Here’s a few points that require thoughtful engagement.
We calibrate air by its moisture content. It’s wetness.
We calibrate oxygen by its dryness. Eg medical oxygen has 67ppm of water contamination.
Lung alveoli requires air to reach 100% humidity.
Can you see the mismatch?
Oxygen is prescribed primarily for the terminally ill not for breathlessness.
Oxygen toxicity
Excerpt: The clinical settings in which oxygen toxicity occurs are predominantly divided into two groups; one in which the patient is exposed to very high concentrations of oxygen for a short duration, and the second where the patient is exposed to lower concentrations of oxygen but for a longer duration. These two cases can result in acute and chronic oxygen toxicity, respectively. Acute toxicity typically manifests with central nervous system (CNS) effects, while chronic toxicity has mainly pulmonary effects. Severe cases of oxygen toxicity can lead to cell damage and death. Those at particular risk for oxygen toxicity include hyperbaric oxygen therapy patients, patients exposed to prolonged high levels of oxygen, premature infants, and underwater divers. [I would also add mountaineers who use oxygen]
Oxygen dehydrates and this is the mechanism that injures and kills.
Babies were blinded with 100% oxygen, their eyes dried out.
Eyes give off moisture - dry eye is a symptom of dehydration.
Hyperbaric chambers should never use oxygen instead of air.
I’ve a new take on lung respiration that dismisses the gaseous exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide.
The lungs are rehydrating the RBCs as they pass through the alveoli capillary beds. The RBCs act like sponges to absorb the salt plus water that soaks the alveoli capillary bed as bubbles burst upon their walls. Bubbles via the surfactant produced by the alveoli at the mouth of each sac. Watch bubbles in slow motion distribute their liquid content.
The saline drip also acts to rehydrate RBCs.
The red light monitoring is checking hydration not oxygen levels.
Dark RBCs are contracted and dehydrated.
Light/bright RBCs are expanded and hydrated.
Hence the red light is monitoring the % of dehydrated RBCs via their lack of transparency.
Respiratory symptoms arise with dehydration. It is the primary assault. Therefore folk arriving after long plane trips are more likely to be dehydrated and nasal and throat symptoms are some of the first signs of dehydration.
Why is flu and colds seasonal?
Cold air holds the least moisture. Folk spend more time inside with air conditioning that can be drier especially when heated.
Respiratory system requires air to be around 30-50% humidity.
The salt gargle, salt nasal rinses were standard care for respiratory distress. They remedy the respiratory distress via rehydration.
Sanatoriums were built along coastlines to utilise the salt air pounding waves provide. The aerosols of salt water aids the healing of lungs.
Too often people (understandably) try to take a few of these "new" (at least to them) facts and fit them into the foundation they have that is years or decades long . It doesn't work. You have to start completely from scratch with a new foundation and go forward. You can't go backward and try to fit one piece at a time into a fraudulent set of beliefs. It's a little like trying to put a square roof on a round house. It just won't fit. And it gets very confusing and frustrating. You wouldn't try to learn calculus or even algebra before you learned simple arithmetic. Clear the slate, then start again. Go to square one.
Again, check out Bailey's and Cowan and even watch Stefan Lanka who had really groundbreaking scientific proofs. All lies must be deleted and replaced with the facts, piece by piece and then the puzzle starts fitting together and the picture looks, feels, sounds right, reasonable, and scientific. This is one way the gatekeepers keep people still believing in enough of the lies to be controlled.
Most diseases and sicknesses have no scientific backing or proof. It's all a mind game steeped in fear and panic with the express purpose of getting you to make a life long commitment to the medical establish. Thereby, you are guaranteed misery, psychological debasement and finally death at the hands to the medical butchers.
That cetuximab causes immediate first use sensitivity reactions in 20% of people in US south-eastern states (lone star tick country) but only in 1% of northeastern people is very interesting. Something in the south eastern states causing sensitivity to both intravenous monoclonal antibodies and eating dead animals?
I looked up the efficacy of Cetuximab, it is used in combo with chemo, compared to chemo alone there was a 0.6% reduction in death and a 1 month and 10 day increase in overall survival, that is according to convicted criminals with huge vested interests.
"cetuximab causes immediate first use sensitivity reactions in 20% of people in US south-eastern states (lone star tick country) but only in 1% of northeastern people"
Aug 26, 2023·edited Aug 26, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Hiya, it says more common to have a reaction, up to 20% of people in southern states here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3964477/ and 'Our study revealed an alarming frequency of infusion-related HSR at the three sites examined, data that would call for a comprehensive survey of reactions in the middle southern US region that includes North and South Carolina, Tennessee, northern Georgia, and extends westward to Arkansas where HSR is also anecdotally problematic. The immediate and severe nature of these reactions suggests a pre-existing immunoglobulin E-based immune reaction directed at the antibody itself. In fact, an immunoglobulin E antibody directed against cetuximab has recently been identified in patients who experience HSR to cetuximab, and a study to determine the utility of this finding as a predictor of HSR is ongoing (Christine Chung, VICCC, personal communication, May 2006). It has been speculated but not proven that such a crossreactive response could be caused by increased exposure to mouse antigens or another antigen mimic of cetuximab that is regionally based, such as a particular plant or tree pollen.' is from https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.11.7812?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed The 22% of patients experiencing grade 3 to 4 HSR at UNC is significantly larger than the published percentage from the study by Cunningham et al4 of 1.2% (for 4 of 329; exact binomial 95% CI, 0.3% to 3%; P < .0001).
they conclude 'cetuximab is a drug that is used safely in most of the country, but we have identified several sites in the US middle south that have reaction rates much higher than reported nationwide. Investigation of the mechanism of this high rate of HSR is ongoing, but practitioners and patients in the region should be aware of the added risk of using cetuximab and take appropriate precautions.
Yes, I can understand that. I find it quite interesting, whatever it is, it could also be affecting food allergy, not ticks at all. Bit of a a whodunit.
Easy simple cure for Lyme Disease and it costs you nothing. Touch the live strand of an electric fence to keep cattle in, with both hands. The jolt kills all Lyme Disease in your blood and makes you well again.
The electric fence is 9 volts DC and won't hurt you - what would be the point of killing the cattle inside the field, other than a light shock to keep them in their enclosure.
While you are at it, do it several times - why not - payback is a bitch.
I just realized while doing chores that you said electric fences are 9 volts. Well, they aren't, they would be 12V DC if they are not 120v electric. Not sure where you get your information.
Hi Christine - 9V DC or 12v DC won't kill you, which is what I was trying to say - when I was a teenager, my father had me touch the spark plug leads of my cars engine "to see if there was a spark" 12 volt Fiat Topolino, car - I got one hell of a belt, but it did not kill me, my father thought it was funny - I could have killed him - but I am still here.
Aug 28, 2023·edited Aug 28, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
What does this have to do with anything? And you didn't say, payback for what exactly? And how exactly does this "cure " you from a disease that doesn't exist?
What in the world? First, there is no Lyme Disease. And, electric fences are not all 9v DC, in fact most are not and are 120v electric. It doesn't kill the cattle but it sure does hurt. It CAN kill a cow if for some reason it gets down on the fence, can't get up, and is repeatedly shocked for a long time.
Maybe I am totally misunderstanding your comment and the reason for it?
My free salt water cure, which you can easily find on my substack, will keep you safe from all bacterial nasal infections including Covid and Flu and well, you know.
Me never ill these past 30 years, doing just that.
Biden is investing 1.4 Billion of your money in new vaccines research to try and find a cure for Moderna's Covid-19 Neucloids lab created virus which they patented in 2013, here is the chemical makeup of that virus: #CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG probably on the orders of Bill Gates after his Event 201 which you probably have heard of.
So now you have my free way of doing that and avoiding the vaccines, because the purpose of the vaccines was never to cure you of Covid - silly!!
Please share your evidence of this "lab created virus"? A sequence of 19 letters is not evidence of a "virus".
That patented sequence is simply a section of the longer sequence said to code for the alleged "SARS-COV-2 spike protein" - which, like "the virus", has never been found in anyone.
Stefano Scoglio discusses the mRNA/spike protein topic with Tom Cowan:
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was unable to provide any record of the alleged SARS-COV-2 spike protein being found in anyone and purified (as opposed to “recombinant” “spike protein” being created in a lab and then studied, as though that reflects something going on in actual people); and so they responded as though this was another FOI regarding the fake virus, and provided the same useless paragraphs that they’ve been giving people for the past year or so:
Once again, the people at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were unable to provide any record of the alleged SARS-COV-2 spike protein being found in anyone and purified. (I specifically ruled out studies where “recombinant” “spike protein” was created in a lab in order to be studied, because those studies can’t provide any evidence of the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein” actually existing in people, i.e. people with the fraudulent convid diagnosis, or people who received the fake mRNA vaccines, or anyone at all.):
Roger Andoh acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC confessed that the CDC doesn’t even have a study where authors did either of the following:
1) tested for the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein” in the blood of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” people, and compared the results – to look for evidence that the “mRNA” quackcines cause bodies to create the protein
2) compared the antibody levels for “vaccinated” people and people injected with other toxins (i.e. other quackcines), to assess specificity of antibodies.
