Dear Ms. Massie - I was looking at the study published in May 2020 (The pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in hACE2 transgenic mice -https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y#Sec2) - which observed slight bristled fur and weight loss only in the HB-01-infected hACE2 mice—and not theHB-01-infected wild-type mice or mock-treated hACE2 mice—at 14 days of observation...I understand that these are not symptoms consistent with being ill with C-19, so understand the significance of this...However, I see that the study also discusses histopathological changes in the lungs of the three mice groups at different time points, indicating that it found only theHB-01-infected hACE2 mice to have lesions and then pneumonia at different points. (That's what I'm understanding - Forgive the layman's rough understanding, as I am not a scientist.)...I was wondering if the no virus camp views this study as lacking true controls and if anyone from that camp has posted an in-depth analyzed of this specific study (aside from pointing out that bristled fur and weight loss are not usual symptoms of COVID-19) discussing what to make of the lung changes discussed above. If you know of anything like this from the non-virus camp, I’d appreciate you pointing me to it. Thank you.
Hi Rio. This study has been discussed many times, in particular I recall Andy Kaufman pointing out the absurdity of the bristled fur being passed off as a "covid" symptom, but not sure exactly which videos you would find this in. It's definitely been addressed on twitter many times but I'm kicked out again so can't find links for you, sorry. Mike Stone's account would be a good place to look: https://x.com/ViroLIEgy
None of the "SARS-COV-2" studies are valid (and can't have valid controls) b/c none have a valid independent variable - the alleged SARS-COV-2 particles. They've never been shown to exist, anywhere, let alone cause anything.
Always go to the Methods section to find the problems. Here you will see that they used a so-called "SARS-CoV-2 strain HB-01 ... provided by W. Tan1." This "strain" is not purified particles or even shown to contain any SARS-COV-2 particles.
They also admit that "Seed SARS-CoV-2 stocks and virus isolation studies were performed in Vero cells, which are maintained in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) (Invitrogen) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 100 IU/ml penicillin, and 100 μg/ml streptomycin, and incubated at 37 °C, 5% CO2."
The "strain" is just a manmade mixture of monkey kidney (Vero) cells, cow serum and chemicals.
In the section describing the mouse experiments, aside from the weird things they did to supposedly create and verify transgenic mice that express the "ACE2 receptor" (which I believe is another scam but haven't looked into as much), they write:
"After being intraperitoneally anaesthetized by 2.5% avertin with 0.02 ml/g body weight, the hACE2 or wild-type (ICR) 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....Mice were dissected at 1, 3, 5 and 7 dpi" (days post infection).
So the study is also invalid for the reason that they anaesthetized the mice and force-inoculated them, which has nothing to do with how the imaginary "virus" is supposedly spread in the real world, and then murdered them within 1-7 days.
Briefly to summarize, they are comparing "transgenic" mice that were anaesthetized and force-inoculated with either an wildly unnatural manmade brew (never shown to even contain any "SARS-COV-2" particles) or PBS (phosphate buffer solution). So it really doesn't matter what the results are because it's an invalid, unscientific animal torture/murder study that couldn't possibly tell us anything about a potential "virus".
Every time that one of 'us' points out that excess mortality, the increase in cases of myocarditis, horrific new kinds of blood clots, etc., are synchronous with the roll out of the jab, and have probably been caused by the needles they are sticking into everyone's arm, the 'scientific' community and politicians and NGO's counter that "correlation does not imply causation." The media amplifies this denial and it greatly hampers our efforts to discussing these issues with friends and family.
With your FOI requests you have established that no-one has isolated a SARS-CoV-2 virus from a patient anywhere on earth. Even though health authorities, universities, media, and hospitals continue to authoritatively declare that "COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus," no-one has demonstrated that such is the case. (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21214-coronavirus-covid-19)
You know all this, of course, but I wanted to say that thanks to you, and some others, I have moved from initially rejecting the jab on intuition, to confidently rejecting all claims about a virus as unsubstantiated. As result, I ride the metro without any fear of my fellow human beings 'infecting' me. In fact, I have less fear of becoming infected than before the year 2020.
Now, triggered by your research, I spent an hour or so looking into a similar "correlation does not imply causation" denial: the smoking causes lung cancer debate. There were some remarkably similar mechanisms at play then, which I thought you might find interesting.
