From Rodent Tissues to Digital Sequences: The Making of a Molecular Ghost and the Displacement of the Chemical Environment If you have been paying attention to the mainstream fear-propaganda machine lately, you have no doubt heard the terrifying tale of a Dutch couple and a German national who succumbed to the “deadly Hantavirus” aboard the… Continue reading The Hanta Hustle
The Playbook: Substitution, Assumption, Persuasion As the conventional history of virology tells it, virologist John Franklin Enders “isolated” and “proved” the measles “virus” in 1954 in his paper Propagation in Tissue Cultures of Cytopathogenic Agents from Patients with Measles. He did this by developing a culturing method that used throat washings from suspected measles patients—collected by gargling… Continue reading Enders Game
“Act like a virus!” In the first part of this series, I examined how fallacious reasoning and indirect methods commonly used by virologists can deceive them into believing they’ve found a “virus” when no such thing has been demonstrated. I focused on the case of Dr. Robert Shihman Chang and the so-called “lipovirus,” a phenomenon that arose… Continue reading The “Virus” Deception: Case Studies in Pseudoscience — Part 2: SMON Says
How a speculative agent with no direct evidence was framed as a causative “virus.” In the 1950s, virology began to emerge as a distinct discipline, separating itself from bacteriology. For the first time, it was (falsely) recognized as a legitimate scientific field. This shift was largely due to the introduction of the cell culture technique by… Continue reading The “Virus” Deception: Case Studies in Pseudoscience — Part 1: The “Lipovirus”
In a previous article, I took a look at the very illogical excuse that virologists make in regard to why they are unable to purify and isolate the particles that are claimed to be “viruses” directly from the fluids of a sick human or animal. As a reminder, below is the response I received from… Continue reading Just One Particle
“No virus has been obtained in an absoutely pure state. Not even the washed granules of vaccine virus can be accepted as representing only virus. Therefore it is impossible to say that virus alone is being filtered rather than virus attached to aggregates of protein or particles of degraded cells.” -Thomas Rivers, Filterable Viruses: A Critical Review https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC374955/ The above statement… Continue reading Where’s the “Virus?”
Round and around we go on the pathogen merry-go-round. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. People are suffering from the same set of non-specific symptoms that they encounter each and every year, and it is declared that a influenza outbreak is upon us. A few months pass, and despite the vaccines and treatments, the symptoms… Continue reading The Sick Cycle Carousel
How to create the fictional “threat” of a “spillover” event. Every so often, I come across stories about studies claiming to have discovered “novel viruses” with potential implications for human health. Reading these studies reveals a familiar pattern: an ill human or animal with non-specific symptoms tests negative for known bacteria and “viruses.” Next, tissues… Continue reading Cat Trick
I was recently in a discussion on Twitter with a user who was utterly convinced in the power of vaccination to end “viral” diseases. This person believed that smallpox had been successfully wiped off the face of the Earth through the injection of toxins directly into the bloodstream and that the defeat of polio was… Continue reading The Magic Trick
You go through narrow-pored clay filters, which hold back all bacteria, easily pass through and you have they are not yet visible with the best microscopes, including the ultramicroscope can do. We must infer their existence because they represent various human, animal and plant diseases. It’s a very special strange fact that we are dealing with these microorganisms that are completely invisible… Continue reading The “Virus” Concept
“No viruses have been found multiplying free in nature.” -Virologist Thomas Rivers Tom Rivers: reflections on a life in medicine and science : an oral history memoir For the greater part of the first 50 years of the 20th century, there was no agreed upon definition for what the invisible entities labelled as a “virus”… Continue reading Inventing the Nature of “Viruses”
I recently went through the origins of the “virus” concept that was born in the late 1800s by pseudoscientific evidence generated for Tobacco Mosaic “Virus” (TMV) and Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD). It was abundantly clear that, at the time of the creation of the “virus” concept, there was (and still is) no direct evidence that these pathogenic entities… Continue reading The “Virus” Model
Back in September of 2021, I was alerted to a “virus” that I had never heard of before known as the Nipah “virus.” After having a good laugh over the name (there were a few nipple jokes thrown about), I had decided to investigate this mysterious “virus” to see what all of the fuss was… Continue reading Nipah’d in the Bud
Over the past few weeks, I have had the privilege of working with some brilliant people on establishing a challenge to virology in order to finally put their (pseudo)scientific methods to the test. Stemming from the mind of Dr. Tom Cowan and meticulously crafted by Dr. Mark Bailey and Dr. Kevin Corbett, the No “Virus”… Continue reading The No “Virus” Challenge
In order to understand the deception of virology, it is important to trace every “virus” to its point of origin in order to see that there is no credible proof of any purified and isolated “virus” at any point in its history. Often times, this leads one to the investigation of so-called plant and animal… Continue reading The Shope Papillomavirus: The Precusor to HPV
In virology, in order to determine whether particles believed to be “viruses” are actually pathogenic, virologists must demonstrate pathogenicity in a suitable host in order to satisfy the last two of Koch’s four Postulates proving a microbe causes disease: 3. The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism. 4. The microorganism… Continue reading Is HPV Pathogenic?