March 2, 2023: U.S. Centers for Disease Control can’t prove the existence of “SARS-COV-2 spike protein“
Roger Andoh, acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, confessed that these institutions have zero proof of the existence of the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein”, this time to my colleague Louis Stephen.
"The truth is stranger than fiction.."- Mark Twain
But I think it's more the truth lies somewhere in between. There are issues in interpretation and method of "science" on both sides. I personally think our understanding of the virome, microbiome and everything in between is childish and the reality lies in the center of both dogmas. Lest we forget- these are theories. Two theories, that have both been latched on to as "truth and become dogmatic camps, barking at each other. Interesting to watch but neither seem focused on verifying their hypothesis, only on proving the other to be wrong or without credible evidence, and that's not science by any measure. But here I am not doing science either, just giving my opinion😉
Actually, we are not trying to prove anything without credible evidence but are using science to show that there is NO credible evidence for the pathogenic contagion being called a virus or that such a particle causes disease. Virus theory isn't even a theory. The reality does not lie in the center of both dogmas. The dogma is the mainstream one that has been pushed for two centuries. Science is science, cut and dried, plain and simple. If it is not followed then it is invalid. Period. So your wisdom of nature is incomplete and misdirected.
You need to purify a virus by ultracentrifuge and get a density band for 100nm, confirm purification on EM, get structure/genome DIRECTLY from particles from the ultracentrifuge density band, confirm they can replicate and infect others and cause same disease. A virus has never been found so that this has never been done.
I understand you are trying to make sense out of the barrage of yes-virus yes-germ stuff, but on viruses, it's a zero sum game, either there is proof of existence or there is not. So far there is not. If some day there is, then the discussion could change. Since there is not in >100 years, it's looking like a failed hypothesis (the null hypotheses has not been disproven). If I was you, I would delete my comment and try to find out what has and has not been found in virology and if what they do is actually valid. Neither genomes, cell cultures, antibodies or antigens, nor EM photos prove a virus. I sense you don't get the logic fully yet.
One of the sessions in The End of Covid was by a chiropractor, I think, Canadian, whose research suggested that there may have been experimentation on ticks to increase the virulence of their venom, and that could be the reason for the set of symptoms that’s being called Lyme disease. Not a bacteria, as is officially stated, but the venom. She mentioned a lab at Plum Island that was known to have been researching on ticks. She likened the symptoms of Lyme to the effects of other arachnid bites like spiders and scorpions. I have not heard anyone else put forward this theory, but it sounds intriguing to me.
I will watch that session and take notes, as much as I don't want to......
Scorpions don't bite, they sting.
State of Missouri asked for people to send in ticks this past year, why I'm not sure. But you can bet they have no clue that Lyme isn't a real disease. And it's true, ticks suck, but anything that pierces the skin will cause some sort of reaction, noticeable or not, because the body recognizes an invader. In most it will go unnoticed or perhaps an itch or redness just like with a chigger bite, mosquito bite, etc.
I think that any attempt to weaponize any insect, such as a tick, or mosquito, is hogwash. TPTB want us to think they are capable of most anything and it's simply not true. When you truly understand biology and the wisdom of the body and what it can do, and how much deceit there is about what we are really made of, down to the so called cells and even atoms, it becomes apparent that they are pulling the bullshit tactic once again.
Aug 26, 2023·edited Aug 26, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Hi Betsy, I think this SS would be happy to see the research you mention, especially as the Canadian is making a serious claim that is akin to the GOF of virus claim aimed at keeping the fear going. Without a research paper to analyze it sounds like something to study, not a theory with any evidence, is it?
I just fast forwarded through some of the 75 minutes video with Dr Steph Young to get to key parts but took copious notes that I can't really read.....I don't know shorthand...
But, she clearly is not a germ theory Dr, she is not a Lyme believer, nor anything that I would consider anything other than what we have come to understand about health, biology, and illnesses.
In order to not make this a very long post, (I can give more details and screenshots if that's possible), I'm going to try to just hit a few highlights.
She quotes multiple papers that state unequivocally that there is zero evidence that antibiotics do anything for Lyme symptoms, that Lyme symptoms are 50+ and can be caused by a large number of things, that ticks are venomous just like spiders, scorpions, bees, and some snakes, and that when they bite they inject some saliva that (as Dr Cowan always states) includes enzymes and other proteins and the venom, as in all animals and insects like this, is to stun the victim, it is a neuro toxin. Lyme is NOT caused by any bacteria, but there is Lyme Toxicosis, just as there is with many other toxins. There is NO test to determine this, antibody tests are worthless, and she gives multiple contradictions they use in their explanations of Lyme and it's diagnosis, testing and treatments. She states that doctors are taught that you can tell what has bitten a person by the way the bite looks on the skin. However, she showed multiple bites and proves that is not the case at all.
As far as a bioweapon, and Plum Island, she just states what James Oliver claimed, that he dropped weaponized ticks out of airplanes. A whistleblower has stated that ticks were being fed and impregnated with with undisclosed cocktails. In 1975 the strange illnesses in Lyme, CT occurred. This Dr in this video states that she has no idea if they could have somehow increased the toxicity of the ticks venom but is doubtful and thinks it's a story used to cover up other contaminations from the lab as the entire area is extremely toxic and dangerous, and thinks Dr Burgdorfer was used as their puppet. She states we know that it is not a germ or pathogen as they do not cause disease.
William Burgdorfer, PHD, named Lyme discoverer, stated that "The controversy in Lyme disease research is a shameful affair. The money goes to the people that for the past 10 yrs produced the same thing: nothing. Serology has to be started from scratch with people that don't know beforehand the results of their research just because they have to get the money."
She also states that yes, the treatments can cause the very symptoms they claim to be Lyme, and states emphatically that no bacteria have ever been demonstrated to cause any disease; that no trials have ever been done for antibiotics for Lyme carditis.
She ends by saying that people think science has the answers that new research and more funding , more technology, that we will find solutions. She says no. We must understand how the body becomes unwell, how it heals, why it has the reactions it does, and look to the natural world. We don't need a microscope and $2000 worth of tests. Learn what makes us well and unlearn what's not substantiated by anything valid. When we blame the wrong thing for symptoms them everything downstream from that is wrong and even dangerous.
(She is a chiropractor and detox specialist. Her presentation was clear, well documented and validated, reasonable and logical and clearly she does not believe in any pathogenic germs nor that bacteria cause any diseases. I hope this was not too scrambled up to make sense.)
Thanks for the detailed summary, Country. It sounds like I did misunderstand, in that she was not suggesting that ticks have been manipulated to make their venom more toxic, rather that this story has been brought up most likely to cover for the toxic stuff they have been doing at that lab in Plum Island, to explain the illnesses and conditions that people in the Lyme, CT, area started having. I don't believe in bioweapons or in effort to make viruses more deadly, since viruses don't exist and can't be the subject of any research. The venom idea, though, seems at least reasonably possible. But then so does the lab using it as an excuse for the toxic mess they have made.
I never really thought of ants as venomous but apparently at least some are considered to be so. Words, definitions, connotations, accepted understandings and interpretations. Sure can change the perceived claim, can't it?
"Based on our extensive literature mining and in silico research, we demonstrate that ticks share several similarities with other venomous taxa. Many tick salivary protein families and their previously described functions are homologous to proteins found in scorpion, spider, snake, platypus and bee venoms. This infers that there is a structural and functional convergence between several molecular components in tick saliva and the venoms from other recognized venomous taxa. We also highlight the fact that the immune response against tick saliva and venoms (from recognized venomous taxa) are both dominated by an allergic immunity background. Furthermore, by comparing the major molecular components of human saliva, as an example of a non-venomous animal, with that of ticks we find evidence that ticks resemble more venomous than non-venomous animals. Finally, we introduce our considerations regarding the evolution of venoms in Arachnida.
Conclusions
Taking into account the composition of tick saliva, the venomous functions that ticks have while interacting with their hosts, and the distinguishable differences between human (non-venomous) and tick salivary proteins, we consider that ticks should be referred to as venomous ectoparasites."
So that paper is a review, and reviews can be very misleading. I'd want to see actual valid experiments. The CDC doesn't have any, so if anyone else finds any I'd be interested to see them.
The tick story might very well be just a cover for other causes of "Lyme" symptoms, which as Sam pointed out are nonspecific.
Not sure exactly what you are saying or asking. Valid experiments for what? This is just saying that per the extended definition of "venom" the tick would fit that category. It really wasn't to prove anything about any disease caused by a tick. It does mention tick borne diseases but the paper wasn't to prove or disprove that claim. It does state tick toxicosis and paralysis which I have no problem believing, living in heavy tick country, but again, that can happen with any spider bite or anything else that includes a neurotoxin, and neurotoxins are ubitquitous. It's amazing how such little insects such as mosquitos, chiggers, ants, and those tiny sweat bees can cause such reactions in some people.
I have no doubt that a tick bite can cause symptoms in various individuals just as mosquito bites can. I have a son who will have a big red itchy lump for 4 weeks from a mosquito bite, every time. I can get bit like crazy and just itch a little once in a while.
There's no doubt that the tick is a cover story for a lot of things and we certainly are used to that.
She says she uses a terrain approach (I don’t know if she’s a chiropractor or a naturopath, or some other kind of doctor). She says she doesn’t believe in pathogens, shredded the notion that Lyme is caused by bacteria, and thinks that the conventional treatments for Lyme often cause the symptoms that are associated with it.
