If we look back at the origin of "vaccination" then it is clear that "the virus" is "the vaccine". This is because in "variolation" the "virus" was "smallpox" and the "inoculation" was "smallpox". The only change in "vaccination" was that "the virus" was a "a mild variety of smallpox" aka "cowpox" and the "vaccine" was "a mild variety of smallpox" aka "cowpox ". The "disease" was still called "smallpox" and only the "inoculation" changed. The "virus" however was still the "inoculation". It was simply puss from a cow instead of puss from a human or rather the belief that there was some trace amount of this puss being transferred since "it should not be forgotten that inoculation from arm to arm with "mild kinds of smallpox " was an existing practice". In practice the fluid in arm to arm "inoculation" was presumably blood that they thought contained "virus" so there is a jumble of meanings for "disease", "virus" and "vaccine" because the whole thing is irrational. All 3 are synonymous and it would be foolish to get lost in the gibberish.
"At the close of last century, variolation had become the custom of the upper and middle classes of England. The trouble and the peril were disliked, but were accepted in the name of duty. The variolation of their children was an anxiety that weighed like lead on the hearts of affectionate parents; and glad and grateful they were when the operation was accomplished without serious mishap. Patients designed for variolation were dieted, purged, and bled; and smallpox from sufferers of sound constitution was diligently inquired for. Mild smallpox was in great demand and was propagated from arm to arm. When Dr. Dimsdale operated on the Empress Catharine he did not venture to convey smallpox direct to the imperial person. He looked out a case of "benign smallpox " with which he inoculated a strong young man, and from the young man the Empress. Unless we realise the inconveniences, the uncertainties, the disasters and the horrors of the practice of variolation, albeit minimised, excused and denied by its professors, we can never understand the enthusiasm with which vaccination was received as its substitute. The promise conveyed in vaccination was a relief inexpressible, bearing with it a show of reason that was well nigh irresistible. The argument ran thus : No one can have smallpox twice, and the mildest attack is as protective from subsequent attack as the severest. Therefore it is that in inoculation with smallpox we find security. But inoculation with smallpox is an uncertain operation with dangerous issues. Here, however, in cowpox is discovered a mild variety of smallpox, which may be inoculated with perfect ease, and with no possibility of harm. And inasmuch as the mildest smallpox is as preventive of future smallpox as the severest, it follows that this gentle cowpox must serve as a full equivalent for smallpox itself."
I think basically they are still using these same vague definitions and the "virus" is even more obviously a stage in the development of the "vaccine". They made up the "virus" on a computer for the sole purpose of making "the vaccine" same like they made up "the virus" in the cow in order to make "the vaccine". The "vaccine" however pertains to cow puss and "milder virus" which is totally at odds with using human samples from the most sick people they could find and lacing a concoction with 'adjuvants'. This in no way resembles "vaccination" and makes a mockery of even 17th century standards. The "milder virus" concept has been used to remove the dieting and precautions whilst actually designing a more toxic concoction or dozens of them.
It is so irritating how the bureaucrats lie and pretend, as if their very jobs depend on them continuing the lie, and the consequence of that lie is the needless suffering the death of people.
They claim viruses are real so proof of claim lies with them.
In legal terms, the principle "he who makes a claim must prove it" refers to the burden of proof, which is the legal obligation to demonstrate the truth of a claim with evidence. This burden typically rests on the person making a claim, like the plaintiff in a civil case, or the prosecution in a criminal case.
Elaboration:
Who bears the burden:
The burden of proof usually falls on the person bringing the claim (the plaintiff in civil cases or the prosecution in criminal cases).
What it means:
The burden of proof requires the claimant to provide evidence that is sufficient to convince the court of the truth of their claim.
Standard of proof:
The standard of proof varies depending on the type of case. In civil cases, it's usually a "balance of probabilities," meaning the evidence must make the claim more likely than not. In criminal cases, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," requiring a much higher degree of certainty.
Shifting the burden:
While the burden of proof generally remains with the claimant, it can sometimes shift to the defendant, especially when the defendant raises a specific defense (e.g., self-defense).
This lie continues because we keep pretending the institutions are legitimate. This only works when we comply. This is up to the individual to make the change; that is why these system is dumbing people down as we speak with drugs, A.I. assistants and sensory distractions.
As I understand it: antibiotics like penicillin are the only medicines that actually "kill" a disease (bacteria). The penicillin "kills" all the bacteria, not just the pneumonia and syphilis bacteriums.
