination Leptospirosis – 100% within the first 3 months after vaccination.
Here, the baseline value of the disease should be set at 0 %, since the
vaccination should protect against the disease
The vaccination was supposed to protect against the disease that it triggered in the reported dogs within three months.
George
My wife had a rash on her face. She went to different doctors and got three different diagnoses. Well, one day the dog got to licking her on her face and the dog wouldn’t stop. The dog was pretty aggressive about wanting to lick her face, so she let him do it for a little while. This went on from day to day for about a week. And guess what? The rash disappeared!
reante
That’s the opposite of rabies. Life is beautiful.
One of our livestock guardian dogs busted a salivary gland on a bone and uninterrupted saliva kept draining into his kneck. He stopped eating and drank just a little bit, and he laid low. Throat swelled up real bad with saliva. He started getting redness and broken skin in one spot. Just when he started to have labored breathing from the pressure and I thought he was in real trouble and I was gonna have to cut him he naturally opened up two holes in his neck, one the size of a silver dollar and another the size of a dime and drained that fluid out all over the house. Then he was ready to eat again and we fed him our stock of elk ground and cougar broth for about a week. We were fortunate to have had those uncommon to us foods at just the right time. That one hole was gaping – huge – but with beautiful pink jagged skin all around the edge. It took him about a month to close the big hole.
KenshoHomestead
I expect you kinda expected that from Alex?! After all, he did the same thing to Cowan. ‘Flatearther’ is his go-to insult. Lord forbid he try to come up with something a tad more unique than that!
Mike Stone
Actually, I had never heard of Alex nor his podcast before. Michael asked me if I would join him to discuss GOF/HIV on this guy’s show and I agreed. In hindsight, I probably should have looked into his show beforehand. I know Alex said he would have us back on in the future but I kind of doubt he will. 😉
reante
Oh, so Cowan gets it directly then, huh? Well if Cowan blows it off by thinking there’s no substance to that pejorative then he’s not a serious thinker even if the pejorative is coming from someone who also isn’t a serious thinker. And Mike shouldn’t have gone on Alex’s show to be a sitting duck, had he known about Cowan’s encounter, anyway. Sez this here ole gossip, from the peanut gallery.
The Club is willing to take its lumps because every player knows that bad press is better than no press don’t hate the player hate the game lol.
Mike Stone
I had never heard of Alex nor his podcast Skeptico before agreeing to do the show. I did it because Michael Wallach asked me to join him and I respect Michael a lot. I definitely should have looked into this podcast beforehand but things were rather busy at the time. I would still have gone on even if I had known about Alex’s encounter with Dr. Cowan. I am not afraid to talk to those who disagree with me. You should know this by now.
reante
No sure man, that’s why I love you Mike you got balls. Nobody keeps reante around this long after the lines in the sand have been drawn. I agree, so you should have still gone on Alex’s show had you known about Tom’s similar experience, and been ready to stick it to him. (Looks to me like Mr Moneybags KK isn’t doing his managerial duties justice. Fool the Club, twice, KK, and it’s shame on you lol.)
A guy like Alex could stab you in the back while shaking your hand. And he did, by catching you out with a graph showing a parlor trick that you refuse to understand the true nature of, so were caught off guard. By refusing to accept that vaccines are capable, one way or another, of some level of fairly specific symptom suppression across whole populations, you weaken your case and start to look out of touch.
Anyway, when the going gets tough the tough get going.
Germ Theory is a one-trick pony that preys on near-universal separation trauma. It calls beneficial microbes, both aerobic and anaerobic, pathogenic when they want and beneficial when they want. And it calls beneficial ‘viruses’/exosomes pathogenic when they want and beneficial when they want. It’s as simple as that, and biology 101 exposes the trick.
You guys got yourselves in the weeds with this scientific method stuff. That’s an ill-advised, undermanned offensive right there. Take a mulligan and stick with home defense.
Mike Stone
“By refusing to accept that vaccines are capable, one way or another, of some level of fairly specific symptom suppression across whole populations, you weaken your case and start to look out of touch.”
With rabies, the vaccine is given before symptoms ever occur. There is no symptom suppression. In fact, like many vaccines, the rabies vaccine causes the symptoms it is supposed to suppress. I outlined this previously in my Louis Pasteur article:
https://viroliegy.com/2022/02/25/louis-pasteurs-unethical-rabies-fraud/
The other thing you are ignoring is the fact that there was never a good correlation between animal bites and the development of rabies symptoms. That is also outlined in the above article.
reante
Thanks Mike. Vaccines are intended to be given before symptoms. That’s why they’re intended as FUTURE symptom suppressors, right? That’s why they’re allopathic. Allopathic etymology by definition is “opposition to suffering.” Kinda like Buddhism. People of the terrain know that suffering heals.
You can see why they love their vaccine technology so much – they love being in control of the future. That’s civilization for you. Plow so you can control next year’s food. Divert rivers so you can control next year’s food. Draw borders so you can control next year’s labor market. Vaccinate so you can control the labor force’s feelings of security, and whatever they lack in true results they make up for with sophistry.