I too am not entirely buying the venom idea, but I thought it was interesting enough to post and see if anyone else knew about it. I have communicated with Dr. Young asking for the research that she based her end of Covid session on. I don’t know if her presentation is available anywhere outside of the End of Covid summit, which is over. I will certainly pass along whatever I hear from her about research regarding tick venom.
I did a sort of scrambled up synopsis of Dr Young's presentation. She seems very intelligent and rational and has many papers that show what she's saying and that show there is no proof of any of the claims the medical profession use concerning Lyme (when it even is from a tick). You seem to have gotten her ideas correct. I think she is right about the "venom" in that being an arachnid it's the same as spiders, bees, etc. Venom seems to have a connotation of something very sinister so I think we put up a partial defense to it at first. Yet, as Dr Cowan always says, there are proteins and enzymes and all sorts of things in saliva of anything that can cause reactions in a bitten person. This particular venom is a neuro toxin like most. Individuals can and do react differently to various bites and even at different times to a bite from the same insect or animal.
My synopsis of her presentation is above in a reply to proton.
I was just looking through my screenshots from Dr Young's video on Lyme and saw where she had put up this list comparing the tick toxicosis from the venom symptoms to the so called Lyme disease caused by a bacteria (per mainstream medicine). They are identical. They are:
Sometimes fever
Sometimes rash
Bells palsy or other nerve issues
Diaphragmatic paralysis thus respiratory issues
Paralysis/loss of function of limbs
Cardiac manifestations/carditis
Inflammation of spinal cord or brain
Vocal cord paralysis
And her "Summary of Lyme Research" states:
"Long course of antibiotics do not resolve chronic symptoms called
chronic Lyme
Antibiotics have not been shown to resolve more severe complications
such as carditis
Antibiotics treatment alone can cause some symptoms attributed to Lyme
Antibody testing does not indicate if a person is ill or not
Ticks are in the same class as scorpions and spiders and are venomous
They cause the same symptoms that are called Lyme simply with their
neuro and cardiac toxins
Antibiotics have not been shown to be significantly more effective for
prophylaxis after a tick bite to stop further complications later
No evidence there is bacterial cause of the symptoms called Lyme
Counting microbes doesn't provide evidence of causation
Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium claimed to cause Lyme has been counted, sequenced and isolated but there have never been transmission studies with humans in any trials.
It's no surprise that the attributed symptoms match given that ticks are blamed for "Lyme disease". But where is the science actually showing causation? CDC doesn't have any.
They almost never do humans studies for that reason, they do fake-ethical studies on animals that don't/can't give informed consent.
I think I mentioned it in my "summary" but not sure. But she said that not a single paper has ever proven the effectiveness of any antibiotic in any condition that was diagnosed as Lyme. Nor were any antibody tests consistent, nor anything else. Complete fraud. Some of the claims she cited as being used sounded just like what was used during the CV scam, such as antibodies at one point show you have something but at another point it means you haven't and at another it might mean something entirely different. Utter nonsense. If you are interested in actually watching the presentation let me know. It's actually a very good very in depth one covering all aspects of the Lyme debacle which would be helpful for anyone that seems to think Covid is a scam but that other things, such as Lyme, measles, polio, flu, etc do exist.
I think may be that calling it a venom instead of just a bite with saliva that has various enzymes and proteins in it is making it sound far more menacing that it's meant to be. All spiders are venomous, even the ones that aren't considered poisonous, like a Black Widow or Brown Recluse, both of which I've seen have quite different reactions in different people, from a small red area for a short time to being hospitalized for a week with severe necrosis around the bite. Why? Who knows. Probably something in that particular individuals make up, toxicity level, mindset, could be anything. Personally I don't think calling a tick venomous changes anything but just puts it in the class that it is, a class that has a venomous concoction that gets transferred into whatever it's biting. The result will vary just like with other bites, but it's clear there are no diseases ever proven to come from a tick bite, no bacteria causing a disease, no spirochete, nothing.
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
No, no diseases. All papers fail to prove a tick causes a disease.She did say that tick toxicosis exists because of there being toxins in the bite, but that there is no bacteria or pathogen involved in an disease from the tick, or anything else actually. The toxicosis can occur just because of the neuro toxin. Like anything else, the effect can be quite different in different people/animals or completely nothing at all noticeable.
This is very interesting and I admit I don't have time to get into the details and admit I didn't see anymore than you guys wrote.
Christine is saying, and I would agree, that there is some science lacking.
1. Saying it is a cover for Plum being toxic or weaponizing ticks and using this as a test is clearly possible, but this isn't science, this is more like a "war game strategy analysis". Which of course is fine but not science or even epidemiology.
2. For science, we would need to see lists of toxins in tick bites and finding out which toxins are what kinds of chemicals with what kind of receptor binding profiles (receptors may even be fuzzy entities), and did what physiologically and clinically and compare the range of toxins in the Lyme area ticks to ticks in other areas with similar tick species, and even the ground dirt. Even some of this could get in a fuzzy area between chemistry, clinical medicine, and epidemiology and none of this is easy or cheap to do. If there is a cover up, it clearly wont get done.
3. Symptom analyses have clinical value but not so much scientific value unless there is a corresponding physiologic parameter to measure objectively.
Betsy, Lyme was first observed in coastal Connecticut directly across from the Plum Island facility back in the 70's. This area was ground zero for whatever it is.
This Dr Steph Young says exactly the same thing. With 50 plus symptoms there is no way to pin it down on a tick and as well antibody tests are worthless and it's all very bad science and medical incompetence.
Off topic but I've had this question I've been meaning to ask someone critical of the existence of viruses for awhile. James Lyons Weiller mentioned in a debate that he points to the existence of bacteriophages which we can see with light microscopes as a sanity check that we do know something very much like viruses exist bacteria. So I didn't know if there was a counter argument to this and am asking for one if you got it. Thanks.
Phages are about 30nm large, no you cant see them with a light microscope. Phages do exist, they seem to be spores of dying bacteria, and they have never been found to replicate, infect, transmit, or cause disease. Since phages can be found and purified at that size so should putative viruses, but they are not. That alone should spell death for virology.
Man. The bacteriophage thing had me pretty convinced. I'm running out of mental firewalls I have built up to prevent me from fully subscribing to this alternative understanding. Since I got you here...if you don't mind....I was going back and looking at some of Kirsch's posts and looking at this ace2 mouse study deal that they say proves koch's postulates. It sounds pretty convincing but has that already been answered by this crew? My guess skimming it over quicly is it comes down to really knowing the compositions of the stuff used to infect the mice vs the stuck used to mock infect. "mice were inoculated intranasally with SARS-CoV-2 stock virus at a dosage of 105 TCID50, and hACE2 mice intranasally inoculated with an equal volume of PBS were used as a mock-infection control." Has that already been looked into by protons or Baileys? The study is this one...https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y#Sec2 Regardless of the 'no virus' angle I find it pretty infuriating they had a model ready to go for testing anti-virals and yet I don't recall hearing of any HCQ or Iveremcting trials making use of these ace2 mice.
Aug 26, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
"My guess skimming it over quickly" - I don't think you should do this anymore, even I need to read the methods section carefully and go to what they reference from because the fraud is usually hidden in "what someone did before".
Its a bit confusing as the Nature paper says The SARS-CoV-2 strain HB-01 was provided by W. Tan(1). (1) leads to this paper by Na Zhu, can't find W. Tan in the author list but Tan is at the end in the Author Affiliation section, I just assume Tan is in the larger author group.
Virus (non) Isolation was done like this (I made it shorter): "Bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid samples were centrifuged to remove cellular debris. The supernatant was inoculated on human airway epithelial cells. RNA extracted from bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid and culture supernatants was used as a template to clone and sequence the genome. We used a combination of Illumina sequencing and nanopore sequencing to characterize the virus genome. Sequence reads were assembled..specific primers were subsequently designed for PCR." [note: RNA extraction doesn't mean from a virus, it means from the sample. So MILLIONS of sources of this RNA were used as a template! Put millions of puzzle pieces of thousands of famous places and program your software to find the Eiffel Tower and Voilà you found it"!]
NO VIRUS PARTICLE was found here. A mix of zillions of things and genetic material was put into a supernatant-still a big mix, then put this into a cell culture where a computer ASSEMBLED A STRING OF LETTERS BY SOFTWARE [CONSENSUS] NOT A REAL GENOME FROM AN OBJECT-and they made pcr primers from this assembly. You need to learn what they do and how to read these things before you put them on stage in the comments-it takes even this proton 20 min to dig into and write, and I'm just a volunteer. But I appreciate you tried more than most people.
THERE WAS NO VIRUS FOUND OR USED IN THIS STUDY, YOU'RE FALLING FOR FRAUD. Their using the word "virus" in the article many times doesn't make any virus actually exist.
Thanks for the taking the time to walk through how to dissect these studies. I don't think me using the comment section of a renowned figure representing those critical that viruses exist to ask for any details or analysis about a study cited by Steve Kirsch as proof Koch's postulates have been meant is a waste of time. I'm just a guy whose been trying to make sense of what is going on in medicine since delta scared him back into his bubble and the decision to vaccinated 5-11 year olds sent him down the anti-vaccine rabbit hole. Who then finally took the time to hear out the full argument against the existence of viruses. I like to think you folks are putting this information out there for people like to hear it and potentially be convinced. That doesn't happen overnight for most of us. But thanks again and I'll try to do more reading on my own before asking questions in the future.
