"No virus" theory sets the "proof for viruses" to such level that due to the size of protein aggregates (and as such, "viruses") that no microscopy can EVER IMAGINE and thus no separation method can NEVER separate the claimed protein aggregates to the level that "NO VIRUS" camp requires.
So, as a scientific theory, it is NOT EVEN WRONG.
It may be true, may not be true, but it is NOT falsifiable AND it is not practical in helping us to avoid them poisoning us (we can call the virus protein aggregates, self-replicating peptides, m|mi|si|RNA, DNA or "viruses" - it doesn't matter - they are still poisoning us, as the statistics clearly show).
Or maybe they could inoculate cells containing the supposed virus in culture which doesn't contain other genetic material and proof its existence by following the Koch postulates.
Also, I don't believe there aren't good enough microscopes to see the virions. We have microscopes that magnify to the level of atoms. That's the worst cope I've ever heard since NASA told us they can't go back to the moon because they've lost the technology.
Atomic force and tunneling microscopes cannot imagine living things, they tear them apart and provide a single snapshot. Cannot provide identification nor sequence of things like cell entry.
Super resolution microscopes are the best we have that go anywhere near the resolution limits required to image "viruses" and they don't resolve enough.
Still there is a way to isolate/purify the supposed particle they call virus and inoculate it on a healthy subject where it should cause the same symptoms of the disease. Then they should be able to get a sample from that subject and isolate/purify the same particle. If that's done in culture that doesn't contain other genetic material and drugs, then we'll have a proof of a virus according to Koch's postulates. It's never been done though.
Any theory to be scientific, must be falsifiable.
"No virus" theory sets the "proof for viruses" to such level that due to the size of protein aggregates (and as such, "viruses") that no microscopy can EVER IMAGINE and thus no separation method can NEVER separate the claimed protein aggregates to the level that "NO VIRUS" camp requires.
So, as a scientific theory, it is NOT EVEN WRONG.
It may be true, may not be true, but it is NOT falsifiable AND it is not practical in helping us to avoid them poisoning us (we can call the virus protein aggregates, self-replicating peptides, m|mi|si|RNA, DNA or "viruses" - it doesn't matter - they are still poisoning us, as the statistics clearly show).
How do you know?
Have you singularly isolated such "toxin"?
Do you have microscope video showing such "toxin" entering the cell and causing illness?
Use the exact same criteria for "toxin" as you use for "virus" or anything below 10nm (resolving power of live imaging super resolution microscopes).
but Alas, we do agrees: They are poisoning us. We just can't "prove" with 100% certainty what "it" is that they are poisoning us with.
And in the end, it is a moot point. They are still poisoning us. That much even the raw statistics show us.
No, I use multivalued logic to reason.
I stay firmly in the "show me more proof" camp and "show me a theory that can be falsified".
Until that is shown, I stay in the excluded middle.
There are always more options than two. Most people fail to understand this.
Or maybe they could inoculate cells containing the supposed virus in culture which doesn't contain other genetic material and proof its existence by following the Koch postulates.
Also, I don't believe there aren't good enough microscopes to see the virions. We have microscopes that magnify to the level of atoms. That's the worst cope I've ever heard since NASA told us they can't go back to the moon because they've lost the technology.
Atomic force and tunneling microscopes cannot imagine living things, they tear them apart and provide a single snapshot. Cannot provide identification nor sequence of things like cell entry.
Super resolution microscopes are the best we have that go anywhere near the resolution limits required to image "viruses" and they don't resolve enough.
Ok, that's good to know.
Still there is a way to isolate/purify the supposed particle they call virus and inoculate it on a healthy subject where it should cause the same symptoms of the disease. Then they should be able to get a sample from that subject and isolate/purify the same particle. If that's done in culture that doesn't contain other genetic material and drugs, then we'll have a proof of a virus according to Koch's postulates. It's never been done though.
Not a single paper.