There are people who does not get illness having presumable pathogen
Except they are "carriers" because they still have the ability to transmit the disease to other people despite not having symptoms of said disease.
It does not. It just proves that illness where could be "asymptomatic carriers" is not caused by presumed pathogen, and that's all.
It most certainly does invalidate all the postulates because it ends with the assumption that reinfection will cause disease in a healthy animal, which is not the case with asymptomatic carriers.
And it begins with the assumption that there are no pathogens to culture from a healthy animal.
So really you could just eliminate all the postulates and replace them with one single postulate.... "Healthy animals do not contain pathogens".
It most certainly does invalidate all the postulates because it ends with the assumption that reinfection will cause disease in a healthy animal, which is not the case with asymptomatic carriers.
Or somebody just mistaken with pathogen.
If "asymptomatic carrier" does not get disease, then, there is obviously a reason for that. Just like there is a reason why others get disease.
Do you understand that a peson who didn't get disease after interaction with some substance is a normal healthy person, not others, who get a disease and probably have something wrong in their bodies.
Do you know that there are tons of bacterias, viruses, substances that does not cause any disease in anybody? And there are more of them than pathogenic ones. It is absolutely normal to not become ill because of some virus or bacteria. This is normal, not getting ill. Looks like it is something that was hidden from you by medical swindlers who feed from ilnesses.
And please, show me a single example from any natural science where exist anything similar to that insane concept of "asymptomatic carreer". When from 100 identical experiments 90 give one result, but 10 give completely opposite one, because of "aSyMpTomAtic cArRier" and it is accounted as something acceptable.
If "asymptomatic carrier" does not get disease, then, there is obviously a reason for that. Just like there is a reason why others get disease.
For sure.... Nobody that I'm aware of is downplaying the importance of many other factors that go into determining your health.
But the fact still remains the asymptomatic carrier can pass the disease to other people, despite not having symptoms themselves.
That proves that whatever causes the disease is still inside their body, even though it's not affecting them the way it does other people.
But my overall point is that this claim that viruses aren't real NECESSARIALY requires that diseases defined as "viral" not be contagious.
If "terrain makes you sick, not viruses", then someone who lives in healthy terrain should be able to inject HIV blood and be totally fine because they are safe from the root cause of the disease....
Why don't virus deniers just prove contagiousness isn't real? They can inject HIV blood, swap cotton swabs with herpes patients, and inhale water droplets from sick people sneezing.
And they should be totally fine provided they keep their terrain healthy, whatever that means.
Should be totally trivial and easy to prove that contagiousness isn't a thing, but yet they don't.
But the fact still remains the asymptomatic carrier can pass the disease to other people, despite not having symptoms themselves.
First, "asymptomatic carrier" does not "pass the disease". He pass virus/bacteria. Second - the fact he have no disease is a solid proof that this virus/bacteria is not the cause of disease in that case.
Technically, viruses could be pathogenic (say, produce some really dangerous poisons as a byproduct of their replication process), but that should be proven scientifically. If somebody does not fell ill being infected, that means this virus itself is not pathogenic. In the worst case it could be catalyst of kind in people who fell ill, but not the cause of disease.
Inability of body to contain and defeat a virus is a cause of disease, really, not virus itself, in overhelming majority of cases of viral infections.
But my overall point is that this claim that viruses aren't real NECESSARIALY requires that diseases defined as "viral" not be contagious.
Bacteria or even some highly agressive poison could be contagious too. Contagiousness itself does not prove that viruses exists, Virus existence proof is in other experiments, with separating everything that is bacteria or poison or other known pathogens and studying what is left in that sample causing disease.
If "terrain makes you sick, not viruses", then someone who lives in healthy terrain should be able to inject HIV blood and be totally fine because they are safe from the root cause of the disease....
HIV blood injection does not always cause disease. There is no scientific proof that HIV cause AIDS. However, this does not necessary connected with terrain, more with correct functioning of human body.