Looking back at the original papers, it was clear that the human “papillomavirus” (HPV) was nothing more than random particles found in ground up wart tissue. There was no attempt at purification/isolation of any “virus” nor was there any proof of pathogenicity. The researchers claimed that the particles they picked out from the impure samples… Continue reading HPV Madness!
virus, infectious agent of small size and simple composition that can multiply only in living cells of animals, plants, or bacteria. The name is from a Latin word meaning “slimy liquid” or “poison.” https://www.britannica.com/science/virus I have purposefully stayed away from the whole “SARS-COV-2” as a gain of function/bioweapon disinformation campaign as it is obvious to anyone who has ever read… Continue reading Gain of Fiction
Hilleman put down the paper: “My God,” he said, “This is the pandemic. It’s here!” As I was investigating the origins of the flu “virus,” I had come upon the infamous avian flu and decided to crack the egg open so to speak. I originally set out to uncover whether this would be the one… Continue reading Maurice Hilleman and the Avian Flu Pandemics
While looking into the origins of the influenza “virus,” it became clear to me that the particles claimed to be the swine flu, influenza A, and influenza B had never been properly purified nor isolated directly from the fluids of a sick host. These “viruses” had never been proven pathogenic in a natural way either,… Continue reading Was Influenza C Ever Purified and Isolated?
“Adventitious agents are defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as microorganisms that may have been unintentionally introduced into the manufacturing process of a biological medicinal product [5]: these include bacteria, fungi, mycoplasma/spiroplasma, mycobacteria, rickettsia, protozoa, parasites, transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) agents and viruses. Adventitious agents could be inadvertently introduced into a vaccine through starting… Continue reading The Adventitious Adenovirus
One of the problems virologists, microbiologists, and other germ theory defenders have when challenged with providing proof of the purification/isolation of any “virus”directly from a human is the complete lack of this proof in any of the original “virus” papers. They can not provide this evidence as it simply does not exist. Virologists have never… Continue reading The Notorious NoV
I love the doctors—they are dears; But must they spend such years and years Investigating such a lot Of illnesses which no one’s got, When everybody, young and old, Is frantic with the common cold? And I will eat my only hat If they know anything of that!” Herbert AP. The common cold. In: Look back… Continue reading The Ridiculous Ruse of the Rampaging Rhinovirus
You can tell a lot about a person just by the content of their character, in how they treat others, and in how they interact with the world around them. Are they someone who is honest and reliable or one who is untrustworthy and a fraud? What does the character of a person tell you… Continue reading Louis Pasteur’s Unethical Rabies Fraud
“HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS.” -Luc Montagnier VI Int’l AIDS Conference, Jun 24 1990 http://aras.ab.ca/aidsquotes.htm If you have been following the news recently, you may have heard that there is currently a new “highly virulent strain” of HIV running around the Netherlands (I think there is a pun in there somewhere).… Continue reading Montagnier’s Monster
In science credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not the man to whom the idea first occurs. -Francis Galton Edward Jenner is considered the “Father of Immunology” for his work with both cowpox and smallpox. While inoculations were known and used before him, Jenner made the case that he could create immunity… Continue reading Edward Jenner’s Smallpox Paper (1798)
According to the CDC: “In 1954, Thomas Weller used cell culture to isolate VZV from vesicular fluid of patients with varicella or zoster.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/varicella.html Taking the CDC at their not-so-trustworthy word, the ‘virus” responsible for both the chickenpox and shingles was not isolated until 1954. This means that any paper said to be working with… Continue reading Did Thomas Weller Isolate the Varicella-Zoster “Virus” in 1954?
