Michalus: The issue here is that they have never been able to demonstrate transmission of respiratory viruses (I'll remain mute on other types for now). They literally did experiments in the 1920s/30s where they got sick people to talk/cough extensively with healthy people and... none (or few) of the healthy people got sick.
Now, if (respiratory) viruses can't be transmitted, then they don't exist. Period.
But what about those pictures you see??? Well, they have a procedure to observe 'viruses' -- take a sample, put it in with monkey kidney cells and anti-biotics, and then starve this mix of nutrients... and then you observe 'viruses' under an electron microscope.
Okay, fine, so there are repeatable experimental observations... but of what? If transmission can't be observed then... who cares.
And, hey, there's always the strange case of Masha and dasha -- Siamese twins who shared their circulatory system... and one of them got the measles, but the other didn't. But they literally shared an "immune system"!!!
I told people we looked at virus, and bacteria under the microscope in biology, and all the responses I got was that I was wrong. I know I saw something, so this theory that virus' are simply tiny parasites caught my attention.
Michalus: You can see bacteria under a normal (light-based) microscope, but not viruses (except the 'mega-viruses' alluded to in your article). Light has a wavelength of about 500nm, so it can't resolve the (alleged) 200nm corona viruses.
The electron microscope can resolve things on an Angstrom level, so, of course, you would think that people would have observed 'viruses' -- but no! If you have a person dying of HIV or Corona... you cannot see any viruses in their cells -- you need to process their effluvia via monkey kidney cells etc in order to see anything. Odd, huh? The virus is killing things left-right-and -centre... but it can't be seen!
If you want a real trip, read Peter duesberg's book 'Inventing HIV' (or something like that). It reads like a thriller, and I really don't think that a rational person can read it and still think HIV exists.
To spoil the ending: Gays in the 80s took massive amounts of Amyl Nitrates (poppers) in order to relax their anal muscles to facilitate sex. These 'poppers' destroyed their lungs -- this is why 'AIdS' patients died of fungal pneumonia or Kaposi's Sarcoma... two diseases that nobody dies of. Then the 'doctors' introduced AZT, an old chemo drug, that killed a whole bunch more Gays.
The reason I posted this link is that as you read through and replace “viral infections” with symptoms from parasite infections exposure you solve the riddle. Here they use infectious organisms.
Also, Stefan Lanko refuted virology and used the methodology of using cell cultures of bodily fluids to prove virus isolation is false.
In my own experiments with ivermectin and illness recovery I concur. Modern Medical treatments are just reverse anecdotalism.
I remember people were telling us to buy specific dog, and cat products. When I went to even look they were removed from my local grocery store shelves.
What exactly are you claiming here? Are you saying because Merck typed out an introductory statement in a webpage that this confirms the virus theory of disease? Or are you claiming that because Merck says viruses are parasites of a particular size that “viruses” exist in some form, regardless of their nature?
Oh for fucks sake you fucking retard, OP is simply putting out new and interesting information. If you have questions around it, do your own fucking research.
I didn’t ask the question of you, Bill. I asked it in terms of defining the subject. We can’t assume, as the reader what the author means by ‘nature’ considering the subject is back up for debate. Here I am enjoying this thought provoking post and I contribute with more questions and Bill here gets offended. Fucking retarded.
Which is a healthy part of apoptosis.
There’s zero doubt they know apoptosis is a natural detoxification event. So most of their “antivirals” are designed to keep your body from detoxifying.
iv been thinking about that also. what do they actually do right? Iv heard some no virus doctor discuss them because this question does pop up once and a while. from what i remember some apparently rejuvenate tissue or spare it from being broken down.. but like you said, is that even a good thing in the end? you got me thinking now
well of course you wont find the answer with just a quick search, the prevalent issues steams from the fact that mainstream medicine refuses to accept the connection. thats why you dont see one at first.
I can explain or point you toward resources but only if your actually willing to learn. Iv been thru this over and over with people and don't feel like wasting time
Michalus: The issue here is that they have never been able to demonstrate transmission of respiratory viruses (I'll remain mute on other types for now). They literally did experiments in the 1920s/30s where they got sick people to talk/cough extensively with healthy people and... none (or few) of the healthy people got sick.
Now, if (respiratory) viruses can't be transmitted, then they don't exist. Period.
But what about those pictures you see??? Well, they have a procedure to observe 'viruses' -- take a sample, put it in with monkey kidney cells and anti-biotics, and then starve this mix of nutrients... and then you observe 'viruses' under an electron microscope.
Okay, fine, so there are repeatable experimental observations... but of what? If transmission can't be observed then... who cares.
And, hey, there's always the strange case of Masha and dasha -- Siamese twins who shared their circulatory system... and one of them got the measles, but the other didn't. But they literally shared an "immune system"!!!
Aerotrain
Very interesting information, ty!
Why not take a picture of the damn thing? They got microscopes with cameras attached!
