We know diseases exist as a general term. Some are external and some are internal issues. We don't know if viruses really do. Is a good question what is actually the cause.
I should add that there is no test where they have "reinfected" someone or something else using tissue from someone who has tested positive. This includes animal/bat tests. If I found such a test of course the bar for believable evidence would be damn high.
I forget the name of the 1900 scientist you're drawing from, but all of his ideas have been replaced. There's not an ethical way to implement your suggestion, for one. Of course it's not ethical to deny sick people medicine. Everything done is a violation of ethics!
My vote is on FAKE. Oh, there's a virus. And people have died from it. Beyond that? Every number you've seen is FAKE.
We know diseases exist as a general term. Some are external and some are internal issues. We don't know if viruses really do. Is a good question what is actually the cause.
Ok, looking at it that way, autopsy on people dead supposedly of wuflu discovers blood clots, not virus. No wonder WHO forbade autopsy, right?
Btw Ivermectin clears out the clotting and junk, at least if taken early.
I should add that there is no test where they have "reinfected" someone or something else using tissue from someone who has tested positive. This includes animal/bat tests. If I found such a test of course the bar for believable evidence would be damn high.
I forget the name of the 1900 scientist you're drawing from, but all of his ideas have been replaced. There's not an ethical way to implement your suggestion, for one. Of course it's not ethical to deny sick people medicine. Everything done is a violation of ethics!