Mike Stone
Yes, vaccines are supposed to be given in anticipation and well before one is “infected.” In the case of rabies, it is after one has been bitten and supposedly “infected.” However, there are no symptoms at the time they are treated. The very symptoms seen afterwards are associated with the vaccine.
Again, per Geison in the article I linked previously:
“In any case, MOST VICTIMS OF RABID ANIMAL BITES COULD FOREGO TREATMENT WITHOUT EXPERIENCING ANY UNTOWARD CONSEQUENCES IN THE FUTURE. Since all forms of treatment yet devised or contemplated for rabies are applied BEFORE ANY SYMPTOMS BECOME MANIFEST, AND SINCE ALL CARRY SOME RISK OF THEIR OWN, a special ethical problem is created in the treatment of rabies. To be sure, all therapeutic or preventive measures involve some degree of uncertainty and all carry some risk of harm.”
“If rabies vaccination is THEREFORE UNLIKE ORDINARY VACCINATION, so too is it unlike ordinary therapeutic measures. These are undertaken for the immediate sake of an individual in whom disease has already become manifest. As such, they have created relatively few ethical problems-even when they amount to a form of human experimentation. In vaccinating the victim of an animal bite against rabies, by contrast, ONE CAN NEVER BE SURE THAT THE SUBJECT OF TREATMENT HAS IN FACT CONTRACTED THE DISEASE. And one can therefore never be sure WHETHER THE TREATMENT IS EVEN POTENTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO HIM OR TO ANYONE ELSE.”
reante
Not supposedly infected. Potentially infected. There are no symptoms (and unlikely to be any) because they go get shot up right away after being bitten. I had to break up my dogs from fighting a few years ago — longest two minutes of my life felt like an eternity — had puncture wounds on my arms my wife wanted me to go get a shot right away, hell no, and that was when I still believed in viruses and germs. I knew they were very healthy dogs tho.
Mike Stone
“There are no symptoms (and unlikely to be any) because they go get shot up right away after being bitten.”
This is exactly the same “logic” they use for flu and “Covid” vaccines. If you get sick after vaccination, you may have been worse had you not received it. If you remain symptomless, it’s because the vaccine worked and protected you. Neither of these scenarios is provable and are completely fabricated. In fact, as shown with the rabies and many other vaccines, it is the toxic vaccines which cause disease rather than suppress disease.
reante
Obviously you’re preaching to the choir but I will aver that just because they cause disease doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t suppress other (target) symptomologies does it? They’re masking agents. Clarifire would say they mask by causing the body to put healing on hold in order to deal with the insult, and I say that is true but that’s not necessarily the only masking they do. We’ve been over this many times. Just because I’m the only person who seems to be saying this doesn’t mean that it doesn’t stand to reason given their technological capabilities (which you don’t believe in).
Mike Stone
Am I preaching to the choir? Sometimes it is hard to tell. We don’t know if vaccines suppress symptoms or not. There is plenty of evidence that they cause symptoms they are meant to prevent. Certain medications and treatments definitely appear to suppress symptoms. However, as vaccination is done prior to any symptoms, there is no way to tell that anything is suppressed, especially when many still come down with the exact same symptoms (or worse) that are supposed to be suppressed.
reante
Yes vaccines are interesting. They lace cultured exosomes with poison in order to prevent the intelligent evolutionary body from participating in the particular adaptive trait (healing symptomology) that that exosome class represents. It a dark, dark voodoo of ‘internal medicine’ as they consider it. They’re messing with evolution; as I said, they like to control the future; forced devolution is real thing; animal domestication is a real thing; look at human physiology compared to 20,000 years ago; in your video appearances you have to rest your head on your hand most of the time and I’m not above that either, but the point is that we need to fight back in the other direction despite ourselves and make no mistake, it’s a herculean task to turn around devolutionary forces because evolution is an ecology-wide team effort.
The reason why vaccines can cause people to come down with the same symptoms that they are trying to suppress is obvious and openly acknowledged by the industry, with the caveat that the acknowledgement is deceitfully framed in ‘viral’ terms. With an ‘attenuated viral vaccine’ people are, despite the toxic lacing, still receiving a cultured, very specific exosome-bomb (an unnaturally amplified synthetic evolutionary/proteomic message) so we shouldn’t be surprised if bodies respond differently to that cocktail depending on individual adaptivity – and some of them prioritize the presentation of the exosomally-catalyzed symptomology over detoxing the adjuvants, or if some of them can multitask and detox the adjuvants while presenting the adaptive symptomology.
And I say catalyze because we are again talking about the primordial soup here. Exosomes are primers in the primordial polymerase chain reactions that are the drivers of adaptivity.
