FPH: The Arguments for No Virus

A series focussing on the excellent curating work of the Fraud Prevention Hotline publication

This is the third in the series of compilations of articles by

Suavek

This is the first to of these be sent out via email.

It’s a collection of writings on a very important and unnecessarily contentious subject.

We say ‘unnecessarily contentious’ because no-one serious is claiming viruses definitely do not exist. A negative cannot be proved.

But what can be stated as fact is that so far, no evidence seems to exist for the physical existence of these genomes, which are created, assembled in silico, and are never sequenced from any physical example.

Christine Massey’s incredible collection of FOIs bears witness to the fact that no purified, isolated sample of any virus has ever been held by any institution ever.

Christine Massey FOIs

One particularly relevant example:

FDA confesses: zero scientific evidence of "avian influenza virus" or contagion... not even a "genome" found by anyone... anywhere

This means no independent variable in any supposed ‘proof of isolation’.

Indeed the extraordinary work of Jamie Andrews and his team in recreating - with even more rigour - the control experiments of Stefan Lanka must be taken on board.

Jamie Andrews

The cytopathic effect occurs exactly the same if no sample of a ‘virus containing sample’ is added to the stressed, starved, poisoned (usually monkey kidney cell) tissue culture 

The whole of virology is based on adding stuff to cell cultures which then die. This is supposed to show there was a killer in the ‘stuff’. The problem is, the cultures die in exactly the same way without adding the ‘stuff’.

Cytopathic Effects in Uninoculated Cultures

Moreover

Electron micrographs of cultures treated only with antibiotics and Bovine Foetal Serum reduction without adding any possible ‘virus’ show exactly the same artefacts as are labelled ‘viruses’ in virology experiments with added ‘virus’.

We can see all the ‘viruses’ in the cell break down even though certified sterile tissue samples were used and no contamination was possible with supposed ‘viruses’.

Please check out The Virology Controls Studies Project.

Jamie Andrews

Stefan Lanka also used the deep metagenomic sequencing programs on tissue cultures with only yeast added:

and ’found’ every single virus they looked for: measles, HIV, SARS COV-II…

Trinity and the other programs look for what they are asked to find. And they find it.

The ‘tools’ of virology depend on circular reasoning, the reification fallacy…

Not even a small ghost

Over to Suavek for his series of curations on this. Some opinions may differ.

There are many interesting articles on

Suavek

‘s publication.

Well worth subscribing, sharing and supporting this fellow’s hard work.

The Argument For No Virus

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” -- PART 1 : Dr. Mike Yeadon is battling the virus.

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” -- PART 2 -Dr. Mike Yeadon : The alternatives

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” -- PART 3 - Dr. Mike Yeadon : Actually easy to understand, but hard to believe. The lack of control experiments.

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” -- PART 4 - Dr. Mike Yeadon : The fundamental weaknesses of the virus hypothesis should not be ignored.

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” - PART 5 -Dr. Mike Yeadon : They refuse to acknowledge the evidence of failed symptomatic transmission or contagion.

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” - PART 6 : Dr. Mike Yeadon : The discussion reaches the mainstream media. And : Prof. Rancourt discreetly promotes the “no virus” theme.

The arguments for “NO VIRUS” - PART 7 : A deep look into biological matter. Dr. Mike Yeadon talks about the elusive chaos in biology.

Subscribing to Fraud Prevention Hotline supports Suavek. Subscription to my own publication supports Tim.

Best Wishes

Mike

Tim