In 2012, Robert Proctor published an article in the BMJ publication *Tobacco Control* titled "The Shameful Past. The history of the discovery of the cigarette-lung cancer link: evidentiary traditions, corporate denial, global toll." (https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050338)
In the abstract, we find the passage:
>Cigarettes were recognised as the cause of the epidemic in the 1940s and 1950s, with the confluence of studies from epidemiology, animal experiments, cellular pathology and chemical analytics. Cigarette manufacturers disputed this evidence, as part of an orchestrated conspiracy to salvage cigarette sales. Propagandising the public proved successful, judging from secret tobacco industry measurements of the impact of denialist propaganda. As late as 1960 only one-third of all US doctors believed that the case against cigarettes had been established.
Hmm, so it took at least ten years to convince merely one-third of doctors. Considering that we're only three years or so into the jab analysis, it seems that there is a long way to go yet. If we survive the coming all out attack on mankind, of course.
And isn't it funny that the British Medical Journal had no issue calling it an "orchestrated conspiracy" when the cigarette manufacturers worked together, using propaganda techniques to influence public opinion?
There is also an analysis of the major 1950 paper. The WHO published an article by Michael Thun, by permission of the American Medical Association, that summarizes the study by Wynder and Graham which resulted in their groundbreaking paper arguing for the existence of a relationship between smoking and cancer.
Here are two excerpts, which I include because of the eerie similarities with today.
Source: Thun, Michael J. (February 2005). "When truth is unwelcome: the first reports on smoking and lung cancer" (PDF). Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 83 (2): 144–145. PMC 2623818. PMID 15744407. (http://www.princeton.edu/~sswang/WHO_lung-cancer-smoking-history.pdf)
>The medical and scientific communities were notably resistant to the idea that smoking caused lung cancer despite these publications. Doctors and scientists were as unreceptive as the general public, because most of them smoked.
>When Graham saw the final draft of the manuscript, he reportedly said, “You are going to have many difficulties. The smokers will not like your message. The tobacco interests will be vigorously opposed. The media and the government will be loath to support these findings. But you have one factor in your favour. What you have going for you is that you are right.”
I believe that this final sentence applies to you as well. So thanks for all your hard work, Christine. I think you are a true heroine of our time.
P.S. I am not totally convinced that tobacco is the ingredient in cigarettes which is causing cancer. I would rather think that the addition of poisonous and addictive ingredients could be the cause of illness and death. So there, too, is a similarity with today.
Thank you Robert. I'm so glad the FOIs have been helpful to you :)
I'm also not convinced that tobacco specifically is what causes cancer, especially given that it's one of the sacred 'medicinal' plants of the Native people of North America.
Re the 'correlation doesn't equal causation' argument when it comes to supposedly 'safe' interventions - the onus is on them to prove safety. If they can't (because there are no valid scientific studies), AND the available research suggests harm, then they are in even bigger trouble!
It was clear to most of the CDC employees (even the US administration) there was no reason to keep financing centralised "Disease Control" bureaucracy in the 1970s. Hence the 'HIV' trauma campaign against civilians, just to keep their #uselesseater jobs for a few more years (which turned out to be decades).
Hollywood literally gave away the script in early 2000s:
I have come to understand the "germ" has been invented to cover up the massive poisoning that has taken place by the Industrial State. So they introduce lead arsenate, ddt etc and poison millions and call it "polio". Sam has covered most of their crimes..
Lead, Arsenic, DDT, MSG, BPA, EDCs, chemtrails, vaccines, fluoride, chlorine, alcohol, tobacco, coffee, glyphosate... many poisons affect not only the body, but the hippocampus, which makes one lose empathy. WW3 - A War of Poisons and Propaganda - https://courses.jchristoff.com/podcasts/psychology-of-freedom/episodes/2147743365
Chemtrails fall into the same pseudoscience category, all claims based on observation of condensation trails but are unsubstantiated and unproven and are speculative conjecture conflated with cloud seeding. Dr Ed Berry a physicist involved in and recognised in atmospheric physics and a Certified Consulting Meteorologist happens to be well versed in both wrote an excellent article called Chemtrail Delusions vs Scientific Method well worth a read. Let me know if you want the link. NB. not everything is a poison. Abuse and overconsumption of food can cause death. Others may be toxic but do not cause death but may or could contribute to death like coffee, tobacco or alcohol, it depends on a number of confounders factors. People also do have choices to imbibe, ingest or inhale or not, that freedom should not be infringed upon by anyone else IMO especially virtue signalling fanatics and do-gooders.