It seems to me that if I was to take a vaccine I would be really down on myself if I didn’t display the target symptomology because even though they are still synthetically cultured exosomes, in and of themselves the manufactured nucleic acid formations are all-natural; farmed (domesticated) but still all-natural. Even the fully-synthetic mRNA vaccine acid formations are molecularly identical to natural exosomes in the same way that the synthetic urea in urea fertilizer is molecularly identical to urine. I emphasize these biochemical truths which brian and me have debated before more than once, because they run contrary to Vitalism orthodoxy. I know how appealing Vitalist philosophy is — and it absolutely contains esoteric, QUALITATIVE truths — but it is thoroughly New Age (not holistic) when it comes to the FUNCTIONAL truths of synthetic (manufactured) biology all around us all the time. Even if (misguidedly) don’t believe in GMOs, that juicy organic summer tomato has been synthetically bred, by human enslavers, to such a degree that we wouldn’t even recognize its deep ancestor as ever worth cultivating. And that’s certainly true of the grains. Qualitatively the modern grains take all that they can from the soil and give as little back as they can; their Vitalistic grade is an F. Yet functionally here they are, dominating Life on this planet as almost pure Takers, because we humans have the Haber-Bosch process at our disposal.
Mike Stone
“They lace cultured exosomes with poison in order to prevent the intelligent evolutionary body from participating in the particular adaptive trait (healing symptomology) that that exosome class represents.”
Please tell me you have a shred of scientific evidence supporting this statement. If not, once again it is pure science fiction.
“It seems to me that if I was to take a vaccine I would be really down on myself if I didn’t display the target symptomology because even though they are still synthetically cultured exosomes, in and of themselves the manufactured nucleic acid formations are all-natural; farmed (domesticated) but still all-natural. Even the fully-synthetic mRNA vaccine acid formations are molecularly identical to natural exosomes in the same way that the synthetic urea in urea fertilizer is molecularly identical to urine.”
Again, you are claiming that synthetic exosomes are molecularly identical to “natural” exosomes. It also seems that you are lumping exosomes and “viruses” together as one entity. For any of what you said to be true, the “natural” exosomes/”viruses” would have needed to have been properly purified and isolated first in order to determine the molecular make-up. As I have shown repeatedly in the past, this has never been done.
reante
A couple of the main aluminum adjuvants are fat-soluble, and the exosome membranes are fats, therefore we can scientifically know that the exosomes are saturated with the adjuvant.
Genetic determinations of specific exosome are made via batch sequencings of density gradient bands in combination with the exhaustive patterning methods of process-of-elimination. I’ve been over this many times with you. You don’t get to go down this road, Mike, because it’s spherical in nature.
Mike Stone
“A couple of the main aluminum adjuvants are fat-soluble, and the exosome membranes are fats, therefore we can scientifically know that the exosomes are saturated with the adjuvant.”
No, we do not know this scientifically as exosomes have never been scientifically (i.e. adherence to the scientific method) proven to exist and function as you claim. You are perpetuating pseudoscientific theories.
“Genetic determinations of specific exosome are made via batch sequencings of density gradient bands in combination with the exhaustive patterning methods of process-of-elimination.”
You need to have first purified and isolated exosomes and separated them from everything else in order to get genetic determinations. You know full well that this is impossible as they admit complete purification and isolation of these particles is impossible. There is no way to be able to tell where or what the genetic material is coming from within a mixed population.
reante
You’re not thinking Mike. You’re running an automated program. That’s what makes you act like an automaton. Flat-earth resurgence is one of the ways in which the Pharisaic culture is persecuting traditionalist Christians. You guys need to redpill your way out of that before you do anything else. Newsflash: virology is not your top priority.
Mike Stone
It’s pretty clear that I’m the only one who has been doing the thinking between the two of us and I’m also the only one who has shown my homework demonstrating why I believe what I believe. You have done no such thing and continue to offer up excuses to cover up ignorance.
kordelas kordelas
Where is your proof of those exosomes you are talking about?
What way do you observe directly all occurring processes on all vital nano levels?
How do you know what nucleic acids are and what processes they participate in?
Have you seen Earth as a whole from different angles?
Have you been in alleged outer space?
What is your proof of outer space?
How do you study structure of matter on nano levels?
How do you validate indirect method without reference material?
reante
You don’t get to ask spherical questions. But if you want you can formulate a counterargument to my recent response to volpoe.
kordelas kordelas
You are not in a position to dictate anything here.
All claims your presented are still unsubstantiated by you.
reante
That’s what I thought kk
kordelas kordelas
You know that you have not substantiated your claims.
kordelas kordelas
“(Looks to me like Mr Moneybags KK isn’t doing his managerial duties justice. Fool the Club, twice, KK, and it’s shame on you lol.)”
It is so amusing that all your arguments are debunked by everyone here.
Nike
Diagnosis… is the first fundamental deception of any lying form of medicine. By means of the so-called diagnosis, doctors can invent any disease at any time and cover up any iatrogenic act… especially now, after the biological and medical pseudo-sciences have appeared: microbiology, laboratory medicine, virology, genetics, immunology and molecular biology.
reante
Yup, that’s why they call it the fog of war. Wars of attrition are basically heavy duty fog machines with which they can keep campaigns running for generations, until the job is done. They’re running into a terminal fuel supply crisis though thank goodness. I know you guys don’t wanna believe that either.