Aug 26, 2023·edited Aug 26, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Dennis,
It can be totally overwhelming for anyone new to this understanding!
Start watching Dr Sam Bailey and Mark Bailey's videos and read their articles and references and as well Dr. Tom Cowan's. He dissects so many of these claims, and the articles in Nature and other journals that people have sent to him thinking aha! here's the proof. But, no. Not a one. Remember that you can't undo something, (like a vax), and you can always choose later to do that should you wish. As well, remember the statement, (forgot which famous Dr in history said this), "When a doctor gives his patient a drug, he must recover twice. Once from the illness and once from the drug." And another worth remembering, "You cannot poison yourself to good health." Both crucial.
Edited to add:
Most people try to take a few of these "new" (at least to them) facts and fit them into the foundation they have that is years or decades long . It doesn't work. You have to start completely from scratch with a new foundation and go forward. You can't go backward and try to fit one piece at a time into a fraudulent set of beliefs. It's a little like trying to put a square roof on a round house. It just won't fit. And it gets very confusing and frustrating. Go to square one. Again, check out Bailey's and Cowan and even watch Stefan Lanka who had really groundbreaking scientific proofs.
ok Great, I'm getting dozens of complex questions daily, I've gotta move to get people to do DIY, which is good for them in the long run. Thanks for understanding!
Hello, I think you've written the refutation answer in your comment. Some transgenic mice where injected with 'virus' ie biologically active proteins made from stressing cells in culture, some of which may indeed bind to ace2 receptors, stimulate other cells and do all sorts of other things vs mice injected with saline?
It just dawned on me another point to be made from this study with mutant mice. That if this serves as proof this virus caused disease then it seems the studies that inject mice with aluminum and get neurodevelopment issues should serve for proof that aluminum can cause autism.
I don't how you'd know a mouse had autism, but unlike 'virology's' use of inert controls, 'vaccinology' uses aluminium/adjuvant containing placebo controls so neurotoxicity is masked.
I now want to track down the references to those studies. Forest Maraedy makes mention of them in the concluding section of his book The Autism Vaccine. And it was in a book I read about the virtues of Silicate in water. I believe they observed some behavior that could indicate neurological issues. I'd like to get better about tracking down and at least attempting to read the studies first hand. In the Silicate book it was noted that having rats, or mice, or some rodents drink silicate water lead to reduction of aluminum in their brains. So now I'm drinking Fiji water and even got so bold as to recommend it as something to try to family with a couple boys on the spectrum. I don't know if they took up my unasked for advice.
You've tripped on the "stock virus" statement because there is no virus (it's probably a pcr tested sample which is meaningless as there is no original). Stand back up, take that paper and recycle it at your nearest toilet paper making factory.
Off topic but I've had this question I've been meaning to ask someone critical of the existence of viruses for awhile. James Lyons Weiller mentioned in a debate that he points to the existence of bacteriophages which we can see with light microscopes as a sanity check that we do know something very much like viruses exist bacteria. So I didn't know if there was a counter argument to this and am asking for one if you got it. Thanks.
and a so-called "mock-infection is the sole addition of bovine or calf serum(so called "nutrients"), which is the first thing that happens in chemical prepared cell lines in order to create the illusion that something would now grow there, e.g. a fictitious "virus" or anything else, but this addition does not change much, because cells need nutrients to perform the repeated metabolism, and during the further treatment of cell lines the other chemical substances are added, like antibiotics, penicillin/streptomycin, trypsin, amphotericin B etc., which then stop the metabolism and make all the cells that are in the cell culture die!!!
these nucleotide sequences can be called part of the dead cells, because every human being, every animal, every plant has to excrete them in its own way to be able to guarantee the growth, the health and the cell division furthermore - and the cell division, by which e.g. the human being excretes between 50 and 70 million dead cell debris daily(also if someone gets too many toxins in the organism, then also cells die with the time!!), is the only verified reality, because otherwise there would be no reproduction!!!
The same fraud also takes place with the so-called "isolation" of "phages" - you can read about it here at Methods
that say absolutely nothing, because if you enter these nucleotide sequences into the BLAST search and find them in humans, in animals, in plants and in so-called "microbes"(and a nucleotide sequence is NOT a so-called whole "genome"!),
then this is a fraud, because you could string together 1000 or millions of these so-called "alignments" produced on a computer tool/software and still no one could say who they really come from!!! Nothing is verified or purified!!! Each time a fraudulent experiment is made and afterwards there is no limit to the imagination, because they interpret exactly what they need or want at the time - an absolute nonsense!!!!
and with the so-called "α-gal", which is also unverifiable, the same fraud - scroll down to "Molecular characterisation" and the oligonucleotide primers
I presume the reason virology uses antibiotics is the same reason they ran water over porcelain back in the day....to rule out bacteria. But then that means that has to be part of any control. I really just need to put in the time and learn to understand studies and be able to fully grasp the described methodologies.
The viruses are normal cellular debris and part of the process of cells dying makes a tone of sense to me. And the parts of virology that discuss how prevalent viruses are make a lot more sense to me when you realize they may be basically describing dead cells. Of course that would make up a good portion of the biomass of any biological system.
Dennis, you asked this Q twice. I gave you the answer. None of us woke up one day fluent in this, and you can't get it in the comments really, read this post and all the references at the bottom, it will all become clear. THEN
There is the point that ticks can possibly concentrate environmental toxins in their bodies, and if so, it's possible that they transfer some of these toxins via their bites. But that's a different universe from the notion that they "infect" the subjects they bite.
Hi Christine! This is fascinating! I have a proven allergy to anything that is a bovine product including beef, dairy, glycerin, gelatin etc. I also gave symptoms (diarrhea, sinus congestion, irritation of the throat, etc) when I eat other red meat. It doesn't seem to be a very common problem. It was thought that it may be an alpha-gal allergy because I have lived in area where ticks are common. Now I'm looking at this differently. Thank you for the info!
Respiratory distress arises from dehydration
Dehydration is the primary assault from which most dis-ease arises.
Hydration equals salt plus water.
Low salt diet advice from govt in the 80s has overseen the massive rise in chronic diseases
Eg Dementia is the result of a chronically dehydrated brain.
I have a Substack article titled: We breathe air not oxygen.
https://jane333.substack.com/p/we-breath-air-not-oxygen
Here’s a few points that require thoughtful engagement.
We calibrate air by its moisture content. It’s wetness.
We calibrate oxygen by its dryness. Eg medical oxygen has 67ppm of water contamination.
Lung alveoli requires air to reach 100% humidity.
Can you see the mismatch?
Oxygen is prescribed primarily for the terminally ill not for breathlessness.
Oxygen toxicity
Excerpt: The clinical settings in which oxygen toxicity occurs are predominantly divided into two groups; one in which the patient is exposed to very high concentrations of oxygen for a short duration, and the second where the patient is exposed to lower concentrations of oxygen but for a longer duration. These two cases can result in acute and chronic oxygen toxicity, respectively. Acute toxicity typically manifests with central nervous system (CNS) effects, while chronic toxicity has mainly pulmonary effects. Severe cases of oxygen toxicity can lead to cell damage and death. Those at particular risk for oxygen toxicity include hyperbaric oxygen therapy patients, patients exposed to prolonged high levels of oxygen, premature infants, and underwater divers. [I would also add mountaineers who use oxygen]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430743/
Oxygen dehydrates and this is the mechanism that injures and kills.
Babies were blinded with 100% oxygen, their eyes dried out.
Eyes give off moisture - dry eye is a symptom of dehydration.
Hyperbaric chambers should never use oxygen instead of air.
I’ve a new take on lung respiration that dismisses the gaseous exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide.
The lungs are rehydrating the RBCs as they pass through the alveoli capillary beds. The RBCs act like sponges to absorb the salt plus water that soaks the alveoli capillary bed as bubbles burst upon their walls. Bubbles via the surfactant produced by the alveoli at the mouth of each sac. Watch bubbles in slow motion distribute their liquid content.
The saline drip also acts to rehydrate RBCs.
The red light monitoring is checking hydration not oxygen levels.
Dark RBCs are contracted and dehydrated.
Light/bright RBCs are expanded and hydrated.
Hence the red light is monitoring the % of dehydrated RBCs via their lack of transparency.
Respiratory symptoms arise with dehydration. It is the primary assault. Therefore folk arriving after long plane trips are more likely to be dehydrated and nasal and throat symptoms are some of the first signs of dehydration.
Why is flu and colds seasonal?
Cold air holds the least moisture. Folk spend more time inside with air conditioning that can be drier especially when heated.
Respiratory system requires air to be around 30-50% humidity.
The salt gargle, salt nasal rinses were standard care for respiratory distress. They remedy the respiratory distress via rehydration.
Sanatoriums were built along coastlines to utilise the salt air pounding waves provide. The aerosols of salt water aids the healing of lungs.