I told people we looked at virus, and bacteria under the microscope in biology, and all the responses I got was that I was wrong. I know I saw something, so this theory that virus' are simply tiny parasites caught my attention.
Michalus: You can see bacteria under a normal (light-based) microscope, but not viruses (except the 'mega-viruses' alluded to in your article). Light has a wavelength of about 500nm, so it can't resolve the (alleged) 200nm corona viruses.
The electron microscope can resolve things on an Angstrom level, so, of course, you would think that people would have observed 'viruses' -- but no! If you have a person dying of HIV or Corona... you cannot see any viruses in their cells -- you need to process their effluvia via monkey kidney cells etc in order to see anything. Odd, huh? The virus is killing things left-right-and -centre... but it can't be seen!
If you want a real trip, read Peter duesberg's book 'Inventing HIV' (or something like that). It reads like a thriller, and I really don't think that a rational person can read it and still think HIV exists.
To spoil the ending: Gays in the 80s took massive amounts of Amyl Nitrates (poppers) in order to relax their anal muscles to facilitate sex. These 'poppers' destroyed their lungs -- this is why 'AIdS' patients died of fungal pneumonia or Kaposi's Sarcoma... two diseases that nobody dies of. Then the 'doctors' introduced AZT, an old chemo drug, that killed a whole bunch more Gays.
It's... insane...
Aerotrain
https://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/overview-of-viral-infections/overview-of-viral-infections
The reason I posted this link is that as you read through and replace “viral infections” with symptoms from parasite infections exposure you solve the riddle. Here they use infectious organisms. Also, Stefan Lanko refuted virology and used the methodology of using cell cultures of bodily fluids to prove virus isolation is false. In my own experiments with ivermectin and illness recovery I concur. Modern Medical treatments are just reverse anecdotalism.
I remember people were telling us to buy specific dog, and cat products. When I went to even look they were removed from my local grocery store shelves.
What exactly are you claiming here? Are you saying because Merck typed out an introductory statement in a webpage that this confirms the virus theory of disease? Or are you claiming that because Merck says viruses are parasites of a particular size that “viruses” exist in some form, regardless of their nature?
I'm not making a claim. I am sharing information that i find interesting. If you disagree elaborate, I'll probably find that interesting too.
I do find this interesting and don't believe the full understanding has yet been achieved
Yes you are: “ I found something for the people that think virus' don't exist. Seems they exist, they're just not what we have been told.”
So will you answer the question?
You're not entitled to my replies 🤣
I found something to discuss. There's discussion. Get over yourself.
Getting this upset over asking for clarification sounds pretty niggerish.
I'm not upset, but I'll be niggerish before I'd be you any day.
Whatever makes you happy,sport. Hope you can become less unhinged in the future
Hope you can grow out of your mellow dramatic behavior.
What is their ‘nature’ then?
I can’t have a conversation with someone answering a question with a question.
Oh for fucks sake you fucking retard, OP is simply putting out new and interesting information. If you have questions around it, do your own fucking research.
You okay, bud? You’re getting a little upset.
It breaks your programming?
No, it’s just rude.
I didn’t ask the question of you, Bill. I asked it in terms of defining the subject. We can’t assume, as the reader what the author means by ‘nature’ considering the subject is back up for debate. Here I am enjoying this thought provoking post and I contribute with more questions and Bill here gets offended. Fucking retarded.
This you?
“What is their ‘nature’ then?”
Fucking retarded indeed.
yeah no. parasites are part of the polymorphic somatid cycle. virus are fucking nothing but dead cell debris.
Which is a healthy part of apoptosis. There’s zero doubt they know apoptosis is a natural detoxification event. So most of their “antivirals” are designed to keep your body from detoxifying.
Edit: OP downvoting, quit acting like a faggot.
iv been thinking about that also. what do they actually do right? Iv heard some no virus doctor discuss them because this question does pop up once and a while. from what i remember some apparently rejuvenate tissue or spare it from being broken down.. but like you said, is that even a good thing in the end? you got me thinking now
Whatever it is, it can’t be a healthy outcome for those that have received “immunizations”
Your comment prompted me to search :
polymorphic somatid cycle
This had to do with tumors. How are you connecting tumors to virus or parasites? No connection found.
well of course you wont find the answer with just a quick search, the prevalent issues steams from the fact that mainstream medicine refuses to accept the connection. thats why you dont see one at first.
I can explain or point you toward resources but only if your actually willing to learn. Iv been thru this over and over with people and don't feel like wasting time
He won’t. He can’t even clarify what the point of its post is.
The point is new information and discussion around it. That’s it. Are you really too fucking stupid to grasp that? (Rhetorical)
See above.
So, you can't connect them, and you think you're giving me homework. You're not.
Should be easy if you've been over and over this, just saying.
It would explain medications such as ivermectin working wonders for covid especially in places like India.
They trolled the shit outta that sub like I've never seen before on peddit
That's where my thoughts go as well!