Jeffrey Strahl
Alex apparently was never taught that correlation does not prove causation, he was trying to do so with this graph. I personally would not go back to Alex’s show, the guy has no ethics, giving you a list of items he’d use and then bringing up something else.
Mike Stone
Exactly! I lose respect when people try to play games. I have no problem discussing rabies but if he tells us to look at some studies related to other topics and then does not bring them up and instead focuses on something else entirely, that is when I have a problem. It was definitely unethical.
George
Cowen webinar from today – interesting.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/A3HtEDYsWTC9/
Nike
Rabies, tetanus, Lyme disease, typhus, plague, etc….nonsense. False medical diagnoses. There are no diseases… I mean… more diseases. Moreover… there are no infectious-contagious diseases. There is only one self-healing condition of the body… which doctors and people call “disease” and which can be confined, predominantly, to a certain area of the body. There is only a certain limited number of harmful factors, of which microorganisms and hypothetical viruses are not part: – negative emotional experiences; – chemical, metallic, mineral, biological toxins; – artificial electromagnetic fields; – physical and intellectual overwork; – chronic insufficiency of night sleep; – quantitative and/or qualitative undernutrition; – exposure to bad weather; – iatrogenic; These harmful factors act on our being by unbalancing and depleting the vital energy flows that circulate through the body’s tissues and organs, altering or degenerating tissues and organs, and loading the body with toxins and catabolic waste. These harmful factors are the reason why our body must switch to the self-healing state manifested through unpleasant symptoms, in order to rebalance and restore its vital energy flows, to cleanse its tissues and organs of toxins and catabolic residues and to be able to restore or regenerate tissues and organs. So, regardless of the area in the body where it can be concentrated, predominantly, the disruption and depletion of vital energy flows, the accumulation of toxins and catabolic waste and the modification or degeneration of tissues and organs… the being switches to one and the same self-healing process manifested by unpleasant symptoms… self-healing process that is called “disease” by doctors and people.
Cal Crilly
If you have any infection from bacteria after a bite there is a chance of getting extreme scurvy if not addressed plus a cytokine storm from the immune response using up your vitamin C.
Scurvy causes serotonin syndrome with excessive sweating, excessive saliva, overheating, difficulty swallowing once the saliva runs out and hallucinations since serotonin gives you brighter vision similar to LSD, panic attacks etc if you have too much.
‘Mild symptoms, which include nervousness, insomnia, nausea, diarrhea, tremor, and dilated pupils, can progress to moderate symptoms such as hyperreflexia (increased reflexes), sweating, agitation, restlessness, clonus (rhythmic muscle spasms), and ocular clonus (side-to-side eye movements). Patients with severe symptoms should be referred to the hospital immediately; severe symptoms include temperature greater than 38.5°C (101.3°F), confusion, delirium, sustained clonus or rigidity, and rhabdomyolysis.’
Rabies could always have been negligence in addressing scurvy.
reante
Interesting, Cal.
Are you saying this is specific to bites? If so, why?
Cal Crilly
Hi Reante, I’ll leave some pointers as a bite can cause sepsis so you can see how I am thinking. In Australia years ago there was a Greek/Australian doctor called Archie Kalokerinos who used intravenous sodium ascorbate for sepsis as well as snake bites and general infections causing fever in outback patients, he was working miles away from emergency departments.
With a snake bite the venom causes serotonin syndrome.
‘Sepsis can start with infection by bacteria, a virus, fungi or protozoa. The initial infection can be anywhere in the body, like in the bladder or abdomen (the gut), or in the chest, or even on the skin. With sepsis, the body’s immune reaction to the infection causes a large inflammatory response which makes things worse, not better.’
Any infections should be treated in my opinion with vitamin C and possibly vitamin B6 to absorb ‘free iron’ as vitamin B6 between 100mg and 200 mg a day prevents siderosis and is the most missed vitamin for preventing anemia, the others are folate from vegetables and B12 from meat. If I saw high iron levels in a patient with infections then that to me is a big alert to the bacteria or fungi using the iron as a nutrient to replicate.
So you start with vitamin C to help the immune response since immune cells use so much vitamin C, the vitamin C also absorbs the iron, vitamin B6 is generally missed and if you had a vegetarian a B12 supplement goes in straight away and if it someone who eats meat but has low veggies then they get told they should eat some fresh vegetables or take folate to absorb the iron into red blood cells before the pathogens get the iron first.