Very interesting, thank you.
https://open.substack.com/pub/francesleader/p/sabrina-wallace-explains-bio-sensors?r=15h968&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Sharing because
There are so many incredibly bright open people here
What are your thoughts
Too often people (understandably) try to take a few of these "new" (at least to them) facts and fit them into the foundation they have that is years or decades long . It doesn't work. You have to start completely from scratch with a new foundation and go forward. You can't go backward and try to fit one piece at a time into a fraudulent set of beliefs. It's a little like trying to put a square roof on a round house. It just won't fit. And it gets very confusing and frustrating. You wouldn't try to learn calculus or even algebra before you learned simple arithmetic. Clear the slate, then start again. Go to square one.
Again, check out Bailey's and Cowan and even watch Stefan Lanka who had really groundbreaking scientific proofs. All lies must be deleted and replaced with the facts, piece by piece and then the puzzle starts fitting together and the picture looks, feels, sounds right, reasonable, and scientific. This is one way the gatekeepers keep people still believing in enough of the lies to be controlled.
Most diseases and sicknesses have no scientific backing or proof. It's all a mind game steeped in fear and panic with the express purpose of getting you to make a life long commitment to the medical establish. Thereby, you are guaranteed misery, psychological debasement and finally death at the hands to the medical butchers.
Christine,
Incredible work! I am so busy i can't take it in - but I thank you anyway.
How do these inbred slugs get any traction? I know but it still amazes me..
That cetuximab causes immediate first use sensitivity reactions in 20% of people in US south-eastern states (lone star tick country) but only in 1% of northeastern people is very interesting. Something in the south eastern states causing sensitivity to both intravenous monoclonal antibodies and eating dead animals?
I looked up the efficacy of Cetuximab, it is used in combo with chemo, compared to chemo alone there was a 0.6% reduction in death and a 1 month and 10 day increase in overall survival, that is according to convicted criminals with huge vested interests.
Sorry, where did you find this detail?
"cetuximab causes immediate first use sensitivity reactions in 20% of people in US south-eastern states (lone star tick country) but only in 1% of northeastern people"
Hiya, it says more common to have a reaction, up to 20% of people in southern states here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3964477/ and 'Our study revealed an alarming frequency of infusion-related HSR at the three sites examined, data that would call for a comprehensive survey of reactions in the middle southern US region that includes North and South Carolina, Tennessee, northern Georgia, and extends westward to Arkansas where HSR is also anecdotally problematic. The immediate and severe nature of these reactions suggests a pre-existing immunoglobulin E-based immune reaction directed at the antibody itself. In fact, an immunoglobulin E antibody directed against cetuximab has recently been identified in patients who experience HSR to cetuximab, and a study to determine the utility of this finding as a predictor of HSR is ongoing (Christine Chung, VICCC, personal communication, May 2006). It has been speculated but not proven that such a crossreactive response could be caused by increased exposure to mouse antigens or another antigen mimic of cetuximab that is regionally based, such as a particular plant or tree pollen.' is from https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.11.7812?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed The 22% of patients experiencing grade 3 to 4 HSR at UNC is significantly larger than the published percentage from the study by Cunningham et al4 of 1.2% (for 4 of 329; exact binomial 95% CI, 0.3% to 3%; P < .0001).
they conclude 'cetuximab is a drug that is used safely in most of the country, but we have identified several sites in the US middle south that have reaction rates much higher than reported nationwide. Investigation of the mechanism of this high rate of HSR is ongoing, but practitioners and patients in the region should be aware of the added risk of using cetuximab and take appropriate precautions.
🙏🏽
Ok thank you. So there could be site-specific or other factors affecting the rate... who knows... I'm too lazy to read further. Thank you.
Yes, I can understand that. I find it quite interesting, whatever it is, it could also be affecting food allergy, not ticks at all. Bit of a a whodunit.
🙏🏽
Easy simple cure for Lyme Disease and it costs you nothing. Touch the live strand of an electric fence to keep cattle in, with both hands. The jolt kills all Lyme Disease in your blood and makes you well again.
The electric fence is 9 volts DC and won't hurt you - what would be the point of killing the cattle inside the field, other than a light shock to keep them in their enclosure.
While you are at it, do it several times - why not - payback is a bitch.
I just realized while doing chores that you said electric fences are 9 volts. Well, they aren't, they would be 12V DC if they are not 120v electric. Not sure where you get your information.
Hi Christine - 9V DC or 12v DC won't kill you, which is what I was trying to say - when I was a teenager, my father had me touch the spark plug leads of my cars engine "to see if there was a spark" 12 volt Fiat Topolino, car - I got one hell of a belt, but it did not kill me, my father thought it was funny - I could have killed him - but I am still here.
What does this have to do with anything? And you didn't say, payback for what exactly? And how exactly does this "cure " you from a disease that doesn't exist?
What in the world? First, there is no Lyme Disease. And, electric fences are not all 9v DC, in fact most are not and are 120v electric. It doesn't kill the cattle but it sure does hurt. It CAN kill a cow if for some reason it gets down on the fence, can't get up, and is repeatedly shocked for a long time.
Maybe I am totally misunderstanding your comment and the reason for it?
Lyme disease?
Payback for what?
The Good News Is:
We Are Not Fighting To Save Anyone - Any More.
We Were Fighting To Save People From The Shots.
We Don't Have To Do That Any More.
We Saved More Than We Needed To. We Saved Plenty.
Now We Are All Fighting Against Those Dumb Enough
To Have Believed The Lie:
The Dead - The Dumb- And The Suffering -
Are Now The Enemies Of The Majority.
So - Keep Beating The Living Shit Out Of Them.
'Like Your Intuition Tells You To.
My free salt water cure, which you can easily find on my substack, will keep you safe from all bacterial nasal infections including Covid and Flu and well, you know.
Me never ill these past 30 years, doing just that.
Biden is investing 1.4 Billion of your money in new vaccines research to try and find a cure for Moderna's Covid-19 Neucloids lab created virus which they patented in 2013, here is the chemical makeup of that virus: #CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG probably on the orders of Bill Gates after his Event 201 which you probably have heard of.
So now you have my free way of doing that and avoiding the vaccines, because the purpose of the vaccines was never to cure you of Covid - silly!!
I believe you are on the wrong substack as you clearly are still in mainstream germ mode.
Also, if you have scientific evidence that bacteria are the cause of colds or flu, please share it.
Please share your evidence of this "lab created virus"? A sequence of 19 letters is not evidence of a "virus".
That patented sequence is simply a section of the longer sequence said to code for the alleged "SARS-COV-2 spike protein" - which, like "the virus", has never been found in anyone.
Stefano Scoglio discusses the mRNA/spike protein topic with Tom Cowan:
https://drtomcowan.com/blogs/podcasts/58-stefano-scoglio
FOIs:
December 16, 2022:
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was unable to provide any record of the alleged SARS-COV-2 spike protein being found in anyone and purified (as opposed to “recombinant” “spike protein” being created in a lab and then studied, as though that reflects something going on in actual people); and so they responded as though this was another FOI regarding the fake virus, and provided the same useless paragraphs that they’ve been giving people for the past year or so:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/CDC-no-purified-spike-protein-PACKAGE-to-Dec-16-redacted.pdf
February 14, 2023:
Once again, the people at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were unable to provide any record of the alleged SARS-COV-2 spike protein being found in anyone and purified. (I specifically ruled out studies where “recombinant” “spike protein” was created in a lab in order to be studied, because those studies can’t provide any evidence of the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein” actually existing in people, i.e. people with the fraudulent convid diagnosis, or people who received the fake mRNA vaccines, or anyone at all.):
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/CDC-spike-protein-PACKAGE-redacted-2023-02-14.pdf
March 21, 2023:
Roger Andoh acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC confessed that the CDC doesn’t even have a study where authors did either of the following:
1) tested for the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein” in the blood of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” people, and compared the results – to look for evidence that the “mRNA” quackcines cause bodies to create the protein
2) compared the antibody levels for “vaccinated” people and people injected with other toxins (i.e. other quackcines), to assess specificity of antibodies.
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/CDC-spike-protein-comparisons-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf
March 2, 2023: U.S. Centers for Disease Control can’t prove the existence of “SARS-COV-2 spike protein“
Roger Andoh, acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, confessed that these institutions have zero proof of the existence of the alleged “SARS-COV-2 spike protein”, this time to my colleague Louis Stephen.
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CDC-spike-antibodies-why-Vero-etc-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf
It is not as easy to find as you infer.
I looked, but I could not find the salt water spray that you are referring to.
Not within the 15 to 30 seconds that I allocated for the search.
What are the proportions of ingredients that you are recommending?
Thx.
"The truth is stranger than fiction.."- Mark Twain
But I think it's more the truth lies somewhere in between. There are issues in interpretation and method of "science" on both sides. I personally think our understanding of the virome, microbiome and everything in between is childish and the reality lies in the center of both dogmas. Lest we forget- these are theories. Two theories, that have both been latched on to as "truth and become dogmatic camps, barking at each other. Interesting to watch but neither seem focused on verifying their hypothesis, only on proving the other to be wrong or without credible evidence, and that's not science by any measure. But here I am not doing science either, just giving my opinion😉
Actually, we are not trying to prove anything without credible evidence but are using science to show that there is NO credible evidence for the pathogenic contagion being called a virus or that such a particle causes disease. Virus theory isn't even a theory. The reality does not lie in the center of both dogmas. The dogma is the mainstream one that has been pushed for two centuries. Science is science, cut and dried, plain and simple. If it is not followed then it is invalid. Period. So your wisdom of nature is incomplete and misdirected.
