*The first scientific evidence in 2021 that viruses do not exist*

Virologie Nights

https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/germ-theory/virologie-nights/

shaftless wrote:There's always going to be that debate...are viruses or toxins to blame? Both sides have their evidence. But to me, it's the area involved and timing that is a mystery. Right now in both america and canada there seems to be an epidemic of a children's respiratory condition being blamed on the RSV (respiratory syncytial virus). Childrens' hospitals across both countries are recording record admittance for this. If it's a toxin how did it spread? How did it enter the kids...food, water, air? Something localized I could see maybe a local toxin. But when it covers vast areas, and happening relatively all around the same time, a "spread" makes more sense. Since people are always moving about that would be a likely vehicle.

It seems we have reached the bottom where the question is 'what came first the chicken or the egg' ? but it's also a question that
can limit us. Likewise 'are viruses or toxins to blame?' I think is a dead end approach. It lacks context.

imagine you're a leaf on a tree and you start turning from green to orange, and the next leaf shortly after you does... and we start
looking for a particular culprit...we get caught by the idea that i turned orange because you turned orange...
we will miss the bigger picture (context) which is the fact that it is now Autumn. Life is intelligent.

Have you seen that illustration of 2 men both looking at the number 6. from the top the man claims (rightly) that it's a 9.
from the bottom the man claims (rightly) it's a 6... the missing factor is the context. The factor that would determine who
has the right answer would be knowing where up and down are. If you draw a line under the 6. then the man who claims
6 would be right. vice versa. So the missing context leaves them spinning their wheels.

The fact is no virus can or does cause disease. This is the context from which we need to work.

I think our overly reductive and technical thinking shackles us from the get go.
It's not natural either, and the majority of us have been propagandised from birth
to approach reality in this way... we often can't see what's right under our nose.

shaftless wrote:"The fact is no virus can or does cause disease. This is the context from which we need to work."

Coming from which guy...the one looking up or the one looking down? So far each guy has drawn their own line.

just establish where is up and where is down. and you will know if its a 6 or a 9. An objective truth.

without context everything is relative, and that's a road to Hell - which we have experienced this past few year.
where good is bad and lies are truth.

In scientific terms, in order to determine the cause of something, a negative control experiment is necessary.

Without, it bias comes into play.

For probably a thousand years people assumed that something invisible caused illness.

With thousands of toxins, it can be difficult to ascertain exactly why person "A" got sick.

Also, with barometric changes during seasonal changes, a concentration gradient multiplier, plus lower level of UBV-radiation form the sun, also play into odds of toxic effects. The body has to purge these, and often does based on cycles.

Personally, I am armed with supplements that defy illness simply by a matter of improving the body's ability to bind up
toxins. Or during dietary indulges, improve the body's ability to deal with reactive oxygen species.

Getting sick just doesn't happen under routine circumstances. However, under the right conditions it can happen, such as poor sleep, high stress, and poor eating.

CausticSymmetry wrote:In scientific terms, in order to determine the cause of something, a negative control experiment is necessary.

Without, it bias comes into play.

For probably a thousand years people assumed that something invisible caused illness.

With thousands of toxins, it can be difficult to ascertain exactly why person "A" got sick.

Also, with barometric changes during seasonal changes, a concentration gradient multiplier, plus lower level of UBV-radiation form the sun, also play into odds of toxic effects. The body has to purge these, and often does based on cycles.

Personally, I am armed with supplements that defy illness simply by a matter of improving the body's ability to bind up
toxins. Or during dietary indulges, improve the body's ability to deal with reactive oxygen species.

Getting sick just doesn't happen under routine circumstances. However, under the right conditions it can happen, such as poor sleep, high stress, and poor eating.

on reactive oxygen species CS, what do you think to EMF/radiation kicking these off?

Live forever wrote:

CausticSymmetry wrote:In scientific terms, in order to determine the cause of something, a negative control experiment is necessary.

Without, it bias comes into play.

For probably a thousand years people assumed that something invisible caused illness.

With thousands of toxins, it can be difficult to ascertain exactly why person "A" got sick.

Also, with barometric changes during seasonal changes, a concentration gradient multiplier, plus lower level of UBV-radiation form the sun, also play into odds of toxic effects. The body has to purge these, and often does based on cycles.