‘Patients with sepsis have low concentrations of antioxidants, including ascorbic acid, and also have increased concentrations of markers of free radical damage. Although ascorbic acid is a potent antioxidant, it can act as a prooxidant by promoting iron-catalysed reactions. We measured baseline total vitamin C and bleomycin-detectable “free” iron levels and ascorbyl radical concentrations before and after intravenous infusion of 1 g ascorbic acid in patients with sepsis and healthy control subjects. Vitamin C concentrations were decreased in patients compared to healthy subjects (p < 0.0001), and "free" iron was increased (p < 0.002). Preinfusion ascorbyl radical concentrations were not different in patients and controls. Postinfusion ascorbyl radical levels increased in both controls and patients, with larger increases in healthy subjects (p < 0.0001), suggesting suboptimal basal vitamin C levels and increased scavenging of a constant oxidant pool by ascorbate in the controls. In the patients, who were all vitamin C deficient, infused ascorbate was rapidly consumed, either via the promotion of redox cycling of iron or as a result of radical scavenging. This study demonstrates markedly different handling of infused ascorbate in patients with sepsis and healthy subjects, and further studies are needed to elucidate the relative anti- and pro-antioxidant mechanisms of ascorbate in patients with raised "free" iron levels.'
Ascorbyl radical formation in patients with sepsis: effect of ascorbate loading 1996
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8903690/
One last interesting thing to note is that Melinda Suchard from South Africa's immunology research has released a study into how the body flicks the macrophage immune response to an M2 polarization mode when vitamin B3 supplies become low.
Vitamin B3 and vitamin C rapid depletion as well as vitamin B6 will easily cause mental effects as well as nerve effects mimicking the same sort of things seen in rabies and if sepsis is the main cause again we looking for the 'single cause' theory when it should be regarded as a cascade of deficiencies with bacterial or fungal infections and the wrong interventions.
Nicotinamide pathways as the root cause of sepsis – an
evolutionary perspective on macrophage energetic shifts
https://febs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/febs.15807
Nike
No one has isolated, purified and visualized in 3D any hypothetical amino acid or hypothetical protein, removed from the living body and placed on a glass slide. Moreover, no one has isolated, purified and visualized in 3D any hypothetical amino acid or any hypothetical protein while in the living body.
In reality, there is no DIRECT, UNINTERPRETABLE and REPEATABLE evidence of the existence of any particle in the sub-microscopic realm. All so-called particles (structures) in the submicroscopic realm exist only at the level of never-confirmed conjectures… just like atoms exist only at the level of conjectures, never proven.
———————————–
“People don’t realize that molecules themselves are somewhat hypothetical, and that their interactions are more so, and that the biological reactions are even more so.”
– Kary Mullis
George
Great video about vaccines, there content and the damage they do. If there were nothing in them of a physical nature they would do no harm. Call their content what you want, but whatever you call it is real and dangerous.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/KMWin5TdNQfy/
Mike Stone
Agreed, there is absolutely no doubt that vaccines are toxic and dangerous.
briansteere
Shocks trigger a conflict phase in which symptomatic expression is suppressed. So in this sense any triggering conflict can delay or block reintegration, rebalancing and renewal.
‘Hanging’ conflicts or perpetuating reiterations of conflict can effectively suppress healing functions. This on many levels.
Fear-triggering as a means of preventing us coming into our ‘right minds’ (healing dissociative masking behaviours).
But my key point is that sympathetic nervous response is suppressive to give focus to fight or flight. GNM notes that the healing phase begins when the conflict is ‘resolved’ or released. Which is it can ‘reset’ itself as an interpretation of symptoms as attack.
On top of these interactions are purposes that any illness serves the one who becomes sick. There are as many ‘reasons’ to be sick as sick people. Which is to say generalisations are not true universals but we can be fooled to think we know and coagulate into official or mainstream presumptions.
Fear of our own thoughts runs fear of contagion.
Nike
I quote:
Basic intelligent tasks, which are so easy for most humans to do and so easy for writers to include in a script, have proven to be profoundly difficult for computers. Simply put, being human is a lot harder than it looks. Alan Perlis once quipped:„A year spent in Artificial Intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.”
If there is one single lesson to learn from 60 years of research in AI, it is that humans are profoundly complex creations, beautiful in their ability to be flexible, insightful, and innovative.
The Psalmist expresses this as follows:
For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful, I know that full well.
– Psalm 139:13,14
reante
Yeah AI is a joke. A hoax. Because metaconscious intelligence grows out of — and is the culmination of — the primordial polymerase chain reaction. Silicon data storage in parallel — no matter how exhaustively compiled — is structurally incapable of discovery which is the root of intelligent patterning.
Without discovery there’s only automation. Part of the purpose of the AI hoax is that civilization wants the labor force to be devolved automatons incapable of discovery, and the AI hoax subconsciously reinforces the lie that true, objective discovery (epignosis) doesn’t exist outside of the marketplace.
reante
volboe,
just noticed this comment from the virus challenge thread:
“@reante
like i said it’s very simple… they tell us that the circumference of the globe is 40,000 km, they also tell us that the globe rotates once every 24 hours… right..? well, 40,000 ÷ 24 = 1,666.66666 km/h (great number..!) now just think a little bit and a little light will shine, which is getting bigger and bigger… it’s just an example, there are thousands. ..”
(david I also just noticed your having congratulated me. Thanks!)
volboe, in presenting me with this retarded challenge, your subconscious is crying out for help. That’s a good thing because it means you’re not too far gone like KK.
The circumference of the earth isn’t exactly 40,000 km. Well, maybe it is somewhere, since the circumference is variable, but it’s not at the equator which is what you’re referencing. So your luciferian math is reaching and juvenile.