Actually, the antibiotics do not "kill" the bacteria, they weaken the shells or skin of the bacteria and the natural immune system (releases cytokines??) then does the killing.
What proof do you have of the "Myth of transmission"? He who makes a claim must prove the claim because it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something except by indirect inference or point to to lack of proof. See the logic spiral here.
What's your proof for "transmission of diseases"? In 1918, a rigorous study by the US Navy and US Public Health Service to investigate how the "Spanish" Flu was spread (allegedly the most contagious disease EVER), headed by Dr Milton Rosenau, one of the Navy's senior doctors, failed to create a SINGLE case of transmission. This is a discussion of that study, includes a link to the study, which was published in JAMA in 1919.
you can find an interview with Dr Daniel Roytas, author of the 2024 book "Can You Catch a Cold?" Among other things, he discusses the UK's Common Cold Research Unit, a research center which was open from 1947 to 1989, which studied how colds and flu were transmitted. The center failed to reliably create transmissions. You can also read about the CCRU here.
If you search this Substack page (i.e. Christine Massey FOIs), under "contagion," you will find numerous admissions by the CDC and many other world health agencies.
The descriptions below do not prove transmission, but... diseases are spread somehow.
Chlamydia is a common sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis.
Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Treponema pallidum. It is curable with antibiotics if detected and treated early. Syphilis progresses through stages, and untreated infection can lead to serious health complications.
The herpes simplex virus (HSV) causes genital herpes. Genital herpes can often be spread by skin-to-skin contact during sexual activity.
Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, is not a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It is a chronic bacterial infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae that primarily affects the skin, nerves, and eyes.
Leprosy is spread through close contact with an untreated person who has the infection. It is not transmitted through sexual contact or casual contact. The incubation period for leprosy can range from a few months to several years.
Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs that can be caused by a variety of germs, including:
In most cases, pneumonia is caused by bacteria or viruses that spread through contact with infected people or surfaces. The germs can enter the lungs through the mouth or nose and cause inflammation and fluid buildup in the air sacs (alveoli).
If you are running from a volcano with a bunch of folks, one goes down and is consumed by the lava, then another, then another. Is that contagion? Did the first guy that went down exhume lava sickness?
Or maybe it could be put down to environmental factors as it is everywhere where that is perhaps not so obvious.
The answer to the first question: it is not contagion, they became exhausted from running and could not go further.
I have very simply asked a question about "contagion".
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
A was actually a virgin but C was out to sell a "chlamydia" treatment and so claimed A layed with B and would have become sterile were it not for the treatment.
And I gave you the most obvious analogy I could think of that illustrates an environmental effect that is not contagion. They are innumerable less obvious environmental effects that you could easily mistake for contagion.
What you should probably do now is go look at papers, or articles examining papers that show that efforts to prove contagion have all failed.
People getting skin problems after rubbing up against someone else is not proof that a pathogen has "spread" anything.
I challenge you to cite actual scientific evidence of any virus, or of any bacteria causing any illness (we have FOIs on that topic as well) or of contagion of any illness.
"n most cases, pneumonia is caused by bacteria or viruses that spread through contact with infected people or surfaces. The germs can enter the lungs through the mouth or nose and cause inflammation and fluid buildup in the air sacs (alveoli). "
Sounds like something you copied from a manual. Do you have any proof that viruses exist? Do you have any proof for a single bacterium being a pathogen, in other words fulfilling the 4 Koch's Postulates?
"Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, is not a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It is a chronic bacterial infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae that primarily affects the skin, nerves, and eyes. "
Again, you copied from a manual. Do you have any PROOF?
"The herpes simplex virus (HSV"
SHOW US THE PROOF THAT THIS VIRUS EXISTS!
"Chlamydia is a common sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis.
Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Treponema pallidum."
You are just asserting this stuff, in fact you're just copying out of a manual. Do you have any PROOFS?
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
You're an asshole and being reported. Lots of diseases per even mainstream medicine have no vector. No living entities have ever been proven to be vectors.
Lots of diseases per even mainstream medicine have no vector. No living entities have ever been proven to be vectors.
Here, more specifically:
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
Well there you go. Maybe the esteemed and trusted CDC has some virus samples lying around. We supposedly just had a major flu season. Oh wait, aren't attenuated viruses added into the vaccines? Surely big pharma has a boatload of them somewhere.
