Dear reader, please note that we are told that the viruses that cause acute respiratory illnesses like the common cold & a group called “influenza-like illnesses” (ILI) are supposedly extraordinarily easy to transmit.
Remember the two metre separation rule? Though this has officially been admitted that there is no scientific or empirical basis for it. We were made to queue up outside shops in all weathers.
Recall the installation of Perspex screens in many shops? Surely almost everyone looked at these and thought “How in the world could this prevent an airborne infection?”. Of course it wouldn’t, though this isn’t how these illnesses develop in the first place. They’re not infectious in nature nor are they contagious.
Remember the masking obligation? You do realise that they could even theoretically only have been effective if they filtered the air you breathe in as well as which you exhale? And either the mesh size is huge, so it won’t filter supposedly tiny particles, or the mesh size is very small indeed, so it simply offers an extreme resistance to airflow and you’d suffocate. The air you breathe in & out while wearing such a mask entirely bypasses the mask fabric itself.
Remember “If the masks are good enough for surgeons….”? Did you talk to any surgeons? They don’t wear masks, but splashguards. These prevent them dropping anything into the surgical field. More importantly, they prevent anything from the patient directly squirting into the surgeon’s mouth, nose and eyes, things like blood, pus & bone fragments.
I added these reminders because none of them work or were even intended to work. Their intention was to maintain fear and to force compliance with absurd charades, to teach you that resistance is useless. The authorities didn’t much need to enforce these “guidelines” because the public did it for them.
Yet again, we were given to understand that acute respiratory illnesses & especially “covid19” was extremely contagious. This means, very easy to become infected.
With that backdrop, it ought immediately to strike the critical reader that investigators have tried scores of times to demonstrate, thereafter to characterise, transmission or contagion of symptoms. They’ve tried and failed. Not once, but scores of times. This is extraordinary. If the narrative is true, the hardest thing would be to prevent almost everyone from acquiring the infection.
There are some studies where the investigators claim to have succeeded in demonstrating transmission. In all cases I’ve looked at, they’ve often used a PCR-based diagnostic, which isn’t a valid way to go about it & why would they even need to adopt complicated endpoints? Simply observe whether or not the “recipients” developed symptoms of a cold or the ILI.
The commonplace weakness I’ve seen involves leaving out controls. Controls replicate every part of the study, except they’re not inoculated/challenged with potentially infected material. How any study got past peer review while lacking controls is beyond me. Best practice involves not only incorporating controls, but having a neutral third party to prepare the innoculum and blank controls for that, and code the challenge material employed. That way, both the subjects and the investigators are “blind” to which subject got what challenge. If you know you’ve extensibly been infected, or the converse, the likelihood of distortion of the entire study is both high and unevaluable.
This might amuse you, Mike. In 2021 in a cold damp day in late January or early February, I went to a builder's merchants, Covers, in Chichester. The place was nearly deserted but they had the masks required sign up on the doors.
I went in anyway, and was accosted by an overweight member of staff who insisted I wear a mask. He was not wearing a mask! I asked him about this and he pointed at the Perspex screen at the payment desk and said ‘That’s my mask’.
I didn’t have the energy to argue as I have been struggling with my health so had to wait outside in the cold and damp whilst he got the things I asked for and I paid outside.
In all my life I have never known such stupidity and lack of common sense and consideration.
But if there are no viruses, what is the RNA in the vaccines and what the hell are the spikes? No particles from a virus?? The more I read and learn, the less I understand!
Dr Mark Bailey and Tom Cowan have gone over this, and if I remember for convid had to add Tripsum to see the "spikes". Dna and rna Bailey Cowan Kaufman have questioned how suspect all these claims are.
Factually transmission by low virus concentration doesn't work. Usually our mucosa is powerful enough to shield us.
But SARS-COV-2, as an US army lab virus, has been engineered with adding powerful receptors (from AIDS virus - 1 virus is enough! for infection) and an optimal cleavage sub-chain (optimized receptor passing) that is not present in any natural virus. So we estimate that SARS-COV-2 is at least 1000x more contagious than any other respiratory virus.
I personally treated many people that had air to air transmissions and confirmed (plate test) infections. Only if you understand how this virus works and when/how you must treat it, you will have a fair chance. Best is to prepare yourself with enough V-D3 + zinc.