You need to purify a virus by ultracentrifuge and get a density band for 100nm, confirm purification on EM, get structure/genome DIRECTLY from particles from the ultracentrifuge density band, confirm they can replicate and infect others and cause same disease. A virus has never been found so that this has never been done.
I understand you are trying to make sense out of the barrage of yes-virus yes-germ stuff, but on viruses, it's a zero sum game, either there is proof of existence or there is not. So far there is not. If some day there is, then the discussion could change. Since there is not in >100 years, it's looking like a failed hypothesis (the null hypotheses has not been disproven). If I was you, I would delete my comment and try to find out what has and has not been found in virology and if what they do is actually valid. Neither genomes, cell cultures, antibodies or antigens, nor EM photos prove a virus. I sense you don't get the logic fully yet.
I'm reporting facts and evidence and helping to debunk "virus theory". Not promoting a hypothesis, a theory or dogma, and not "barking" at anyone.
If you have valid evidence of any virus, required for a "virome", please cite it. 😉
Damn good thing because I've been bit by quite a few ticks in my life. And I'll probably be bit by a few more before my days here are done.
One of the sessions in The End of Covid was by a chiropractor, I think, Canadian, whose research suggested that there may have been experimentation on ticks to increase the virulence of their venom, and that could be the reason for the set of symptoms that’s being called Lyme disease. Not a bacteria, as is officially stated, but the venom. She mentioned a lab at Plum Island that was known to have been researching on ticks. She likened the symptoms of Lyme to the effects of other arachnid bites like spiders and scorpions. I have not heard anyone else put forward this theory, but it sounds intriguing to me.
I will watch that session and take notes, as much as I don't want to......
Scorpions don't bite, they sting.
State of Missouri asked for people to send in ticks this past year, why I'm not sure. But you can bet they have no clue that Lyme isn't a real disease. And it's true, ticks suck, but anything that pierces the skin will cause some sort of reaction, noticeable or not, because the body recognizes an invader. In most it will go unnoticed or perhaps an itch or redness just like with a chigger bite, mosquito bite, etc.
I think that any attempt to weaponize any insect, such as a tick, or mosquito, is hogwash. TPTB want us to think they are capable of most anything and it's simply not true. When you truly understand biology and the wisdom of the body and what it can do, and how much deceit there is about what we are really made of, down to the so called cells and even atoms, it becomes apparent that they are pulling the bullshit tactic once again.
Hi Betsy, I think this SS would be happy to see the research you mention, especially as the Canadian is making a serious claim that is akin to the GOF of virus claim aimed at keeping the fear going. Without a research paper to analyze it sounds like something to study, not a theory with any evidence, is it?
Proton, Betsy, and Christine:
I just fast forwarded through some of the 75 minutes video with Dr Steph Young to get to key parts but took copious notes that I can't really read.....I don't know shorthand...
But, she clearly is not a germ theory Dr, she is not a Lyme believer, nor anything that I would consider anything other than what we have come to understand about health, biology, and illnesses.
In order to not make this a very long post, (I can give more details and screenshots if that's possible), I'm going to try to just hit a few highlights.
She quotes multiple papers that state unequivocally that there is zero evidence that antibiotics do anything for Lyme symptoms, that Lyme symptoms are 50+ and can be caused by a large number of things, that ticks are venomous just like spiders, scorpions, bees, and some snakes, and that when they bite they inject some saliva that (as Dr Cowan always states) includes enzymes and other proteins and the venom, as in all animals and insects like this, is to stun the victim, it is a neuro toxin. Lyme is NOT caused by any bacteria, but there is Lyme Toxicosis, just as there is with many other toxins. There is NO test to determine this, antibody tests are worthless, and she gives multiple contradictions they use in their explanations of Lyme and it's diagnosis, testing and treatments. She states that doctors are taught that you can tell what has bitten a person by the way the bite looks on the skin. However, she showed multiple bites and proves that is not the case at all.
As far as a bioweapon, and Plum Island, she just states what James Oliver claimed, that he dropped weaponized ticks out of airplanes. A whistleblower has stated that ticks were being fed and impregnated with with undisclosed cocktails. In 1975 the strange illnesses in Lyme, CT occurred. This Dr in this video states that she has no idea if they could have somehow increased the toxicity of the ticks venom but is doubtful and thinks it's a story used to cover up other contaminations from the lab as the entire area is extremely toxic and dangerous, and thinks Dr Burgdorfer was used as their puppet. She states we know that it is not a germ or pathogen as they do not cause disease.
William Burgdorfer, PHD, named Lyme discoverer, stated that "The controversy in Lyme disease research is a shameful affair. The money goes to the people that for the past 10 yrs produced the same thing: nothing. Serology has to be started from scratch with people that don't know beforehand the results of their research just because they have to get the money."
She also states that yes, the treatments can cause the very symptoms they claim to be Lyme, and states emphatically that no bacteria have ever been demonstrated to cause any disease; that no trials have ever been done for antibiotics for Lyme carditis.
She ends by saying that people think science has the answers that new research and more funding , more technology, that we will find solutions. She says no. We must understand how the body becomes unwell, how it heals, why it has the reactions it does, and look to the natural world. We don't need a microscope and $2000 worth of tests. Learn what makes us well and unlearn what's not substantiated by anything valid. When we blame the wrong thing for symptoms them everything downstream from that is wrong and even dangerous.
(She is a chiropractor and detox specialist. Her presentation was clear, well documented and validated, reasonable and logical and clearly she does not believe in any pathogenic germs nor that bacteria cause any diseases. I hope this was not too scrambled up to make sense.)
Thanks for the detailed summary, Country. It sounds like I did misunderstand, in that she was not suggesting that ticks have been manipulated to make their venom more toxic, rather that this story has been brought up most likely to cover for the toxic stuff they have been doing at that lab in Plum Island, to explain the illnesses and conditions that people in the Lyme, CT, area started having. I don't believe in bioweapons or in effort to make viruses more deadly, since viruses don't exist and can't be the subject of any research. The venom idea, though, seems at least reasonably possible. But then so does the lab using it as an excuse for the toxic mess they have made.
I never really thought of ants as venomous but apparently at least some are considered to be so. Words, definitions, connotations, accepted understandings and interpretations. Sure can change the perceived claim, can't it?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4085379/
This paper says this:
"Based on our extensive literature mining and in silico research, we demonstrate that ticks share several similarities with other venomous taxa. Many tick salivary protein families and their previously described functions are homologous to proteins found in scorpion, spider, snake, platypus and bee venoms. This infers that there is a structural and functional convergence between several molecular components in tick saliva and the venoms from other recognized venomous taxa. We also highlight the fact that the immune response against tick saliva and venoms (from recognized venomous taxa) are both dominated by an allergic immunity background. Furthermore, by comparing the major molecular components of human saliva, as an example of a non-venomous animal, with that of ticks we find evidence that ticks resemble more venomous than non-venomous animals. Finally, we introduce our considerations regarding the evolution of venoms in Arachnida.
Conclusions
Taking into account the composition of tick saliva, the venomous functions that ticks have while interacting with their hosts, and the distinguishable differences between human (non-venomous) and tick salivary proteins, we consider that ticks should be referred to as venomous ectoparasites."
So that paper is a review, and reviews can be very misleading. I'd want to see actual valid experiments. The CDC doesn't have any, so if anyone else finds any I'd be interested to see them.
The tick story might very well be just a cover for other causes of "Lyme" symptoms, which as Sam pointed out are nonspecific.
Not sure exactly what you are saying or asking. Valid experiments for what? This is just saying that per the extended definition of "venom" the tick would fit that category. It really wasn't to prove anything about any disease caused by a tick. It does mention tick borne diseases but the paper wasn't to prove or disprove that claim. It does state tick toxicosis and paralysis which I have no problem believing, living in heavy tick country, but again, that can happen with any spider bite or anything else that includes a neurotoxin, and neurotoxins are ubitquitous. It's amazing how such little insects such as mosquitos, chiggers, ants, and those tiny sweat bees can cause such reactions in some people.
I have no doubt that a tick bite can cause symptoms in various individuals just as mosquito bites can. I have a son who will have a big red itchy lump for 4 weeks from a mosquito bite, every time. I can get bit like crazy and just itch a little once in a while.
There's no doubt that the tick is a cover story for a lot of things and we certainly are used to that.
Her name is Dr. Steph Young. This is her website: https://www.drsteph.shop/
She says she uses a terrain approach (I don’t know if she’s a chiropractor or a naturopath, or some other kind of doctor). She says she doesn’t believe in pathogens, shredded the notion that Lyme is caused by bacteria, and thinks that the conventional treatments for Lyme often cause the symptoms that are associated with it.
I too am not entirely buying the venom idea, but I thought it was interesting enough to post and see if anyone else knew about it. I have communicated with Dr. Young asking for the research that she based her end of Covid session on. I don’t know if her presentation is available anywhere outside of the End of Covid summit, which is over. I will certainly pass along whatever I hear from her about research regarding tick venom.