I responded to your Asenine regarding tobacco smoking, besides there in zero scientific support regarding second hand smoke and there are many smokers who don't get ill from smoking. stick to context before emotional waffle pollutes.
Jun 18·edited Jun 18Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Huge thanks for reaching out to everyone‘s favorite FOIA officer, Roger, again. 😃 Every time he sees one of your requests, he must be thinking, “fuk me!! My only purpose in life is to publicly admit that there is absolutely NO REASON for the CDC to exist, since we have ZERO evidence to back up our claims that microbes are pathogenic, or that viruses even exist.“
LOVE IT!! At least you‘re making someone there actually earn their tax-financed pay.
When one researches the history of any disease and does so in depth, going back to source documents, what you find is always a tale of sordid motives and corrupt practices.
I do this as one part of my professional life and I've yet to find a single instance where any "disease" is presented to the public, from the original time of the "origin" of that "disease " up to the present, in a fashion that even remotely resembles authentic and honest scientific/medical discovery.
Virtually every step of the way you find shoddy studies, ignored material conditions, institutional distortions, professional chicanery and economic motives as the recurring themes to the story of each particular "disease."
Have we successfully brought forward any of this information that has changed the perception of the masses? In my community of friends and family, it hasn’t. I am not going to try and show them anything else as they have told me to just stop. It causes extreme friction even with my very close family. It’s as if they are not able to grasp or unwilling to grasp how corrupt the world is. It’s my greatest stressor and I do not spend time with this stress so I can be sane when they do (if they do in my lifetime) have to swallow that pill. Thank you for all the amazing work you’ve done.
I have managed to keep my relationships alive and heathy only because I realized they can’t or won’t accept it. I’ve decided I don’t want to be the one to tell them as well.
Jun 18·edited Jun 19Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Hello, Sammie. I've given up on trying to persuade one of my sisters and her partner about the germ theory fraud. I knew they would roll up their sleeves for the jab cos they believe that 2 planes could take down 3 skyscrapers on 9/11.
Family can be a tough nut to crack. But you can have success online with people who are wavering on Germ Theory.
Mine too. There is no opening their hard heads and those of us who get it, have advanced one other levels and they will get here in their own time. It’s a tough wait. Good luck but we have each other. ❤️
There is a brutal irony at play for our team: the more we research, the crazier we sound to ignorant people. Recently, on Team Virus blogs such as Meryl‘s Covid Newsletter I'm starting to mix my more serious posts with full on mocking of virology. I'm not sure how successful the strategy is but I'm having a blast. Once you start speaking up you meet some resistance but also a lot of people who are onboard, and others who then start to speak up. There's nothing to lose, and a lot of gain for people who begin to see the fraud.
If people get lippy, just ask them to cite evidence for their claims. Its usually crickets at that point or some bogus viroliegy paper you can enjoy picking apart.
You must try harder to convert your family before they are in charge of your treatment in case you become ill. Scientific method information is indeed about your own life and death.
I agree and I did try for some months until they were all simply avoiding all communication with me. I still drop a little nugget here and there and send something I think might not be so obvious but get them to think. They are all very well educated and very bright other than this issue. It’s something I can’t actually wrap my head around other than they haven’t reached the level of comfort to allow them to listen. Some of my close family are insulting if I try more than a tiny point. I can’t force them to open their minds. I have focused instead on information about the scientific process and perhaps an article well written about how debate is necessary and should always be part of the scientific process or simply life itself. I’ve even discussed evolution and slipped in bits that should resonate with our current times but if they opened their minds for that I had no indication. Maybe they are processing and will let me know in some manner. I hope so. I do set the example often.
The viral sorcery is only a random symptom of a wider lie: #heliocentricism.
Most of the vaccine injured individuals are fiscally hijacked by their usury banker, which had to believe the germ sorcery, too.