As to the rotational velocity of the earth – welcome to reality! It’s easy to understand with reason-based physics, and for the exact same reason that light can travel across the universe without dimming at all or slowing down: things (the earth) moving in a true vacuum don’t experience resistances of any kind. The centrifugal forces don’t apply because centrifugal forces, as ‘oppositional’ derivative forces to gravity are ultimately dependent on gravity for their existence, and in a true vacuum, massive objects (objects with mass) have no mass relative to the massless vacuum which does not ‘do’ mass, and therefore no centrifugal force can be generated by a massive object spinning in a vacuum. Ladies and gentlemen we’re floating in space, very fast, and spinning while we float, yet we feel none of it because we are just holography. It’s WHY we are holography, because nothing else would work.
Holographic reality is energy animated by that which animates energy (Consciousness/Spirit/Mystery). Part of what hat C/S/M does is spin energy in order to make the holograph vumetric in nature. CSM creates eddies of energy by spinning its own embodied/holographic gravity (sourced from the dark matter field) against the gravitational resistance of the dark matter field, which creates centrifugal force in opposition to the centripetal force. Polarity.
There’s dark gravitational resistance underneath the earth spin dynamic that enables the ‘projection’ of the earth hologram but inside this separatist dark resistance does not interact with the holographic product itself, which is why there is no holographic centrifugal force accompanying earth rotation in the vacuum of space.
reante
“inside this” should read “this inside.”
George
Label-free characterization of single extracellular vesicles using two-photon fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy of NAD(P)H
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-80813-0
Mike Stone
Same cell culture crap as usual:
“To assess this potential, EVs derived from diverse cell lines were imaged using two-photon FLIM in this proof-of-concept study to quantify their NAD(P)H fluorescence lifetime repeatability and heterogeneity, examine their functional characteristics, and better understand the relationship between EVs and their parent cells.”
“Cell culture
MDA-MB-231 triple-negative human epithelial breast cancer epithelial cells (ATCC HTB-26, Manassas, VA), were primarily used to produce EVs to allow for comparison with previous work with nonlinear optical imaging22. Additionally, U-87 MG human glioblastoma (ATCC HTB-14, Manassas, VA), and J774A.1 mouse BALB/c monocyte/macrophage (ATCC TIB-67, Manassas, VA), cell lines were used to diversify the EV samples used for examination of FLIM capabilities. MDA-MB-231 and J774A.1 cells were grown in a complete phenol-free Dulbecco’s Modified Eagles Medium (DMEM, Gibco, Waltham, MA) supplemented with 4 mM L-glutamine, 10% heat-inactivated Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS, GE Healthcare Life Sciences, HyClone Laboratories, Logan, UT), and 1% streptomycin-penicillin antibiotic solution (PSA, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). U-87 MG cells were grown in a complete phenol-free Minimum Essential Medium alpha (MEM alpha, Gibco, Waltham, MA) supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated FBS (GE Healthcare Life Sciences, HyClone Laboratories, Logan, UT) and 1% PSA (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). All cells were maintained at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator. Cell concentration and viability protocol and measurements for selected experiments are available in Supplementary Note 3 and Supplementary Table S4.”
George
They cannot help themselves when it comes to making cell cultures. It’s instinctive, in their genes you might say! Optical microscopy (photon microscopy) cannot imagine at the 10 to 100 nanometer range due to the diffraction limit. This method however does use photons to image. I am still reviewing the process to determine if it proves the existence of exosomes in cell breakdown. The method does not seem to be destructive like electron microscopy is, which is due to both the preparation and the imaging with electrons.
kordelas kordelas
Photons are a mental construct.
In this method fluorophores are added to specimen and there is no reference material for such visualization nor it is a direct real time observation of occurring processes.
briansteere
Photons as light particles are a mental model, but light is observable to light sensors. Part of our breakdown of reason is because everything is reduced to a mental construct, hence the ‘post truth’ manipulation of identity set in or from such constructs.
The nature of a field is non physical excepting as it interacts with something particular, that then gives form or shape or energetic qualities to the physical.
I note that our forebears regarded the eye as a beam that went forth and not just as a passive receiver. Likewise the notion that what comes OUT of our mouths corrupts, rather than what goes in – relating to personal and cultural definitions whereby we both give and receive meaning.
But light is EMF – in truth the whole spectrum, not just the visible to our eyes.
Biophotons are a ‘thing’ in that they are measurable and have measurable effects or exchange with themselves – as interference pattens and with bio-chemistry – such as the effect on structured interfacial water shown by Pollack with universal implications at all scales.
kordelas kordelas
Nowhere I stated that we can’t see an effect caused by something. But what processes occur between is another thing.
Because you measure something, it does not mean that you understand what occurs.
Speculations, assumptions, correlations, associations, fairy tales, declarations are not undeniable evidence.
What is a biophoton? Has anyone directly observed all vital occurring processes with it or experimented on it as an independent variable?