Or better yet, grab one of those people wearing a mask and have the mask filtered for the viruses it is catching. There's gotta be at least a few hundred buried into that woven mesh.
How about those clowns in Wuhan? They are always up to something that makes the world a better place. Or any of the other 1,000s of biolabs working feverishly to create good things for mankind. They CAN'T be working on viruses without top notch samples, can they?
Surely, out of the some tens of thousands of virologists, someone has a virus sample. Or why can't they just grab a bucket of air and filter it for viruses? Do I have to do all the work for these bums? For sure as a last resort, A/i can produce a real virus, can't it?
Dr. Bhakdi has danced as close to the fire as he can without being burned alive at the stake. There is no shame in that. This is Armageddon. Those in the business simply cannot go against the narrative by telling the truth. Why should he? Few if any would believe him, fewer still would do anything. What can be done? Answer: non-compliance, do not take the shot.
This leaves you limping from one shot to another, not to mention "alternative therapies" which are being emphasized by the Trump regime instead of shots. Keep the myth alive at your own peril.
Thanks for sharing! I think the respondents believe in what they write. Their income depends on their continued belief. Why wish other people in jail? That would just make it impossible for them to talk openly.
Looking at myself, I'm ashamed to say I studied physics yet believed we put a man on the moon. They wouldn't lie about something that big, would they?
The only ''virus'' that has ever been proven to exist are the ones that infect your pc operating system - even then they're deliberately created in order to continue selling their snake oil remedies and require frequent updates aka boosters.
Back in the real world where viruses have not been proven to exist there's there's something very suspicious about it all when one considers that Mr Fauci was provided with a pardon which if anything fits into a long line of hypocrisies where war criminals receive nobel prizes and knighthoods and extremely lucrative business deals and toxic snake oil man receive pardons for pushing a death jab onto a trusting public.
And don't you dare investigate these crimes against humanity or they'll come for you, they've threatened the ICC and have the ICJ under their control - in the end we have to admit that all our supposedly democratic institutions have been compromised one way or another - from intelligence to the judicial system it's nothing but one big farce.
At the other end of it all those who tell the truth about what's really happening can expect to have their door demolished at the crack of dawn under trumped up anti terrorism charges hauled from a plane or from an embassy while supposedly under the protection of asylum or tricked into visiting one in a country that doesn't extradite so they can be arrested anyway, flown back to the homeland and locked up on [you guessed it] trumped up charges.
It never ends, the moment when we collectively rise up to put an end to this madness cannot arrive soon enough, this should not be seen as a matter of if as much as when, call me impatient but it's time.
If we look back at the origin of "vaccination" then it is clear that "the virus" is "the vaccine". This is because in "variolation" the "virus" was "smallpox" and the "inoculation" was "smallpox". The only change in "vaccination" was that "the virus" was a "a mild variety of smallpox" aka "cowpox" and the "vaccine" was "a mild variety of smallpox" aka "cowpox ". The "disease" was still called "smallpox" and only the "inoculation" changed. The "virus" however was still the "inoculation". It was simply puss from a cow instead of puss from a human or rather the belief that there was some trace amount of this puss being transferred since "it should not be forgotten that inoculation from arm to arm with "mild kinds of smallpox " was an existing practice". In practice the fluid in arm to arm "inoculation" was presumably blood that they thought contained "virus" so there is a jumble of meanings for "disease", "virus" and "vaccine" because the whole thing is irrational. All 3 are synonymous and it would be foolish to get lost in the gibberish.
"At the close of last century, variolation had become the custom of the upper and middle classes of England. The trouble and the peril were disliked, but were accepted in the name of duty. The variolation of their children was an anxiety that weighed like lead on the hearts of affectionate parents; and glad and grateful they were when the operation was accomplished without serious mishap. Patients designed for variolation were dieted, purged, and bled; and smallpox from sufferers of sound constitution was diligently inquired for. Mild smallpox was in great demand and was propagated from arm to arm. When Dr. Dimsdale operated on the Empress Catharine he did not venture to convey smallpox direct to the imperial person. He looked out a case of "benign smallpox " with which he inoculated a strong young man, and from the young man the Empress. Unless we realise the inconveniences, the uncertainties, the disasters and the horrors of the practice of variolation, albeit minimised, excused and denied by its professors, we can never understand the enthusiasm with which vaccination was received as its substitute. The promise conveyed in vaccination was a relief inexpressible, bearing with it a show of reason that was well nigh irresistible. The argument ran thus : No one can have smallpox twice, and the mildest attack is as protective from subsequent attack as the severest. Therefore it is that in inoculation with smallpox we find security. But inoculation with smallpox is an uncertain operation with dangerous issues. Here, however, in cowpox is discovered a mild variety of smallpox, which may be inoculated with perfect ease, and with no possibility of harm. And inasmuch as the mildest smallpox is as preventive of future smallpox as the severest, it follows that this gentle cowpox must serve as a full equivalent for smallpox itself."