There is enough for everyone on earth. When the fake money economy stops (i.e. everyone demanding the end of the illegal "fraction reserve lending" yesterday), one would live according to their conviction again.
I hear you Sammie, and have some relationships like that myself. It will take time for this information to spread around, as the fake-news outlets and the clowns who fancy themselves "authorities" will not help us. At least we can be living examples of people who live happily without fear of "germs" and with zero interest in waging war on the microbes (the ones that actually exist) inside of us. This is a massive paradigm shift that will upset a lot of apple carts.
The CDC, FDA and AMA...all gateways to an earlier than you expected death. All working for gates and big pharma and depopulation for the last 30 years.
Dear Christine, if almost all awards and decorations hadn't already been devalued by unworthy recipients, you would have been awarded a medal long ago. For special services to humanity.
Hi Edward - nice to recognize names on a site with like-minded souls. My soul family. I unsubscribed from a Substack yesterday bc the owner of it said I sound like a miserable old woman -- bc my comment was presenting information that didn't go along with his sugar-coated edutainment. Blehh! Have a saucy day!
A pdf of this newsletter along with a searchable copy of the evidence can be downloaded for safekeeping, here:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/CDC-FOIA-Streptococcus-A-pathogenic-%E2%80%A2-23-00348-FOIA-complete-19-pages-.pdf
Strep A “Superbug”? - Dr Sam Bailey
https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/germ-theory/strep-a-superbug/
Dear Ms. Massie - I was looking at the study published in May 2020 (The pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in hACE2 transgenic mice -https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y#Sec2) - which observed slight bristled fur and weight loss only in the HB-01-infected hACE2 mice—and not theHB-01-infected wild-type mice or mock-treated hACE2 mice—at 14 days of observation...I understand that these are not symptoms consistent with being ill with C-19, so understand the significance of this...However, I see that the study also discusses histopathological changes in the lungs of the three mice groups at different time points, indicating that it found only theHB-01-infected hACE2 mice to have lesions and then pneumonia at different points. (That's what I'm understanding - Forgive the layman's rough understanding, as I am not a scientist.)...I was wondering if the no virus camp views this study as lacking true controls and if anyone from that camp has posted an in-depth analyzed of this specific study (aside from pointing out that bristled fur and weight loss are not usual symptoms of COVID-19) discussing what to make of the lung changes discussed above. If you know of anything like this from the non-virus camp, I’d appreciate you pointing me to it. Thank you.
Hi Rio. This study has been discussed many times, in particular I recall Andy Kaufman pointing out the absurdity of the bristled fur being passed off as a "covid" symptom, but not sure exactly which videos you would find this in. It's definitely been addressed on twitter many times but I'm kicked out again so can't find links for you, sorry. Mike Stone's account would be a good place to look: https://x.com/ViroLIEgy
None of the "SARS-COV-2" studies are valid (and can't have valid controls) b/c none have a valid independent variable - the alleged SARS-COV-2 particles. They've never been shown to exist, anywhere, let alone cause anything.
Always go to the Methods section to find the problems. Here you will see that they used a so-called "SARS-CoV-2 strain HB-01 ... provided by W. Tan1." This "strain" is not purified particles or even shown to contain any SARS-COV-2 particles.
They also admit that "Seed SARS-CoV-2 stocks and virus isolation studies were performed in Vero cells, which are maintained in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) (Invitrogen) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 100 IU/ml penicillin, and 100 μg/ml streptomycin, and incubated at 37 °C, 5% CO2."
The "strain" is just a manmade mixture of monkey kidney (Vero) cells, cow serum and chemicals.
In the section describing the mouse experiments, aside from the weird things they did to supposedly create and verify transgenic mice that express the "ACE2 receptor" (which I believe is another scam but haven't looked into as much), they write:
"After being intraperitoneally anaesthetized by 2.5% avertin with 0.02 ml/g body weight, the hACE2 or wild-type (ICR) 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....Mice were dissected at 1, 3, 5 and 7 dpi" (days post infection).
So the study is also invalid for the reason that they anaesthetized the mice and force-inoculated them, which has nothing to do with how the imaginary "virus" is supposedly spread in the real world, and then murdered them within 1-7 days.