Pollack is making assumptions too but it is not bad if it gives him direction for further studies.
briansteere
I recommend Gerald Pollack’s book ‘The Fourth Phase of Water’ as an example of empirical science at its best.
Quite apart from that its ‘ordinary’ findings have extraordinary implication and application.
You can reproduce the experiments yourself.
My point was to dismissing light because ‘photons’ were considered a mental construct.
Light can be measured as IR radiation from another body directly to your senses we call it radiative heat. I cant immediately quote examples of biophotonic or biological use of light as energy and information – but I have no cause to believe that electromagnetic principles stop acting within biology when they are everywhere else apparent.
The specific application of seeking to measure with photons is not my main point here. That involves complexities in practice and in interpretation.
kordelas kordelas
I know who Pollack is and what he does.
Cause and effect experiments or tinkering with things by trial and error do not explain what processes occur between.
Also nowhere I dismissed what level of brightness is as we visually perceive it.
The thing is what really know about it.
We associate effects with measurements. It is a different thing than knowing all vital occurring processes and using this knowledge to validate a measuring method.
Energy is another mental construct only.
My point is that we should categorize and present things as they really are.
briansteere
The term ‘communication’ is often used for an exchange or transmission of information between separate or individual parts. But Beneath this are resonant patterns within a whole.
The idea of recycling breakdown products is part of physics, as with biology. So ‘cell debris’ is not necessarily ‘junk’. Nor is intelligence ‘in’ the cells, the debris or the organism or indeed planetary biome, but Is the field of which all else takes form and function.
So for my part Communication is a subset or selection within Communion. But a pathological idea of separation from wholeness ‘thinks’ through the lens of fragmenting and fragmented self-assumption such as to generate artefacts that it then seeks to ‘make sense of as its world.
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king’s horses and all the king’s men
Couldn’t put Humpty together again.
But in this metaphor the fall is into a division and dissociation that no longer recognises life, for it presumes to separate from actions so as to assume itself the initiator or cause, in a characteristic reversal that then seeks to control or usurp function to mental modelling set over reality made blind thereby.
Exosomal communications like our own, are not limited to packets and particles, but express and embody the underlying nature of one – which is itself indivisible. The idea of creating something out of nothing is the nature of a forgetting of everything one, and one in everything.
To such a seeming, oneness is called a void, a zero-point or a field of relativity. For it is prior to thinking or thinging of a world projected and reflected.
What reveals reality is truly shared basis for life and thought.
What seeks to make real, is a private bubble or construct.
These two are the balance points of a focus in motion.
We are creators in our own realm of idea-extension and experience, but we do not and can not create our self, but only an exo-somal representation.
I looked up soma and found it interesting to read the first few examples:
https://presearch.com/search?q=soma%20define
Greek thought set it as and in the body, Hindu as the vital force or cosmic energy.
Scientific Medicine locked down in cells!
😉
kordelas kordelas
There are similar issues with this method of visualization just like with EM.
reante
If cell cultures were total crap like you say Mike then IVF wouldn’t exist. Test tube babies wouldn’t exist.
Mike Stone
I never made a blanket statement claiming all cell culturing is bad. That is a rather ridiculous assumption on your part. However, the cell culture process used to “isolate” exosomes and “viruses” is total crap and does not lead to purified and isolated particles. It is a mixture of toxic substances along with human and animal waste material.
reante
Interesting. I would have thought as a Christian you would be opposed to children conceived in antibiotics-laced petri dishes. I most certainly am.
Mike Stone
Why do you assume I am a Christian?
reante
Because you’re a scientific Methodist. 😀
reante
children being conceived
PC
On the topic of ‘viruses’ in animal
myxomatoses in rabbits
“Yet we don’t need an “infectious virus” to explain myxomatosis. During the 1950s, myxomatosis was intentionally introduced in Australia, France and Chile to control wild European rabbit populations. Brought to these countries in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to serve as a food source, and having few enemies, these rabbits bred like . . . like rabbits. . . and soon overwhelmed the countryside, eating every green thing in sight. Did scientists kill them off by introducing pure isolated virus or even “virulent” virus into the rabbits? No; they introduced fleas.21 The fleas dutifully bit the rabbits and myxomatosis followed, killing off huge numbers. Blood-sucking insects like fleas, mosquitoes and ticks contain an enzyme called apyrase in their saliva, which prevents platelet aggregation (clotting) at the site of the bite. Apyrase keeps the blood liquid until the insect has had its fill. In animals that are breathing bad air in overcrowded warrens, are undernourished due to scarce food (including clot-promoting vitamin K in green fodder) and then are bitten many times, the enzyme can overwhelm blood-clotting capabilities and act as a poison. In short, fleas and mosquitoes are one of nature’s ways to control overpopulation in various species of animals, and they do it by poisoning them.