Every once in a while, I’m fortunate enough to stumble upon an old paper that I imagine makes those trying to keep the lid shut on this virology scam cringe a bit when it’s brought up. These papers contain admittances and revelations by researchers that, if they were uttered by virologists today, would potentially blow… Continue reading Thomas Rivers Debunks Chickenpox in 1923
“Incidentally, these tests furnish interesting information as to the portal of entry of the virus of varicella. The fact that the lymph from the vesicles, when applied to the broken skin or to the mucous membranes, led to no infection must cause us to consider this investigation from quite another standpoint. How are we to… Continue reading Chickenpox & Shingles: No Transmission
“Did you know? The same virus that causes chickenpox also causes shingles. Although shingles and chickenpox are caused by the same virus, they are not the same illness.” When looking into the history of virology, it becomes readily apparent that the same symptoms of disease are regularly given different names which are claimed to be… Continue reading Chickenpox & Shingles: A Confusing Tale About the Same Disease Caused by the Same “Virus” Yet Given Different Names
“If a lie is only printed often enough, it becomes a quasi-truth, and if such a truth is repeated often enough, it becomes an article of belief, a dogma, and men will die for it.” – From The Crown of Life by Isa Blagden Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, esotericist, spiritualist, claimed clairvoyant, and the… Continue reading Did Rudolf Steiner Demonstrate Chickenpox Infectiousness in 1875?
On May 8th, 1980, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the complete global eradication of the smallpox “virus.” This moment in time is considered one of the greatest success stories in all of modern medicine. Humanity had come together in a worldwide effort and finally conquered a deadly foe by utilizing the medical “miracle” of… Continue reading Was Smallpox Really Eradicated?
When it comes to symptoms of disease, fear has been a constant tool used by the medical cartel to sell young impressionable minds on the myths of “viruses” and contagiousness. A great example of this is found in smallpox. From a very young age, we were fed stories of how the pilgrims transferred the deadly… Continue reading Did William Heberden Distinguish Chickenpox From Smallpox in 1767?
I think it’s simple logic. It doesn’t require that anyone have any specialized knowledge of the field. The fact is that if there were evidence that HIV causes AIDS-if anyone who was in fact a specialist in that area could write a review of the literature, in which a number of scientific studies were cited… Continue reading Creating the “Coronavirus”
Remember the horrendous MERS “Coronavirus” outbreak of 2012? Don’t feel bad if it doesn’t ring a bell as most people outside of Saudi Arabia remain unaware of it. This epidemic-that-never-was resulted in only 882 deaths associated with it globally. Apparently, the MERS “virus” didn’t like to travel as 804 of those deaths were in Saudi… Continue reading Zaki MERS “Coronavirus” Paper (2012)
In 2005, Patrick Woo claimed the discovery of another new “coronavirus” which he named HKU1. This was the third new human “coronavirus” identified since 2003 after 30 years of apparent hibernation with the discovery of the first two strains in the 1960’s. On top of the human “coronaviruses” popping up at the turn of the… Continue reading Woo “Coronavirus” HKU1 Paper (2005)
“I have the hypothesis that some viruses may be beneficial. I have no proof. It is only a hypothesis, simply because some viruses fail to be associated with disease, so these viruses may be beneficial, but this has not been investigated yet. Work on this topic is ongoing in my group.” -Lia Van Der Hoek The… Continue reading Van Der Hoek’s “Coronavirus” NL63 Paper (2004)
In 1968, a group of eight virologists sent word to Nature that they had all discovered similar (i.e. the same) particles from tissue and organ cultures in humans which resembled those in chickens and mice. The researchers relied on negative staining in electron microscopes and used several indirect methods such as complement fixation, neutralization tests,… Continue reading Naming The “Coronaviruses” (1968)
After his preliminary paper on the discovery of “IBV-like” particles, McIntosh went on to adapt the growth of his “virus” in suckling mouse brains and then to tissue cultures. McIntosh did so because he could not “grow” his “virus” using the standard tissue culture techniques and had to rely on organ cultures from aborted fetuses… Continue reading McIntosh “Coronavirus” OC43 Discovery Paper (1967)