Personally, I am armed with supplements that defy illness simply by a matter of improving the body's ability to bind up
toxins. Or during dietary indulges, improve the body's ability to deal with reactive oxygen species.

Getting sick just doesn't happen under routine circumstances. However, under the right conditions it can happen, such as poor sleep, high stress, and poor eating.

on reactive oxygen species CS, what do you think to EMF/radiation kicking these off?

Yes, ROS can be generated by either:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360754261_Interaction_between_Highly_Diluted_Samples_Protein_Solutions_and_Water_in_a_Controlled_Magnetic_Field

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6250044/

Reactive Oxygen Species also driven from toxic food. Mainstream science uses ROS as a surrogate marker for viruses.

shaftless wrote:As global warming is melting permafrost they say dangerous microbes may be coming to life. Anthrax is one of them. Anthrax bacteria occurs naturally in soil but certain types are more deadlier than others.

Remember the anthrax attacks in america right after 9/11? Someone was sending letters laced with it. It killed 5 people and sickened 17. The perpetrator worked in a lab where he obtained it and eventually killed himself just before the authorities closed in on him. Reminds me of some of those CSI tv shows.

If bacteria are supposed to be beneficial...what did this guy send in those envelopes?

Global warming? No real science on that. The temperature of the earth has fluctuated up and down for millions of years (depending on your religion). Al Gore has made a bundle for a scientifically unsound hypothesis by way of carbon taxes.

In regards to Anthrax. Another illusion from corporate controlled media, who profit by fear, not by facts.

From a book that took the authors over a decade to write: What Really Makes You Ill?: Why Everything You Thought You Knew About Disease Is Wrong Paperback - December 24, 2019 by Dawn Lester (Author), David Parker (Author)

The article explains that experiments were conducted which showed that,“…animals inoculated with blood from a fatal case of woolsorters’ disease died of anthrax.”

In an effort to demonstrate that these experiments provide definitive proof, the article also states,
“This important link with anthrax in cattle and sheep was finally confirmed when cattle in Bradford died of anthrax after
drinking water that had been used to wash imported wool.”

These cattle deaths do not provide confirmation that anthrax ‘spores’ were the cause; they do however, indicate poisoning, and suggest that the water the cattle drank contained toxic substances. The 2008 WHO report admits that the poor level of knowledge about anthrax leaves many unanswered questions, one of which is, “…how precisely do grazing and browsing animals acquire it?”

This question is inexplicable from the perspective of the ‘germ theory’. It is however, fully explicable from the perspective of a ‘toxin’ or ‘poison; after all, the ‘disease’ is acknowledged to be due to ‘toxins’. The medical establishment erroneously attributes the source of the toxins to be bacterial; the real sources are of a very different
nature.

The most significant toxin that can explain the early cases of woolsorters’ disease is arsenic, which was the main ingredient of a sheep dip that had been developed in 1830. Arsenic is discussed in more detail in the next chapter; it is, however, a persistent toxin. The use of arsenic in sheep dip has produced considerable environmental contamination, as indicated by an article entitled Arsenic and Old Wool, which refers to various arsenic-based compounds that have been used as ingredients of sheep dip and states, “The pervasive toxicity of these compounds is evidenced by the fact that old sheep dip sites in Australia contaminated by arsenic are now considered a threat to public health.”

The article also indicates that The Lancet carried many reports during the 19th century about shepherds who suffered from the effects of the toxic sheep dip; but shepherds were not the only people exposed to the hazards of arsenic. In addition to shepherds and woolsorters, anyone who handled wool from sheep dipped in arsenic-based compounds would have been affected by this highly toxic substance. The rise of ‘bacteriology’ in the latter part of the 19th century ensured, however, that little, if any, attention was paid to a toxicological investigation of the disease.

Although a significant contributory factor, arsenic is not the only toxic substance that can account for the poisoning of grazing animals. As will be further discussed in the next chapter, certain industries have released a wide variety of toxic substances into the environment; many of these contaminants are eminently capable of causing serious harm to the health of animals, including livestock.