Likewise, we don’t need to call on “infectious viruses” to explain human diseases like TB in the Inuit or cholera among the Chinese. Nutrient deficiencies, crowding and filth are perfectly capable of causing suffering and death without the help of “viruses.” Finally, are researchers seeing “viruses” in their swabs and isolates, or helpful exosomes which multiply in situations of stress and disease?“
https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/the-contagion-fairy-tale/#gsc.tab=0
George
The study of the theoretical exosome can’t confirm the existence of virus particles. But it will not stop them from saying that viruses are exosomes-like particles. It would be better for them to demonstrate cells dying from a natural process (without adding chemical ingredients) and then analyzing the byproducts. This method should adhere to the law of the conservation of mass. If the exosomes are found it still does not prove that they existed in the cell or were in the cell in the state they are found while the cell was fully alive.
George
The COVID-19 mRNA “Vaccines” cause Cancer; here’s the evidence…
https://expose-news.com/2022/08/02/the-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-cause-cancer/
The comments at the bottom of this article are well worth reading.
briansteere
I start reading and meet every kind of claim – that I am unwilling to accept or even invest in as plausible due to the nature and complexity of lies being propagated as normal currency of thought. The injections do not contain the aptly named spike protein, but as SAID to transfect cells, hijack their DNA to then produce the S-protein – which is entirely a GoF product – that is – NOT derived from any actual found virus isolate. So WHAT IS being measured or ‘tested for’ as ‘S-protein’? Is it part of natural processes but assigned to the actions of viruses or man-made hijackers?
IS it being measured or are the ‘tests’ for biomarkers another trick by which to conjure up, mutate or eradicate according to the parameters and working definitions?
I am inclined to Hamer’s view of cancer – and see the poisoning of both minds and bodies as the suppression of the body function, such that healing phase is blocked (not least by interpretation of symptoms as an ‘attack’ of disease).
There are details to Hamer’s findings that require study, but in general, breast cancers correspond to child-conflicts or fears. Ovaries (and testes) to (loss conflict of loved ones.
I don’t ask for belief here, but find credible explanation for cause at a deeper level of relational existence than a reductive material machine-existence by which we successfully mask out or discard and denigrate our heart and minds to a slave status that of course reproduces as our social order!
PC
‘the real dangers in the vaccines are the nanoparticles and adjuvants, not the mRNA.’
‘ There are currently four different fat-soluble substances in nanoparticle size in all Corona gene vaccines. One of them is polyethylene glycol, PEG. It is known that this PEG can develop an extremely high allergic potential.’
‘ Since the gene and even the cell theories have been completely refuted, [5] the alleged genes in the Corona vaccines cannot cause any genetic damage to our alleged genetic material. Our chromosomes are in a constant state of change and reconstruction and therefore cannot be genetic material. ’
“ The toxic ingredients, the nanoparticles, are mainly responsible for the rapid damage caused by the gene corona vaccinations. The all-clear can be given for the false claims that the “genes” in the vaccines and an immune system supposedly running amok would cause damage in the future. What causes long-term vaccine damage, however, and often only after weeks and months, is, as with all vaccinations, the so-called “psychosomatics”: when the act of vaccination itself triggers a trauma, a “biological conflict”. The build-up and degradation processes triggered by this usually only become visible after weeks or months.
But if the act of vaccination immediately causes a change in character, aggression (often against the mothers because they bring their children to be vaccinated), autism, mania, depression, bed-wetting, etc., this proves that the act of vaccination in itself has triggered a “trauma”, i.e. a biological conflict. The physical consequences that are triggered in parallel with this change of nature, e.g. always digestive problems in autism, are often only noticed weeks or months after the vaccination act, but are real vaccination damage in the sense of real biology. However, if the vaccination damage does not occur immediately, it is not recognisable from the point of view of “purely material biology&medicine” and is therefore systematically not recognised.”
https://media2-production.mightynetworks.com/asset/40443686/Dangerous_Claims_Exaggerated_danger_of_the_corona_vaccinations_from_Dr._Stephen_.pdf?_gl=1*ay09tt*_ga*MTIzMTkzOTQ4OC4xNjI1NzM1OTcw*_ga_T49FMYQ9FZ*MTY1OTcwOTg3OC4xMTc1LjEuMTY1OTcxMDAxNC4w
George
I don’t buy their theory about the spike protein either. They’re explaining what they see happening through their understanding of how the body works. What they see is cause and effect. Their efforts to explain the mechanism don’t hold water. But the point that there is an increase in the incidence of cancer since the rollout of the injections cannot be ignored.
George
Recently, Joe Virion was convicted for murder. He was found guilty of the homicide of his cellmate. However, no bullet was found and thus there was nothing to match the rifling in the weapon they recovered at the scene. The autopsy revealed the body had an exit wound but no entrance wound. The prosecution told the jury that it was a new and remarkable kind of bullet. The prosecution also told the jury that the gun was placed in Joe’s hand to see if it would fit his hand, which, of course, would mean he was capable of firing it. After that, they tested the gun for Joe’s fingerprints and obtained a match. The prosecution then explained that the evidence was incontrovertible that Joe had murdered his cellmate. The jury agreed and Joe was found guilty in spite of the fact that there was no entrance wound, no bullet and planted evidence. Have you ever heard a story like that before?