In 1967, Kenneth McIntosh discovered what became considered the second strain of “Coronavirus” (after the red-headed step-child B814 was discarded to the historical waste bin) which was later named OC43. It is difficult to find out much backstory on the discovery process of OC43, which coincidentally happened to be discovered at the same exact time… Continue reading McIntosh “Coronavirus” OC43 Preliminary Paper (1967)
In 1967, June Almeida presented a paper supposedly showing the first EM images of the “coronavirus” structure. These images were published two years after D.A. Tyrrell discovered the B814 strain in 1965 and a year after Dorothy Hamre discovered strain 229E in 1966. The samples that Almeida used to characterize the previously unseen “viruses” were… Continue reading June Almeida And The First “Coronavirus” EM Images (1967)
In 1966, Dorothy Hamre “isolated” what she termed specimen 229E from tissue cultures using specimens from college students. She noticed what she said was distinct cytopathic changes (CPE) from known “viruses” and the results she obtained from indirect antibody testing led her to conclude it was a new respiratory “virus.” The 229E “virus” is now… Continue reading Hamre’s “Coronavirus” 229E Paper (1966)
This is the second paper by D.A. Tyrrell that is considered as preliminary evidence for the existence of human “coronaviruses.” Notice, as in his first paper from 1965, that once again there are numerous assumptions which are made, the least of which is that there is a “virus” present in the samples to begin with.… Continue reading D.A. Tyrrell’s 2nd “Coronavirus” Discovery Paper (1966)
If you want to truly understand the insane leaps in logic, the numerous assumptions, and the lack of evidence regarding any “virus,” you must always trace things back to the original source for the discovery of said “virus.” If the paper claiming the isolation of a novel “virus” is unable to actually show purification/isolation of… Continue reading D.A. Tyrrell’s “Coronavirus” Discovery Paper (1965)
“Isolation and purification of a virus is necessary before a vaccine can be made.” The above statement came from the New York Times obituary of Wendell Meredith Stanley, considered by some to be the “Father of Virology.” While it is technically a correct statement, it really should read: Isolation and purification of the particles believed… Continue reading Further Proof The Influenza “Virus” Was Never Purified and Isolated
After “isolating” the influenza A “virus” in 1934 and supposedly “isolating” it again on tissue culture and egg membrane in 1937, Thomas Francis Jr. was back in 1940 to perform more grotesque serial passages of ground up chemically altered diseased animal tissue goo from one animal into another. He must have decided that the perfect… Continue reading Did Thomas Francis Jr. Isolate Influenza B in 1940?
When I originally started researching the origins of the supposed isolation of the influenza “virus,” I was not expecting to spend so much time on Thomas Francis Jr. It became evident, however, that throughout the early flu research of the 1930’s and 40’s, Francis Jr. was “Mr. Influenza.” It was also apparent that his research… Continue reading Thomas Francis Jr.’s Flu Review (1937)
In 1937, a few years after Smith, Andrewes, and Laidlaw supposedly isolated influenza A in 1933 and after Thomas Francis Jr. supposedly isolated it in 1934, Francis Jr. once again claimed to have the direct isolation of influenza A “virus,” this time in tissue culture medium and on an egg membrane. Or at least that… Continue reading Did Thomas Francis Jr. Isolate Influenza A in 1937?
“Epidemiology must constantly seek imaginative and ingenious teachers and scholars to create a new genre of medical ecologists who, with both the fine sensitivity of the scientific artist, and the broad perception of the community sculptor, can interpret the interplay of forces which result in disease.” —Thomas Francis, Jr. After the British trio of Smith,… Continue reading Did Thomas Francis Jr. Isolate Influenza A in 1934?
Two years after Richard Shope “discovered” that an invisible “virus” was the assumed cause of the swine flu in 1931, three other researchers decided to determine the “viral” cause of human influenza. These researchers were Wilson Smith, Christopher Andrewes, and Patrick Laidlaw. In order to determine the cause of influenza in humans, these brave researchers… Continue reading Was Influenza A Isolated in 1933?
Exposing the lies of germ theory and virology using their own sources.
Copyright © 2026 All Right Reserved ViroLIEgy
Disclaimer: The information on this site is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice.
We are an awward winning multinational & company We believe in quality and standard worldwide company.