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/white_b.html#VARIOLATION._
I think basically they are still using these same vague definitions and the "virus" is even more obviously a stage in the development of the "vaccine". They made up the "virus" on a computer for the sole purpose of making "the vaccine" same like they made up "the virus" in the cow in order to make "the vaccine". The "vaccine" however pertains to cow puss and "milder virus" which is totally at odds with using human samples from the most sick people they could find and lacing a concoction with 'adjuvants'. This in no way resembles "vaccination" and makes a mockery of even 17th century standards. The "milder virus" concept has been used to remove the dieting and precautions whilst actually designing a more toxic concoction or dozens of them.
It is so irritating how the bureaucrats lie and pretend, as if their very jobs depend on them continuing the lie, and the consequence of that lie is the needless suffering the death of people.
They claim viruses are real so proof of claim lies with them.
In legal terms, the principle "he who makes a claim must prove it" refers to the burden of proof, which is the legal obligation to demonstrate the truth of a claim with evidence. This burden typically rests on the person making a claim, like the plaintiff in a civil case, or the prosecution in a criminal case.
Elaboration:
Who bears the burden:
The burden of proof usually falls on the person bringing the claim (the plaintiff in civil cases or the prosecution in criminal cases).
What it means:
The burden of proof requires the claimant to provide evidence that is sufficient to convince the court of the truth of their claim.
Standard of proof:
The standard of proof varies depending on the type of case. In civil cases, it's usually a "balance of probabilities," meaning the evidence must make the claim more likely than not. In criminal cases, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," requiring a much higher degree of certainty.
Shifting the burden:
While the burden of proof generally remains with the claimant, it can sometimes shift to the defendant, especially when the defendant raises a specific defense (e.g., self-defense).
This lie continues because we keep pretending the institutions are legitimate. This only works when we comply. This is up to the individual to make the change; that is why these system is dumbing people down as we speak with drugs, A.I. assistants and sensory distractions.
The is no transmission of disease. It isnt possible.
Cheers for you Christine. I admire your smarts and pluck.
As I understand it: antibiotics like penicillin are the only medicines that actually "kill" a disease (bacteria). The penicillin "kills" all the bacteria, not just the pneumonia and syphilis bacteriums.
Actually, the antibiotics do not "kill" the bacteria, they weaken the shells or skin of the bacteria and the natural immune system (releases cytokines??) then does the killing.
Is this somewhat correct?
Northern Tracey's scribblings
Antibiotics – the sense and nonsense of anti-life drugs
https://northerntracey213875959.wordpress.com/2021/01/18/antibiotics-the-sense-and-nonsense-of-anti-life-drugs/
Antibiotics effectively kill bacteria, which have in fact never been proven to be pathogens.
Yes, the firemen are always there, but they did not start the fire.
If viruses do not exist, and contagion is a myth then what is the means of transmission for diseases?
What proof do you have of the "Myth of transmission"? He who makes a claim must prove the claim because it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something except by indirect inference or point to to lack of proof. See the logic spiral here.
Thank you for bringing up this point about logical spiral.
In my personal experience: I was well one day and physically compromised the next.
If you go onto Reddit/herpes you can read tens of thousands of contagion stories.
They do not have Reddit/chlamydia. I assume it would be similar:
well one day and physically compromised the next.
That said...
You are the one that ultimately controls what you believe.
I cannot prove anything to you.
I only asked a question:
what is the means of transmission for diseases? (how does a healthy person acquire disease?)
Please tell us, you are the one who proports to be knowledgeable.