One industry in particular that has been associated with anthrax ‘outbreaks’ is tanning; the WHO document states that,
“…the main enzootic livestock areas traditionally lay ‘downstream’ from tanneries and the implication has been that
watercourses have carried contaminated tannery effluent…”

The use of the word ‘contaminated’ is intended to indicate the existence of anthrax spores from ‘infected’ animals; the alleged ‘contamination’ of hides with anthrax spores is the reason that tannery workers were vaccinated against the disease. The real contamination would be from the use of toxic chemicals by the tanning industry; these toxins included arsenic, as the Arsenic and Old Wool article states, “White arsenic was further used as a preservative of hides, skins and furs.”

Mining is another industry associated with the release of toxic substances that contaminate the environment. Tin mining, for example, is particularly hazardous because tin ore is usually found in association with sulfur and arsenic. Interestingly, tin mining was one of the industries in 19th century Yorkshire, the English county in which woolsorters’ disease arose.

It is clear therefore, that exposure to highly toxic substances, especially arsenic used in sheep dip, provides a more compelling explanation for woolsorters’ disease in humans; and that the contamination of grazing land with toxic industrial effluent and toxins released from mining provides a more compelling explanation for the animal disease known as anthrax.

Hot! Hot!

The €1,500,000 bet: The #IsolateTruthFund was accepted!

The #IsolateTruthFund has sparked much controversy over the past few days.

The lawyers of Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer contacted us and informed us about their ambitions.

https://samueleckert.net/isolate-truth-fund/

shaftless wrote:As global warming is melting permafrost they say dangerous microbes may be coming to life. Anthrax is one of them. Anthrax bacteria occurs naturally in soil but certain types are more deadlier than others.

Remember the anthrax attacks in america right after 9/11? Someone was sending letters laced with it. It killed 5 people and sickened 17. The perpetrator worked in a lab where he obtained it and eventually killed himself just before the authorities closed in on him. Reminds me of some of those CSI tv shows.

If bacteria are supposed to be beneficial...what did this guy send in those envelopes?

Viruses and now Global Warming... you really are a great devils advocate Shaftless.

Can you see how new industries are made and sustained through fear based lies? (virus/climate change etc)

As CS said above it is profit through fear and not through facts.

Have you seen some of the thinking that emanates from those attending cop27? Chilling.

Dissecting Virology Flaws One Detail at a Time

https://www.bitchute.com/video/LDr95jG08oa0/

3 x 500k euros !

For virologist Ulrike Kämmerer

: If she has necessary proofs for virus existence

She failed as expected!

Dr. Peter McCullough Says He Has Seen A Picture Of A Virus Up Close

https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/dr-peter-mccullough-says-he-has-seen

McCullough and the study:

1. Isolation/purification: No
2. Biochemical characterization: No
3. Alleged WGS: No
4. Controls: No

Completely Useless "study"

CausticSymmetry wrote:Dr. Peter McCullough Says He Has Seen A Picture Of A Virus Up Close

https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/dr-peter-mccullough-says-he-has-seen

McCullough and the study:

1. Isolation/purification: No
2. Biochemical characterization: No
3. Alleged WGS: No
4. Controls: No

Completely Useless "study"

Never trusted Peter McC for some reason

shaftless wrote:Yet people are still getting sick "out of the blue" so to speak. China is reporting a record number of covid cases and are implementing harsher lockdowns. Now in different parts of the world measles is making a comeback which some say can spread globally. They're blaming the previous lockdowns for a lack of getting vaccinated for measles and other viral ailments.

So what is making so many people sick enuff to not stay home and recover on their own and instead run to the emergency wards? This is not typical of past years, especially in china. China also does not have the same covid vaccines as we do. They have their own versions...which may not be as effective as ours. China's economy is rapidly losing ground becuz of these latest lockdowns. Nobody, not even the tyrannical gov't is profiting from all of this. I can't see them carrying on a sham illusion of desperation if there wasn't a highly contagious pathogen responsible.

Contagion has only been disproved scientifically.

There's thousands of toxins, but they blame it on a single 'virus.'

Measles responds well to vitamin A and D.

Becoming ill is due to just one of three possible causes:

Lack of elimination, poor nutrition, and dehydration.

