I think we need to be more careful with loading up terrain theory with easy to misinterpret words. Exosomes (extracellular vesicles) are made visible through at least one technology (electron transmission or scanning microcopes). They can be filtered and examined / classified just like viruses. The difference is in replication competence. So its not that "viruses" are "fake" - they very likely have had their intent / purpose misclassified - they form a branch of the Exosome superset (the other branch non-replication competent). They serve to deliver signals of varying purpose to either local or some large portion the bodies cells. There is a host of research showing that most "viruses" are commensal - meaning they provide some benefit to the holism of the human (or eukaryotic cells / body) that they are discovered within.
When "viruses" are cultured and then experimentally challenged via unnatural inoculation utilizing cellular broths at sufficiently high "viral" concentration, this will naturally disrupt the average body. The "message" is not suppose to exist in such concentrations at such locations in the biome - nor are the adulterants, antifungals, antibiotics and extracellular debris, nucelic acid and organelle contamination that comes along for the ride. So I do think it still true that disease can be inflicted via injection with these substances that although are not truly isolated, they are indeed "cultured".
Feel free to start here to add to your body of knowledge. I do not advise throwing out all of virology / exosomology. The truth is likely a synthesis between them.
Lifelong cytomegalovirus infection may boost the immune system in old age, when we need it most, according to a study led by University of Arizona researchers.
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is notable among Human Herpesvirus because it almost never causes clinical disease in immunocompetant hosts. This is despite the fact that almost the entire adult population is seropositive for the virus
CMV is present in all body secretions including urine, saliva, feces, blood, breast milk, semen, and cervical secretions
I just took the time to write the first few paragraphs - you are free to disavow all of the science but I strongly suggest you do not.
Anyway, this is just from a document of links I've been collecting regarding the changing consensus of what "viruses" really are - questioning even the "pathogenicity" of the ... "pathogenic" ones. They are not all scientific research, some are more editorial. They represent exactly what you are getting at. That we should distrust because this is more breaking edge - a closer picture of reality. But still I find it lacking. The virological domain of science is what it is. Observations from microscopes on tissue samples or cellular cultures + quite a few other technologies including genomic analysis (computational reconstruction of genomes, "antigen" analysis, antibodies.) I strongly advise you understand them all fully. You will only understand the ramifications of terrain theory more completely.
Sad to see he dropped epic knowledge to an empty chamber.
You got to see it. That’s more important than a bunch of lawmakers who already know it’s sketch and have accepted that.
That is true.
Everything he said was what Moderna were warning about in January 2017
https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/
Very good video. Wish US senators could be this knowledgeable.
Knowledge is one thing, a spine is another. They get plausible deniability as long as they keep quiet.
Carry On!!!
I think we need to be more careful with loading up terrain theory with easy to misinterpret words. Exosomes (extracellular vesicles) are made visible through at least one technology (electron transmission or scanning microcopes). They can be filtered and examined / classified just like viruses. The difference is in replication competence. So its not that "viruses" are "fake" - they very likely have had their intent / purpose misclassified - they form a branch of the Exosome superset (the other branch non-replication competent). They serve to deliver signals of varying purpose to either local or some large portion the bodies cells. There is a host of research showing that most "viruses" are commensal - meaning they provide some benefit to the holism of the human (or eukaryotic cells / body) that they are discovered within.
When "viruses" are cultured and then experimentally challenged via unnatural inoculation utilizing cellular broths at sufficiently high "viral" concentration, this will naturally disrupt the average body. The "message" is not suppose to exist in such concentrations at such locations in the biome - nor are the adulterants, antifungals, antibiotics and extracellular debris, nucelic acid and organelle contamination that comes along for the ride. So I do think it still true that disease can be inflicted via injection with these substances that although are not truly isolated, they are indeed "cultured".
Feel free to start here to add to your body of knowledge. I do not advise throwing out all of virology / exosomology. The truth is likely a synthesis between them.
Chronic Viral Infections vs. Our Immune System: Revisiting our view of viruses as pathogens https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/programs/stars/assets/Dr.%20Tiffany%20Reese.pdf
The good viruses: Viral mutualistic symbioses https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/the-good-viruses-viral-mutualistic-symbioses
Move Over, Bacteria! Viruses Make Their Mark as Mutualistic Microbial Symbionts https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Move-Over%2C-Bacteria!-Viruses-Make-Their-Mark-as-Roossinck/8ffd1ba3f12184c2cd936d348bf8eac8187ee0d0
Even viruses can be beneficial microbes https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Even-viruses-can-be-beneficial-microbes-Roossinck/5823a4eb5bbae044f50cc96474c090ce1e907558
Are Viruses Always Villains? The Roles Plant Viruses May Play in Improving Plant Responses to Stress https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Are-Viruses-Always-Villains-The-Roles-Plant-Viruses-Wylie-Jones/0bf9c83fb1209ed8b6d4e668e0c028216a73c669
Enemies with benefits: mutualistic interactions of viruses with lower eukaryotes https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Enemies-with-benefits%3A-mutualistic-interactions-of-Jagdale-Joshi/1b5a76876cef14c9b336ebb7f186615cde6719c2
Arguing that Cytomegalovirus is Beneficial for Old Immune Systems https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2018/07/arguing-that-cytomegalovirus-is-beneficial-for-old-immune-systems/
Viruses of the Human Body https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310233895_Viruses_of_the_human_body
Lifelong CMV infection improves immune defense in old mice by broadening the mobilized TCR repertoire against third-party infection https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1719451115
The human virome: The trillions of viruses inside your body keeping you alive https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-human-virome-the-trillions-of-viruses-inside-your-body-keeping-you-alive/
Virus May Boost — Not Weaken — Our Immune Systemshttps://news.arizona.edu/story/virus-may-boost-not-weaken-our-immune-systems
Historical Background https://virus.stanford.edu/herpes/History.html https://virus.stanford.edu/herpes/CMVdiseases.html
I just took the time to write the first few paragraphs - you are free to disavow all of the science but I strongly suggest you do not.
Anyway, this is just from a document of links I've been collecting regarding the changing consensus of what "viruses" really are - questioning even the "pathogenicity" of the ... "pathogenic" ones. They are not all scientific research, some are more editorial. They represent exactly what you are getting at. That we should distrust because this is more breaking edge - a closer picture of reality. But still I find it lacking. The virological domain of science is what it is. Observations from microscopes on tissue samples or cellular cultures + quite a few other technologies including genomic analysis (computational reconstruction of genomes, "antigen" analysis, antibodies.) I strongly advise you understand them all fully. You will only understand the ramifications of terrain theory more completely.