When I see a visual representation of a virus, it appears to be a whole unit and not a 20% fragment.
When someone is sick, specimens show high concentrations of viral load. Although one may not be able to prove a virus causes illness, it is certainly peculiar that when someone is ill with a "viral infection" they have large quantities of this virus present. There is a high, positive correlation at the very least.
What specifically in Virus Mania or about terrain theory was so convincing that you abandoned the formal conventional explanation for germ theory and definitions of a virus?
Terrain theory fails to convince me. People of shared terrain do not all become sick. However, there is more evidence of contagiousness through person to person contact.
I have heard evidence that was interesting. For example, I have heard of studies that attempted to infect people via viral load and contamination and failed to do so.
When someone is sick, specimens show high concentrations of viral load.
Unfortunately, this isn't true. They've never done the experiments to verify this. They might occasionally lie about having done said experiments. The experiments would be cheap and easy to do... they just don't do them.
However, there is more evidence of contagiousness through person to person contact.
Unfortunately, there is no evidence of person to person contagion, at least not scientifically speaking. Anecdotally... sure. But no experiments have ever established contagion. Again... they'll lie about this, but when you go through the papers, you'll see the lie.
Since you've seen through the holofrost, understanding that viruses are a hoax should be fairly easy. Remember, when you try to talk to a normie about the holofrost, their initial impression is that 'the amazing jewish historians must have an answer to all of your objections...' ... but they don't.
It's going to take more than a simple definition.
I'd start with a history lesson how conventional germ theory came to be. When was a virus first discovered? By who?
We see a virus under electron microscope. If not a virus, then what is it?
Perhaps the phony covid tests are only checking for leftover dead cell fragments, but a virus can be seen and exists. So what do you claim it is?
When I see a visual representation of a virus, it appears to be a whole unit and not a 20% fragment.
When someone is sick, specimens show high concentrations of viral load. Although one may not be able to prove a virus causes illness, it is certainly peculiar that when someone is ill with a "viral infection" they have large quantities of this virus present. There is a high, positive correlation at the very least.
What specifically in Virus Mania or about terrain theory was so convincing that you abandoned the formal conventional explanation for germ theory and definitions of a virus?
Terrain theory fails to convince me. People of shared terrain do not all become sick. However, there is more evidence of contagiousness through person to person contact.
I have heard evidence that was interesting. For example, I have heard of studies that attempted to infect people via viral load and contamination and failed to do so.
Unfortunately, this isn't true. They've never done the experiments to verify this. They might occasionally lie about having done said experiments. The experiments would be cheap and easy to do... they just don't do them.
Unfortunately, there is no evidence of person to person contagion, at least not scientifically speaking. Anecdotally... sure. But no experiments have ever established contagion. Again... they'll lie about this, but when you go through the papers, you'll see the lie.
Since you've seen through the holofrost, understanding that viruses are a hoax should be fairly easy. Remember, when you try to talk to a normie about the holofrost, their initial impression is that 'the amazing jewish historians must have an answer to all of your objections...' ... but they don't.