What's your proof for "transmission of diseases"? In 1918, a rigorous study by the US Navy and US Public Health Service to investigate how the "Spanish" Flu was spread (allegedly the most contagious disease EVER), headed by Dr Milton Rosenau, one of the Navy's senior doctors, failed to create a SINGLE case of transmission. This is a discussion of that study, includes a link to the study, which was published in JAMA in 1919.
https://viroliegy.com/2021/10/03/the-infectious-myth-busted-part-1-the-rosenau-spanish-flu-experiments-1918/
And here, https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/dan-roytas-can-you-catch-a-cold
you can find an interview with Dr Daniel Roytas, author of the 2024 book "Can You Catch a Cold?" Among other things, he discusses the UK's Common Cold Research Unit, a research center which was open from 1947 to 1989, which studied how colds and flu were transmitted. The center failed to reliably create transmissions. You can also read about the CCRU here.
https://viroliegy.com/2024/03/15/the-infectious-myth-busted-part-7-the-common-cold-vacation/
If you search this Substack page (i.e. Christine Massey FOIs), under "contagion," you will find numerous admissions by the CDC and many other world health agencies.
The descriptions below do not prove transmission, but... diseases are spread somehow.
Chlamydia is a common sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis.
Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Treponema pallidum. It is curable with antibiotics if detected and treated early. Syphilis progresses through stages, and untreated infection can lead to serious health complications.
The herpes simplex virus (HSV) causes genital herpes. Genital herpes can often be spread by skin-to-skin contact during sexual activity.
Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, is not a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It is a chronic bacterial infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae that primarily affects the skin, nerves, and eyes.
Leprosy is spread through close contact with an untreated person who has the infection. It is not transmitted through sexual contact or casual contact. The incubation period for leprosy can range from a few months to several years.
Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs that can be caused by a variety of germs, including:
In most cases, pneumonia is caused by bacteria or viruses that spread through contact with infected people or surfaces. The germs can enter the lungs through the mouth or nose and cause inflammation and fluid buildup in the air sacs (alveoli).
If you are running from a volcano with a bunch of folks, one goes down and is consumed by the lava, then another, then another. Is that contagion? Did the first guy that went down exhume lava sickness?
Or maybe it could be put down to environmental factors as it is everywhere where that is perhaps not so obvious.
The answer to the first question: it is not contagion, they became exhausted from running and could not go further.
I have very simply asked a question about "contagion".
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
A was actually a virgin but C was out to sell a "chlamydia" treatment and so claimed A layed with B and would have become sterile were it not for the treatment.
I do not want to go to your level but you are especially stupid.
And I gave you the most obvious analogy I could think of that illustrates an environmental effect that is not contagion. They are innumerable less obvious environmental effects that you could easily mistake for contagion.
What you should probably do now is go look at papers, or articles examining papers that show that efforts to prove contagion have all failed.
you wrote: There are innumerable less obvious environmental effects that you could easily mistake for contagion.
Ok, please elaborate...
What is the environmental effect that would produce anti-bodies for chlamydia and another set for herpes?
People getting skin problems after rubbing up against someone else is not proof that a pathogen has "spread" anything.
I challenge you to cite actual scientific evidence of any virus, or of any bacteria causing any illness (we have FOIs on that topic as well) or of contagion of any illness.
If A rubs against B and gets something on his skin that will not go away, what is the condition called?
Irritation?
"n most cases, pneumonia is caused by bacteria or viruses that spread through contact with infected people or surfaces. The germs can enter the lungs through the mouth or nose and cause inflammation and fluid buildup in the air sacs (alveoli). "
Sounds like something you copied from a manual. Do you have any proof that viruses exist? Do you have any proof for a single bacterium being a pathogen, in other words fulfilling the 4 Koch's Postulates?
"Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, is not a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It is a chronic bacterial infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae that primarily affects the skin, nerves, and eyes. "
Again, you copied from a manual. Do you have any PROOF?
"The herpes simplex virus (HSV"
SHOW US THE PROOF THAT THIS VIRUS EXISTS!
"Chlamydia is a common sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis.
Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the bacterium Treponema pallidum."
You are just asserting this stuff, in fact you're just copying out of a manual. Do you have any PROOFS?
Quit changing the subject.
I asked:
Is there a condition called disease?
If so what is its vector?
Just cite valid evidence or given it a rest.
I am asking a question.
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
You're an asshole and being reported. Lots of diseases per even mainstream medicine have no vector. No living entities have ever been proven to be vectors.
Finally, you answer the question with this:
Lots of diseases per even mainstream medicine have no vector. No living entities have ever been proven to be vectors.
Here, more specifically:
What is actually happening when A lays with B and then develops "disease", in this instance "chlamydia", and A's fallopian tubes become blocked, thus rendering A sterile?