Briefly to summarize, they are comparing "transgenic" mice that were anaesthetized and force-inoculated with either an wildly unnatural manmade brew (never shown to even contain any "SARS-COV-2" particles) or PBS (phosphate buffer solution). So it really doesn't matter what the results are because it's an invalid, unscientific animal torture/murder study that couldn't possibly tell us anything about a potential "virus".
I hope this helps, cheers.
Also, reading the peer review information was very helpful to me. Quite illuminating.
That's the best way to really understand the pseudoscience!
Thank you!
Christine, my observation on the issue of cause.
Every time that one of 'us' points out that excess mortality, the increase in cases of myocarditis, horrific new kinds of blood clots, etc., are synchronous with the roll out of the jab, and have probably been caused by the needles they are sticking into everyone's arm, the 'scientific' community and politicians and NGO's counter that "correlation does not imply causation." The media amplifies this denial and it greatly hampers our efforts to discussing these issues with friends and family.
With your FOI requests you have established that no-one has isolated a SARS-CoV-2 virus from a patient anywhere on earth. Even though health authorities, universities, media, and hospitals continue to authoritatively declare that "COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus," no-one has demonstrated that such is the case. (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21214-coronavirus-covid-19)
You know all this, of course, but I wanted to say that thanks to you, and some others, I have moved from initially rejecting the jab on intuition, to confidently rejecting all claims about a virus as unsubstantiated. As result, I ride the metro without any fear of my fellow human beings 'infecting' me. In fact, I have less fear of becoming infected than before the year 2020.
Now, triggered by your research, I spent an hour or so looking into a similar "correlation does not imply causation" denial: the smoking causes lung cancer debate. There were some remarkably similar mechanisms at play then, which I thought you might find interesting.
In 2012, Robert Proctor published an article in the BMJ publication *Tobacco Control* titled "The Shameful Past. The history of the discovery of the cigarette-lung cancer link: evidentiary traditions, corporate denial, global toll." (https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050338)
In the abstract, we find the passage:
>Cigarettes were recognised as the cause of the epidemic in the 1940s and 1950s, with the confluence of studies from epidemiology, animal experiments, cellular pathology and chemical analytics. Cigarette manufacturers disputed this evidence, as part of an orchestrated conspiracy to salvage cigarette sales. Propagandising the public proved successful, judging from secret tobacco industry measurements of the impact of denialist propaganda. As late as 1960 only one-third of all US doctors believed that the case against cigarettes had been established.
Hmm, so it took at least ten years to convince merely one-third of doctors. Considering that we're only three years or so into the jab analysis, it seems that there is a long way to go yet. If we survive the coming all out attack on mankind, of course.
And isn't it funny that the British Medical Journal had no issue calling it an "orchestrated conspiracy" when the cigarette manufacturers worked together, using propaganda techniques to influence public opinion?
There is also an analysis of the major 1950 paper. The WHO published an article by Michael Thun, by permission of the American Medical Association, that summarizes the study by Wynder and Graham which resulted in their groundbreaking paper arguing for the existence of a relationship between smoking and cancer.
Here are two excerpts, which I include because of the eerie similarities with today.
Source: Thun, Michael J. (February 2005). "When truth is unwelcome: the first reports on smoking and lung cancer" (PDF). Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 83 (2): 144–145. PMC 2623818. PMID 15744407. (http://www.princeton.edu/~sswang/WHO_lung-cancer-smoking-history.pdf)
>The medical and scientific communities were notably resistant to the idea that smoking caused lung cancer despite these publications. Doctors and scientists were as unreceptive as the general public, because most of them smoked.
>When Graham saw the final draft of the manuscript, he reportedly said, “You are going to have many difficulties. The smokers will not like your message. The tobacco interests will be vigorously opposed. The media and the government will be loath to support these findings. But you have one factor in your favour. What you have going for you is that you are right.”
I believe that this final sentence applies to you as well. So thanks for all your hard work, Christine. I think you are a true heroine of our time.
P.S. I am not totally convinced that tobacco is the ingredient in cigarettes which is causing cancer. I would rather think that the addition of poisonous and addictive ingredients could be the cause of illness and death. So there, too, is a similarity with today.
Thank you Robert. I'm so glad the FOIs have been helpful to you :)
I'm also not convinced that tobacco specifically is what causes cancer, especially given that it's one of the sacred 'medicinal' plants of the Native people of North America.