At the same time I suppose that today people who live in "healthy terrain" (in rural areas?) have better health than those who live in cities f.e. and so have lower probability of getting disease regardless of disease initiator.
So, basically "healthy terrain" as healthy way of life is really helps to not fell ill from viruses. But that in no way prove that viruses does not exist.
"Viruses does not exist, it's terrain" is the same logical fallacy as "Viruses are cause of diseases, not anything else".
Except they are "carriers" because they still have the ability to transmit the disease to other people despite not having symptoms of said disease.
It most certainly does invalidate all the postulates because it ends with the assumption that reinfection will cause disease in a healthy animal, which is not the case with asymptomatic carriers.
And it begins with the assumption that there are no pathogens to culture from a healthy animal.
So really you could just eliminate all the postulates and replace them with one single postulate.... "Healthy animals do not contain pathogens".
There ya go.... All of them boiled down to 1.
Or somebody just mistaken with pathogen.
If "asymptomatic carrier" does not get disease, then, there is obviously a reason for that. Just like there is a reason why others get disease.
Do you understand that a peson who didn't get disease after interaction with some substance is a normal healthy person, not others, who get a disease and probably have something wrong in their bodies.
Do you know that there are tons of bacterias, viruses, substances that does not cause any disease in anybody? And there are more of them than pathogenic ones. It is absolutely normal to not become ill because of some virus or bacteria. This is normal, not getting ill. Looks like it is something that was hidden from you by medical swindlers who feed from ilnesses.
And please, show me a single example from any natural science where exist anything similar to that insane concept of "asymptomatic carreer". When from 100 identical experiments 90 give one result, but 10 give completely opposite one, because of "aSyMpTomAtic cArRier" and it is accounted as something acceptable.
For sure.... Nobody that I'm aware of is downplaying the importance of many other factors that go into determining your health.
But the fact still remains the asymptomatic carrier can pass the disease to other people, despite not having symptoms themselves.
That proves that whatever causes the disease is still inside their body, even though it's not affecting them the way it does other people.
But my overall point is that this claim that viruses aren't real NECESSARIALY requires that diseases defined as "viral" not be contagious.
If "terrain makes you sick, not viruses", then someone who lives in healthy terrain should be able to inject HIV blood and be totally fine because they are safe from the root cause of the disease....
Why don't virus deniers just prove contagiousness isn't real? They can inject HIV blood, swap cotton swabs with herpes patients, and inhale water droplets from sick people sneezing.
And they should be totally fine provided they keep their terrain healthy, whatever that means.
Should be totally trivial and easy to prove that contagiousness isn't a thing, but yet they don't.
First, "asymptomatic carrier" does not "pass the disease". He pass virus/bacteria. Second - the fact he have no disease is a solid proof that this virus/bacteria is not the cause of disease in that case.
Technically, viruses could be pathogenic (say, produce some really dangerous poisons as a byproduct of their replication process), but that should be proven scientifically. If somebody does not fell ill being infected, that means this virus itself is not pathogenic. In the worst case it could be catalyst of kind in people who fell ill, but not the cause of disease.
Inability of body to contain and defeat a virus is a cause of disease, really, not virus itself, in overhelming majority of cases of viral infections.
Bacteria or even some highly agressive poison could be contagious too. Contagiousness itself does not prove that viruses exists, Virus existence proof is in other experiments, with separating everything that is bacteria or poison or other known pathogens and studying what is left in that sample causing disease.
HIV blood injection does not always cause disease. There is no scientific proof that HIV cause AIDS. However, this does not necessary connected with terrain, more with correct functioning of human body.
At the same time I suppose that today people who live in "healthy terrain" (in rural areas?) have better health than those who live in cities f.e. and so have lower probability of getting disease regardless of disease initiator.
So, basically "healthy terrain" as healthy way of life is really helps to not fell ill from viruses. But that in no way prove that viruses does not exist.
"Viruses does not exist, it's terrain" is the same logical fallacy as "Viruses are cause of diseases, not anything else".
Do it then. Inject yourself with HIV.