These can be caused by toxins, lack of elimination means cannot remove toxins. Dehydration, another cause
of poor elimination. Poor nutrition can cause any of these.

A lot of people have asked if Stefan Lanka's control experiments have been published. They were published in the scientific journal Wissenschafftplus:
Here (https://t.me/control_experiment/254) and here (https://t.me/control_experiment/253)

https://www.wplus-verlag.ch/de_CH/p/buy/wissenschafftplus-ausgabe-2-2021

And here (free), scroll down:

https://telegra.ph/Kontrollexperiment-Phase-1---Die-Widerlegung-der-Virologie-durch-den-cytopathsichen-Effekt-03-10

But, raw reads of the controls are not published.

Therefore....more time is needed, probably

Michael Laue from Robert Koch Institute use typical structures of dying tissue (exosomes and MVB) and misinterpret them as alleged viruses, in his new study:

"SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is attenuated for replication in a polarized human lung epithelial cell model (https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-022-04068-3)"

Let's remember. Michael Laue do not use neccessary control (https://t.me/control_experiment/273).

In the new study he tried to correct his unscientific behavior. He used some alleged controls but without micrographs of exosomes and MVB. So it looks like discarding unwanted results (https://t.me/control_experiment/271).

Micrograph with exosomes and MVB is documented in this study:

"Exosomes from Human CD34+ Stem Cells Mediate their Pro-angiogenic Paracrine Activity (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3201702/)"

Please, look at Figure 1

A lot of people ask, what about rabies?

https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/viruses-unplugged/what-about-rabies/

shaftless wrote:Questioning methods from old experiments does cast some doubt. I personally don't see too much of a problem of making a serum out of scrambled up bat brains and spinal cords and injecting a small amount of said liquid into a rabbit's brain. They don't inject too much since the virus is small. It shouldn't cause any real damage to the brain itself as a procedure. And true the disease originally comes from an external bite....but blood flow carries the pathogens from the wound all over the body eventually ending up in the brain.

What sam and others should do is take a freshly dead animal presumably from rabies and search for other causes. Toxins or parasites from tics perhaps. She's a doc and probably good at lab work. This would be easy for her. If she discovers a previously unidentified source that causes this disease and writes a paper on it, then she would be EXTREMELY famous.

This particular book:

WHAT REALLY MAKES YOU ILL?
WHY EVERYTHING YOU THOUGHT YOU KNEW ABOUT DISEASE IS WRONG

https://whatreallymakesyouill.com/

To me the whole premise of "infectious" disease model is based on pure mythology and folklore under the guise of 'science' via the medical cartel. Paid and bought for $cience.

All the real science, based on positive controls, double-blind, placebo controlled, independent variables, not based on conjecture or epidemiology, reveals that only toxins, dehydration or malnutrition actually manifest illness.

The book above was researched for over a decade, from authors not restrained from research grants or other incentives before they would finally publish the work.

Usually the paradigm shifts comes from those outside of the "field of expertise" since there is no dogma to sift through.

shaftless wrote:I was thinking about heartworms and bacteria. There really isn't much of a difference. A mosquito injects larvae into a dog or cat that grow and multiply and causes damage to the heart of the animal. Bacteria, like the one that causes strep throat (Streptococcus pyogenes), invade the tissues of the throat and causes irritation and damage. Sounds pretty similar.

Even if you don't believe that bacteria produce toxins that damages tissue...just overmultiplying quickly enuff can "crowd out" tissue and interfere with normal tissue function. Some even instigate a massive immune response from the body which can be fatal. Strep throat goes away with antibiotics that kill the strep bacteria.

So even if bacteria and heartworms have an enormous size difference, they both can cause damage in their own way. Yet one is considered a parasite and the other a germ. Can't bacteria be considered parasites as well?

So bacteria that we already have, for example e-coli and Streptococcus will show a positive culture, sick or not.

These bacteria are janitors, they simply consume toxins or other non-toxic material....they will only make us sick if they eat toxins, then it is the bacterial endotoxin (their waste matter), that causes illness.

That's why antibiotics can "help" but there are much better ways than antibiotics...instead, there are anti-toxins, such as Vitamin C, CDS, and others.