Re the 'correlation doesn't equal causation' argument when it comes to supposedly 'safe' interventions - the onus is on them to prove safety. If they can't (because there are no valid scientific studies), AND the available research suggests harm, then they are in even bigger trouble!
Another nail in the disproven germ hypothesis coffin. Keep going!
Thank YOU Christine! You are one of the few Substack's worth reading!
Thank you Gram :)
Hey...
It was clear to most of the CDC employees (even the US administration) there was no reason to keep financing centralised "Disease Control" bureaucracy in the 1970s. Hence the 'HIV' trauma campaign against civilians, just to keep their #uselesseater jobs for a few more years (which turned out to be decades).
Hollywood literally gave away the script in early 2000s:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368447/ (The Village)
I have come to understand the "germ" has been invented to cover up the massive poisoning that has taken place by the Industrial State. So they introduce lead arsenate, ddt etc and poison millions and call it "polio". Sam has covered most of their crimes..
Lead, Arsenic, DDT, MSG, BPA, EDCs, chemtrails, vaccines, fluoride, chlorine, alcohol, tobacco, coffee, glyphosate... many poisons affect not only the body, but the hippocampus, which makes one lose empathy. WW3 - A War of Poisons and Propaganda - https://courses.jchristoff.com/podcasts/psychology-of-freedom/episodes/2147743365
Chemtrails fall into the same pseudoscience category, all claims based on observation of condensation trails but are unsubstantiated and unproven and are speculative conjecture conflated with cloud seeding. Dr Ed Berry a physicist involved in and recognised in atmospheric physics and a Certified Consulting Meteorologist happens to be well versed in both wrote an excellent article called Chemtrail Delusions vs Scientific Method well worth a read. Let me know if you want the link. NB. not everything is a poison. Abuse and overconsumption of food can cause death. Others may be toxic but do not cause death but may or could contribute to death like coffee, tobacco or alcohol, it depends on a number of confounders factors. People also do have choices to imbibe, ingest or inhale or not, that freedom should not be infringed upon by anyone else IMO especially virtue signalling fanatics and do-gooders.
People have choice to inhale or not?
https://carnicominstitute.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLkRzx50pNY&t=140s
I responded to your Asenine regarding tobacco smoking, besides there in zero scientific support regarding second hand smoke and there are many smokers who don't get ill from smoking. stick to context before emotional waffle pollutes.
"Bop, bop, bop, another myth bites the dust." (you know the sound track.:-) )
Thanks, Christine.
Huge thanks for reaching out to everyone‘s favorite FOIA officer, Roger, again. 😃 Every time he sees one of your requests, he must be thinking, “fuk me!! My only purpose in life is to publicly admit that there is absolutely NO REASON for the CDC to exist, since we have ZERO evidence to back up our claims that microbes are pathogenic, or that viruses even exist.“
LOVE IT!! At least you‘re making someone there actually earn their tax-financed pay.
At least he's willing to admit at times that there is nothing, which is better than some institutions (and the "World Council for Health")!
👍👍I hope he never retires. 😃 And, agreed, he's more honest than the crew of the Wily Hoaxters‘ Club 😃😃
When one researches the history of any disease and does so in depth, going back to source documents, what you find is always a tale of sordid motives and corrupt practices.
I do this as one part of my professional life and I've yet to find a single instance where any "disease" is presented to the public, from the original time of the "origin" of that "disease " up to the present, in a fashion that even remotely resembles authentic and honest scientific/medical discovery.
Virtually every step of the way you find shoddy studies, ignored material conditions, institutional distortions, professional chicanery and economic motives as the recurring themes to the story of each particular "disease."
I believe it, too!
I believe it!!
Have we successfully brought forward any of this information that has changed the perception of the masses? In my community of friends and family, it hasn’t. I am not going to try and show them anything else as they have told me to just stop. It causes extreme friction even with my very close family. It’s as if they are not able to grasp or unwilling to grasp how corrupt the world is. It’s my greatest stressor and I do not spend time with this stress so I can be sane when they do (if they do in my lifetime) have to swallow that pill. Thank you for all the amazing work you’ve done.
I have managed to keep my relationships alive and heathy only because I realized they can’t or won’t accept it. I’ve decided I don’t want to be the one to tell them as well.
