Why would they need to prove something that everyone already believes?
It's like saying "If they actually had rockets and satelites, why wouldn't they use them to prove the Earth is a globe?" They don't need to.
I'm not saying germ theory is definitely true, just that there really isn't any doubt of it in most people's minds.
Edit: I really can't say I understand the point in denying germ theory; what difference would it make if it was completely made up?
Right now it seems to explain quite a bit via feasible mechanisms. For example, if I get a cut and it gets dirty, I get an infection. If I keep it clean, or clean it with alcohol (or any number of anti-biotic agents) to kill the supposed microbial germs, it doesn't get infected. So why is that happening, if not germs? My son got Scarlet Fever when he was younger, which was no joke, and he got better hours after being treated with anti-biotics so, again, how did that work if germs aren't real? What did they treat him with that so obviously worked?
If it is fake, so what? The claim was that the vax would stop the spread of illness, regardless of the cause, and the numbers show it doesn't. Compare this to the polio vaccine where we can easily see the different rates of polio in places that use quality shots versus those whose treatment is spotty or use the Gates killshots.
I'm no fan of the varicella shots, but it's pretty obvious that rates of chickenpox are way down today compared to when I was a kid, so clearly many of these treatments are functional.
What then, would the difference be if germ theory were a conspiracy? As opposed to the difference of the clot shot being "safe and effective" versus it being useless and killing people?
Why would they need to prove something that everyone already believes?
It's like saying "If they actually had rockets and satelites, why wouldn't they use them to prove the Earth is a globe?" They don't need to.
I'm not saying germ theory is definitely true, just that there really isn't any doubt of it in most people's minds