Betsy,
I did a sort of scrambled up synopsis of Dr Young's presentation. She seems very intelligent and rational and has many papers that show what she's saying and that show there is no proof of any of the claims the medical profession use concerning Lyme (when it even is from a tick). You seem to have gotten her ideas correct. I think she is right about the "venom" in that being an arachnid it's the same as spiders, bees, etc. Venom seems to have a connotation of something very sinister so I think we put up a partial defense to it at first. Yet, as Dr Cowan always says, there are proteins and enzymes and all sorts of things in saliva of anything that can cause reactions in a bitten person. This particular venom is a neuro toxin like most. Individuals can and do react differently to various bites and even at different times to a bite from the same insect or animal.
My synopsis of her presentation is above in a reply to proton.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Thank you for the summary :)
Did she cite any actual papers showing that a tick's "venom" causes any disease?
Christine,
I was just looking through my screenshots from Dr Young's video on Lyme and saw where she had put up this list comparing the tick toxicosis from the venom symptoms to the so called Lyme disease caused by a bacteria (per mainstream medicine). They are identical. They are:
Sometimes fever
Sometimes rash
Bells palsy or other nerve issues
Diaphragmatic paralysis thus respiratory issues
Paralysis/loss of function of limbs
Cardiac manifestations/carditis
Inflammation of spinal cord or brain
Vocal cord paralysis
And her "Summary of Lyme Research" states:
"Long course of antibiotics do not resolve chronic symptoms called
chronic Lyme
Antibiotics have not been shown to resolve more severe complications
such as carditis
Antibiotics treatment alone can cause some symptoms attributed to Lyme
Antibody testing does not indicate if a person is ill or not
Ticks are in the same class as scorpions and spiders and are venomous
They cause the same symptoms that are called Lyme simply with their
neuro and cardiac toxins
Antibiotics have not been shown to be significantly more effective for
prophylaxis after a tick bite to stop further complications later
No evidence there is bacterial cause of the symptoms called Lyme
Counting microbes doesn't provide evidence of causation
Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium claimed to cause Lyme has been counted, sequenced and isolated but there have never been transmission studies with humans in any trials.
They claim it's due to ethical reasons."
It's no surprise that the attributed symptoms match given that ticks are blamed for "Lyme disease". But where is the science actually showing causation? CDC doesn't have any.
They almost never do humans studies for that reason, they do fake-ethical studies on animals that don't/can't give informed consent.
I think I mentioned it in my "summary" but not sure. But she said that not a single paper has ever proven the effectiveness of any antibiotic in any condition that was diagnosed as Lyme. Nor were any antibody tests consistent, nor anything else. Complete fraud. Some of the claims she cited as being used sounded just like what was used during the CV scam, such as antibodies at one point show you have something but at another point it means you haven't and at another it might mean something entirely different. Utter nonsense. If you are interested in actually watching the presentation let me know. It's actually a very good very in depth one covering all aspects of the Lyme debacle which would be helpful for anyone that seems to think Covid is a scam but that other things, such as Lyme, measles, polio, flu, etc do exist.
I think may be that calling it a venom instead of just a bite with saliva that has various enzymes and proteins in it is making it sound far more menacing that it's meant to be. All spiders are venomous, even the ones that aren't considered poisonous, like a Black Widow or Brown Recluse, both of which I've seen have quite different reactions in different people, from a small red area for a short time to being hospitalized for a week with severe necrosis around the bite. Why? Who knows. Probably something in that particular individuals make up, toxicity level, mindset, could be anything. Personally I don't think calling a tick venomous changes anything but just puts it in the class that it is, a class that has a venomous concoction that gets transferred into whatever it's biting. The result will vary just like with other bites, but it's clear there are no diseases ever proven to come from a tick bite, no bacteria causing a disease, no spirochete, nothing.
No, no diseases. All papers fail to prove a tick causes a disease.She did say that tick toxicosis exists because of there being toxins in the bite, but that there is no bacteria or pathogen involved in an disease from the tick, or anything else actually. The toxicosis can occur just because of the neuro toxin. Like anything else, the effect can be quite different in different people/animals or completely nothing at all noticeable.
This is very interesting and I admit I don't have time to get into the details and admit I didn't see anymore than you guys wrote.
Christine is saying, and I would agree, that there is some science lacking.
1. Saying it is a cover for Plum being toxic or weaponizing ticks and using this as a test is clearly possible, but this isn't science, this is more like a "war game strategy analysis". Which of course is fine but not science or even epidemiology.
2. For science, we would need to see lists of toxins in tick bites and finding out which toxins are what kinds of chemicals with what kind of receptor binding profiles (receptors may even be fuzzy entities), and did what physiologically and clinically and compare the range of toxins in the Lyme area ticks to ticks in other areas with similar tick species, and even the ground dirt. Even some of this could get in a fuzzy area between chemistry, clinical medicine, and epidemiology and none of this is easy or cheap to do. If there is a cover up, it clearly wont get done.
3. Symptom analyses have clinical value but not so much scientific value unless there is a corresponding physiologic parameter to measure objectively.
"may have been"...
Since when do ticks even have "venom?"
I gave a synopsis of Dr Young's presentation above in a reply to proton.
This may be another one of those cleverly altered definitions of words which we are becoming more and more familiar with.
Betsy, Lyme was first observed in coastal Connecticut directly across from the Plum Island facility back in the 70's. This area was ground zero for whatever it is.
Sam Bailey recently a video on Lyme
"...how can this ‘disease’ possibly be diagnosed?"
https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/the-lyme-disease-lie
This Dr Steph Young says exactly the same thing. With 50 plus symptoms there is no way to pin it down on a tick and as well antibody tests are worthless and it's all very bad science and medical incompetence.
Off topic but I've had this question I've been meaning to ask someone critical of the existence of viruses for awhile. James Lyons Weiller mentioned in a debate that he points to the existence of bacteriophages which we can see with light microscopes as a sanity check that we do know something very much like viruses exist bacteria. So I didn't know if there was a counter argument to this and am asking for one if you got it. Thanks.
Phages are about 30nm large, no you cant see them with a light microscope. Phages do exist, they seem to be spores of dying bacteria, and they have never been found to replicate, infect, transmit, or cause disease. Since phages can be found and purified at that size so should putative viruses, but they are not. That alone should spell death for virology.
Man. The bacteriophage thing had me pretty convinced. I'm running out of mental firewalls I have built up to prevent me from fully subscribing to this alternative understanding. Since I got you here...if you don't mind....I was going back and looking at some of Kirsch's posts and looking at this ace2 mouse study deal that they say proves koch's postulates. It sounds pretty convincing but has that already been answered by this crew? My guess skimming it over quicly is it comes down to really knowing the compositions of the stuff used to infect the mice vs the stuck used to mock infect. "mice were inoculated intranasally with SARS-CoV-2 stock virus at a dosage of 105 TCID50, and hACE2 mice intranasally inoculated with an equal volume of PBS were used as a mock-infection control." Has that already been looked into by protons or Baileys? The study is this one...https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y#Sec2 Regardless of the 'no virus' angle I find it pretty infuriating they had a model ready to go for testing anti-virals and yet I don't recall hearing of any HCQ or Iveremcting trials making use of these ace2 mice.
"My guess skimming it over quickly" - I don't think you should do this anymore, even I need to read the methods section carefully and go to what they reference from because the fraud is usually hidden in "what someone did before".
Here is the study which was where they got so-called virus from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
Its a bit confusing as the Nature paper says The SARS-CoV-2 strain HB-01 was provided by W. Tan(1). (1) leads to this paper by Na Zhu, can't find W. Tan in the author list but Tan is at the end in the Author Affiliation section, I just assume Tan is in the larger author group.
Virus (non) Isolation was done like this (I made it shorter): "Bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid samples were centrifuged to remove cellular debris. The supernatant was inoculated on human airway epithelial cells. RNA extracted from bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid and culture supernatants was used as a template to clone and sequence the genome. We used a combination of Illumina sequencing and nanopore sequencing to characterize the virus genome. Sequence reads were assembled..specific primers were subsequently designed for PCR." [note: RNA extraction doesn't mean from a virus, it means from the sample. So MILLIONS of sources of this RNA were used as a template! Put millions of puzzle pieces of thousands of famous places and program your software to find the Eiffel Tower and Voilà you found it"!]
NO VIRUS PARTICLE was found here. A mix of zillions of things and genetic material was put into a supernatant-still a big mix, then put this into a cell culture where a computer ASSEMBLED A STRING OF LETTERS BY SOFTWARE [CONSENSUS] NOT A REAL GENOME FROM AN OBJECT-and they made pcr primers from this assembly. You need to learn what they do and how to read these things before you put them on stage in the comments-it takes even this proton 20 min to dig into and write, and I'm just a volunteer. But I appreciate you tried more than most people.
THERE WAS NO VIRUS FOUND OR USED IN THIS STUDY, YOU'RE FALLING FOR FRAUD. Their using the word "virus" in the article many times doesn't make any virus actually exist.
Thanks for the taking the time to walk through how to dissect these studies. I don't think me using the comment section of a renowned figure representing those critical that viruses exist to ask for any details or analysis about a study cited by Steve Kirsch as proof Koch's postulates have been meant is a waste of time. I'm just a guy whose been trying to make sense of what is going on in medicine since delta scared him back into his bubble and the decision to vaccinated 5-11 year olds sent him down the anti-vaccine rabbit hole. Who then finally took the time to hear out the full argument against the existence of viruses. I like to think you folks are putting this information out there for people like to hear it and potentially be convinced. That doesn't happen overnight for most of us. But thanks again and I'll try to do more reading on my own before asking questions in the future.