Translation of English to Latin- AstraZeneca-road to death https://www.bitchute.com/video/XlxLkIb9G6LN
This covid crime has been going on to long.
If you want to make a fast 10,000 pounds cash, get the proof to Tim West here beyondcertainty.substack.com/p/no-virus-evidence-is-the-fact-to
Well there you go. Maybe the esteemed and trusted CDC has some virus samples lying around. We supposedly just had a major flu season. Oh wait, aren't attenuated viruses added into the vaccines? Surely big pharma has a boatload of them somewhere.
Or better yet, grab one of those people wearing a mask and have the mask filtered for the viruses it is catching. There's gotta be at least a few hundred buried into that woven mesh.
How about those clowns in Wuhan? They are always up to something that makes the world a better place. Or any of the other 1,000s of biolabs working feverishly to create good things for mankind. They CAN'T be working on viruses without top notch samples, can they?
Surely, out of the some tens of thousands of virologists, someone has a virus sample. Or why can't they just grab a bucket of air and filter it for viruses? Do I have to do all the work for these bums? For sure as a last resort, A/i can produce a real virus, can't it?
Dear Madam Massey,
Please ask Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi the question about virus isolation and make his response, if any, known.
Remember, he was tried in court for dissemination of "anti-Semitic hate" because he spoke against the CV-19 vaccine. He was acquitted.
He may not be able to answer due to the legal consequences.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-e&q=Dr.+Suchrect+Bahkdi
vty,
She did, last June.
https://christinemasseyfois.substack.com/p/some-responses-to-bhakdi-and-palmers
Thank you for providing this link.
Dr. Bhakdi has danced as close to the fire as he can without being burned alive at the stake. There is no shame in that. This is Armageddon. Those in the business simply cannot go against the narrative by telling the truth. Why should he? Few if any would believe him, fewer still would do anything. What can be done? Answer: non-compliance, do not take the shot.
This leaves you limping from one shot to another, not to mention "alternative therapies" which are being emphasized by the Trump regime instead of shots. Keep the myth alive at your own peril.
Will you please add some clarity to the important comment above?
My original question was basically: What does Dr. Bhakdi say about the isolation of viruses?
READ the link i provided you!!
I read it and replied that Dr. B cannot commit suicide.
I also asked, in other words, if it is not disease via contagion what is it?
The best way to control our opposition…. Fuck it's all so tiresome...
I heard that....
Thanks for sharing! I think the respondents believe in what they write. Their income depends on their continued belief. Why wish other people in jail? That would just make it impossible for them to talk openly.
Looking at myself, I'm ashamed to say I studied physics yet believed we put a man on the moon. They wouldn't lie about something that big, would they?
"Yes, we have no evidence" is quickly becoming the hit song of this relatively young century. Thanks, Christine.
And opps we did it again.....
The only ''virus'' that has ever been proven to exist are the ones that infect your pc operating system - even then they're deliberately created in order to continue selling their snake oil remedies and require frequent updates aka boosters.
Back in the real world where viruses have not been proven to exist there's there's something very suspicious about it all when one considers that Mr Fauci was provided with a pardon which if anything fits into a long line of hypocrisies where war criminals receive nobel prizes and knighthoods and extremely lucrative business deals and toxic snake oil man receive pardons for pushing a death jab onto a trusting public.
And don't you dare investigate these crimes against humanity or they'll come for you, they've threatened the ICC and have the ICJ under their control - in the end we have to admit that all our supposedly democratic institutions have been compromised one way or another - from intelligence to the judicial system it's nothing but one big farce.
At the other end of it all those who tell the truth about what's really happening can expect to have their door demolished at the crack of dawn under trumped up anti terrorism charges hauled from a plane or from an embassy while supposedly under the protection of asylum or tricked into visiting one in a country that doesn't extradite so they can be arrested anyway, flown back to the homeland and locked up on [you guessed it] trumped up charges.
It never ends, the moment when we collectively rise up to put an end to this madness cannot arrive soon enough, this should not be seen as a matter of if as much as when, call me impatient but it's time.
Virus = poison ☠️ in Latin they definitely exist in many forms
Poisons exist, no doubt about it.
It's the alleged Sars Cov 2 novel virus that has never been proven to exist while the jab is the poison.
Virology Isn’t a Lie—It’s a Religion. Yeadon exposes the fraud. But are the perpetrators evil—or true believers? https://turfseer.substack.com/p/virology-isnt-a-lieits-a-religion