Hello, Sammie. I've given up on trying to persuade one of my sisters and her partner about the germ theory fraud. I knew they would roll up their sleeves for the jab cos they believe that 2 planes could take down 3 skyscrapers on 9/11.
Family can be a tough nut to crack. But you can have success online with people who are wavering on Germ Theory.
Mine too. There is no opening their hard heads and those of us who get it, have advanced one other levels and they will get here in their own time. It’s a tough wait. Good luck but we have each other. ❤️
There is a brutal irony at play for our team: the more we research, the crazier we sound to ignorant people. Recently, on Team Virus blogs such as Meryl‘s Covid Newsletter I'm starting to mix my more serious posts with full on mocking of virology. I'm not sure how successful the strategy is but I'm having a blast. Once you start speaking up you meet some resistance but also a lot of people who are onboard, and others who then start to speak up. There's nothing to lose, and a lot of gain for people who begin to see the fraud.
If people get lippy, just ask them to cite evidence for their claims. Its usually crickets at that point or some bogus viroliegy paper you can enjoy picking apart.
You must try harder to convert your family before they are in charge of your treatment in case you become ill. Scientific method information is indeed about your own life and death.
Get a Medical Directive in place and give copies to many people, other than your family.
That’s already been done. Good point tho
I agree and I did try for some months until they were all simply avoiding all communication with me. I still drop a little nugget here and there and send something I think might not be so obvious but get them to think. They are all very well educated and very bright other than this issue. It’s something I can’t actually wrap my head around other than they haven’t reached the level of comfort to allow them to listen. Some of my close family are insulting if I try more than a tiny point. I can’t force them to open their minds. I have focused instead on information about the scientific process and perhaps an article well written about how debate is necessary and should always be part of the scientific process or simply life itself. I’ve even discussed evolution and slipped in bits that should resonate with our current times but if they opened their minds for that I had no indication. Maybe they are processing and will let me know in some manner. I hope so. I do set the example often.
Being brainwashed is different from being educated (i.e. "be brought up to lead").
You would face a similar dilemma soon after they fall ill (ahead of you):
Do you follow your conviction to choose the right treatment or let the allopathic sorcery rob their savings?
The viral sorcery is only a random symptom of a wider lie: #heliocentricism.
Most of the vaccine injured individuals are fiscally hijacked by their usury banker, which had to believe the germ sorcery, too.
There is enough for everyone on earth. When the fake money economy stops (i.e. everyone demanding the end of the illegal "fraction reserve lending" yesterday), one would live according to their conviction again.
We do indeed!! 🌈💕💥
Very good and wise comment!
I hear you Sammie, and have some relationships like that myself. It will take time for this information to spread around, as the fake-news outlets and the clowns who fancy themselves "authorities" will not help us. At least we can be living examples of people who live happily without fear of "germs" and with zero interest in waging war on the microbes (the ones that actually exist) inside of us. This is a massive paradigm shift that will upset a lot of apple carts.
It's been nearly 200 years of training of the wrong thing... How long for the right?
We shall see!
The CDC, FDA and AMA...all gateways to an earlier than you expected death. All working for gates and big pharma and depopulation for the last 30 years.
Depopulation for the last decade!
Ex. 1918 flu- fraud
Dear Christine, if almost all awards and decorations hadn't already been devalued by unworthy recipients, you would have been awarded a medal long ago. For special services to humanity.
You're so sweet :)
.
The Idea Of A Virus
Is Itself A Virus.
Self- Replicating
In The Presence
Of A Susceptible Mind.
Until Proven
It’s Just An Idea After All.
.
.
SARS- CoV-2 …
Still Only “Poised” For Human Emergence.
Show Me A Poison
That Is Self - Replicating.
There Is No There - THERE.
Gain Of Function Is
Gain Of Failure.
“Poised”. Only “Poised”. Still Poised To Fail.
Beautiful! Almost Haiku-like.
it's part and parcel of the narrative matrix...
Hi Edward - nice to recognize names on a site with like-minded souls. My soul family. I unsubscribed from a Substack yesterday bc the owner of it said I sound like a miserable old woman -- bc my comment was presenting information that didn't go along with his sugar-coated edutainment. Blehh! Have a saucy day!