Dennis,
It can be totally overwhelming for anyone new to this understanding!
Start watching Dr Sam Bailey and Mark Bailey's videos and read their articles and references and as well Dr. Tom Cowan's. He dissects so many of these claims, and the articles in Nature and other journals that people have sent to him thinking aha! here's the proof. But, no. Not a one. Remember that you can't undo something, (like a vax), and you can always choose later to do that should you wish. As well, remember the statement, (forgot which famous Dr in history said this), "When a doctor gives his patient a drug, he must recover twice. Once from the illness and once from the drug." And another worth remembering, "You cannot poison yourself to good health." Both crucial.
Edited to add:
Most people try to take a few of these "new" (at least to them) facts and fit them into the foundation they have that is years or decades long . It doesn't work. You have to start completely from scratch with a new foundation and go forward. You can't go backward and try to fit one piece at a time into a fraudulent set of beliefs. It's a little like trying to put a square roof on a round house. It just won't fit. And it gets very confusing and frustrating. Go to square one. Again, check out Bailey's and Cowan and even watch Stefan Lanka who had really groundbreaking scientific proofs.
ok Great, I'm getting dozens of complex questions daily, I've gotta move to get people to do DIY, which is good for them in the long run. Thanks for understanding!
Hello, I think you've written the refutation answer in your comment. Some transgenic mice where injected with 'virus' ie biologically active proteins made from stressing cells in culture, some of which may indeed bind to ace2 receptors, stimulate other cells and do all sorts of other things vs mice injected with saline?
It just dawned on me another point to be made from this study with mutant mice. That if this serves as proof this virus caused disease then it seems the studies that inject mice with aluminum and get neurodevelopment issues should serve for proof that aluminum can cause autism.
I don't how you'd know a mouse had autism, but unlike 'virology's' use of inert controls, 'vaccinology' uses aluminium/adjuvant containing placebo controls so neurotoxicity is masked.
I now want to track down the references to those studies. Forest Maraedy makes mention of them in the concluding section of his book The Autism Vaccine. And it was in a book I read about the virtues of Silicate in water. I believe they observed some behavior that could indicate neurological issues. I'd like to get better about tracking down and at least attempting to read the studies first hand. In the Silicate book it was noted that having rats, or mice, or some rodents drink silicate water lead to reduction of aluminum in their brains. So now I'm drinking Fiji water and even got so bold as to recommend it as something to try to family with a couple boys on the spectrum. I don't know if they took up my unasked for advice.
You've tripped on the "stock virus" statement because there is no virus (it's probably a pcr tested sample which is meaningless as there is no original). Stand back up, take that paper and recycle it at your nearest toilet paper making factory.
Tom discusses bacteriophages here: https://archive.org/details/on-bacteriophages-and-viruses-by-dr-thomas-cowan-short-clip-from-2022-10-05-webinar
Off topic but I've had this question I've been meaning to ask someone critical of the existence of viruses for awhile. James Lyons Weiller mentioned in a debate that he points to the existence of bacteriophages which we can see with light microscopes as a sanity check that we do know something very much like viruses exist bacteria. So I didn't know if there was a counter argument to this and am asking for one if you got it. Thanks.
Hi Mr. Field,
https://maryann255.substack.com/p/the-truth-is-always-on-the-other-66c
and a so-called "mock-infection is the sole addition of bovine or calf serum(so called "nutrients"), which is the first thing that happens in chemical prepared cell lines in order to create the illusion that something would now grow there, e.g. a fictitious "virus" or anything else, but this addition does not change much, because cells need nutrients to perform the repeated metabolism, and during the further treatment of cell lines the other chemical substances are added, like antibiotics, penicillin/streptomycin, trypsin, amphotericin B etc., which then stop the metabolism and make all the cells that are in the cell culture die!!!
these nucleotide sequences can be called part of the dead cells, because every human being, every animal, every plant has to excrete them in its own way to be able to guarantee the growth, the health and the cell division furthermore - and the cell division, by which e.g. the human being excretes between 50 and 70 million dead cell debris daily(also if someone gets too many toxins in the organism, then also cells die with the time!!), is the only verified reality, because otherwise there would be no reproduction!!!
The same fraud also takes place with the so-called "isolation" of "phages" - you can read about it here at Methods
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marina-Goderdzishvili/publication/233395474_Isolation_and_Characterisation_of_Lytic_Bacteriophages_of_Klebsiella_pneumoniae_and_Klebsiella_oxytoca/links/55101bee0cf224726ac5152b/Isolation-and-Characterisation-of-Lytic-Bacteriophages-of-Klebsiella-pneumoniae-and-Klebsiella-oxytoca.pdf
And what BHIB is, you can read here
https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/PL/en/product/sial/53286 - https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/deepweb/assets/sigmaaldrich/product/documents/387/435/53286dat.pdf
and the "universal primers of T3 and T7"(page 3) that are used can be seen here
https://web.archive.org/web/20120110063736/http://www.lslabs.com/resources/universal-primer-list
these are always designed, synthetic-chemically produced oligonucleodite primers
https://maryann255.substack.com/p/the-truth-is-always-on-the-other-c3e
that say absolutely nothing, because if you enter these nucleotide sequences into the BLAST search and find them in humans, in animals, in plants and in so-called "microbes"(and a nucleotide sequence is NOT a so-called whole "genome"!),
https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch&BLAST_SPEC=OGP__9606__9558&LINK_LOC=blasthome
https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch&BLAST_SPEC=OGP__10090__9559&LINK_LOC=blasthome
https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch&BLAST_SPEC=OGP__10116__10621&LINK_LOC=blasthome
https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch&BLAST_SPEC=MicrobialGenomes
then this is a fraud, because you could string together 1000 or millions of these so-called "alignments" produced on a computer tool/software and still no one could say who they really come from!!! Nothing is verified or purified!!! Each time a fraudulent experiment is made and afterwards there is no limit to the imagination, because they interpret exactly what they need or want at the time - an absolute nonsense!!!!
or e.g. here
https://tinyurl.com/53mwwr8x
and the so-called "Escherichia coli" is also a fraud - see the Oligonucleotide primers here on page 2
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5043/4a5e18de38001b497a8d0858ea71a2c4f6a7.pdf
and with the so-called "α-gal", which is also unverifiable, the same fraud - scroll down to "Molecular characterisation" and the oligonucleotide primers
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-11632-8
or here - page 5 under the numbers 20. and 21. you can see the Oligonucleotide-primers
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/August-Rieke/publication/11580033_Production_of_-13-Galactosyltransferase_Knockout_Pigs_by_Nuclear_Transfer_Cloning/links/02bfe51110fef5b128000000/Production-of-1-3-Galactosyltransferase-Knockout-Pigs-by-Nuclear-Transfer-Cloning.pdf
Thanks.
I presume the reason virology uses antibiotics is the same reason they ran water over porcelain back in the day....to rule out bacteria. But then that means that has to be part of any control. I really just need to put in the time and learn to understand studies and be able to fully grasp the described methodologies.
The viruses are normal cellular debris and part of the process of cells dying makes a tone of sense to me. And the parts of virology that discuss how prevalent viruses are make a lot more sense to me when you realize they may be basically describing dead cells. Of course that would make up a good portion of the biomass of any biological system.
Steve Falconer has just released part 1 of a new documentary film series, ‘A Farewell to Virology – Part 1’, based on the essay by Dr Mark Bailey
https://www.bitchute.com/video/5EAWnkwUuJWJ/
Dennis, you asked this Q twice. I gave you the answer. None of us woke up one day fluent in this, and you can't get it in the comments really, read this post and all the references at the bottom, it will all become clear. THEN
ask complex questions
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/fan-wu-naked-centerfold
Tom discusses bacteriophages here: https://archive.org/details/on-bacteriophages-and-viruses-by-dr-thomas-cowan-short-clip-from-2022-10-05-webinar
thank you
Thanks for this, Christine.
There is the point that ticks can possibly concentrate environmental toxins in their bodies, and if so, it's possible that they transfer some of these toxins via their bites. But that's a different universe from the notion that they "infect" the subjects they bite.
Northern Tracey addressed that on FB a day or 2 ago, saying they suck in, not release.
Regardless, CDC has no science for any sort of adverse effect.
Only a kind of interesting geographical distribution of cases that also seems to correspond to hyper-reactivity to monoclonal antibody treatment.
Thanks. That was an hypothesis offered by Tom Cowan or Sam Bailey, not sure. I'll check out Tracey's comment.
Hi Christine! This is fascinating! I have a proven allergy to anything that is a bovine product including beef, dairy, glycerin, gelatin etc. I also gave symptoms (diarrhea, sinus congestion, irritation of the throat, etc) when I eat other red meat. It doesn't seem to be a very common problem. It was thought that it may be an alpha-gal allergy because I have lived in area where ticks are common. Now I'm looking at this differently. Thank you for the info!
You're welcome! And there are some articles/video in my newsletter about "alpha-gal". Northern Tracey brings up a possible explanation.
I will definitely check it out. Thank you! And thank you for all your hard work. You are appreciated!!
Thank you Robin :)
Nice one