After infection use 1:10 Betadiene lotion to roll a cotton stick over all your throat and sniff the rest of the iodine through your nostrils. Gargling might work too.
This is what the informed Chinese people did after getting a sore throat. This 1 cent treatment will enhance your survival rate by a factor of 19!
So please forget all fiction of a impossible transmission as with SARS-COV-2 this has completely changed.
As you correctly say:: It's just a claim - usually made by people that have no relevant education or try to attract such people to support other wired claims.
Independent (from Big Pharma money) scientists that understood the nature & origin of the virus never did believe the official pandemic charade but these scientists based all their comments (countering Big Pharma) on a real existent SARS-COV2 virus.
If contagion was a real thing pHARMa would have done 1000s of controlled scientific studies written in plain english with HD video to document all the gory details and scare the living crap out of everyone. The fact they haven't done a single controled scientific study speaks loudly about their house of cards. There would also be dozens of Jackass style reality TV shows where people infected each other with colds and the flu, or they drank bacteria and got violently ill, all backed up by solid scientific evidence.
I'm not arguing against the thrust if the article, but if indeed transmission does not occur this way, how does one explain it when a class of kindergardeners all come down with a sniffle at the same time? What is the mechanism at play? This a common occurrence that everyone has experience with.
It’s not the scientific method to be in any way obligated to answer questions that arise when taking down a false narrative.
I challenge your assertion that all the kids get sick, anyway. But even if you are right, it doesn’t trump the extensive literature showing that attempted transmission does not occur.
In response to this realisation, we are collectively obligated to think of new explanations. Even if there are no explanations forthcoming that you find acceptable, it doesn’t overrule the formal failures to demonstrate transmission.
It’s important to undertake this distinction. Human desire for apparently easy certainty is a huge trap.
The symptoms are not the illness but the natural healing symptoms of our body trying to expel toxins which are the cause of being ill.
Sniffles, flu, skin rash, pimples, diarrhea, vomiting and more are all ways (behavior) of the body to detox and some of these seem to be contagious, just like laughing or smiling which are not transmissible.
Menstruation moments of woman living together are also said to sync up.
.
The mechanism for sniffles and Flu is AFAIK still unknown. Pheromones and exosomes are possible candidates I know of. Some dogs are said to be able to smell if someone is ill.
Dear Dr Mike Yaddon, you have done it again: created a stir in the duck pond and with common sense and loving reasons, thank you if anyone I consider to be trustworthy and honest, and you claim not to know everything, but I am humbled by the knowledge you process and share. Your honesty earns you respect, and everyone will love you for it. I had the mindset before this pandemic that no virus that makes me sick has ever been proven. This attitude has made my work as a naturopath/Heilpraktiker extremely difficult, even among colleagues. You have had quite an 'alternative' opinion about that and the whole disease system, and shaming is not unknown to me either. Being at a lecture and asking such 'alternative' questions rarely goes down well with the many. But since I know from experience that it is rarely or almost never the many who hold the truth, they live on mantras of lies without walking the globe. I am grateful to you for your contribution to bringing truth to this insanity because it is what it is if you ask me. I have shared your views and your understanding and annoyance at the world that is at the door right now, from the point of view that the population are easy victims because they do not take responsibility for their own lives and well-being. Thanks, Mike. Hugs from a friend, Cliff
Mark Playne is a good friend of mine because we share life views and physical mysteries. Science is a tool by which we have shaped this planet. One can use this tool in all manner of ways. For so long, we have viewed the tool of science in an egotistical manner, thinking we must control what is around us, causing us to lose sight of the larger picture and resulting in an asynchronous flow with the universe. This technology's purpose seems to suggest a shift in perspective from the egotistical to the universal. There is a fundamental intelligence/geometry at play within the vacuum of creation, and when we align our perspective with this, we realign with universal thought. In this manner, science can now work synchronously with the universe, resulting in harmony with our environment.
"We are one at the root - we just part at the branch" - Rasheed Ogunlaru
Learn how we are literally all connected by studying the physics of the universe: enroll in the free Unified Science Course in the Resonance Academy at ResonanceScience.org
I currently live in Denmark, but we, my wife Birthe and the undersigned, are pulling up tent poles and want to seek freedom if it exists somewhere on the planet. One of my FB platforms has been started under the pandemic, "Gå For Friheden I Kærlighed Til Biologien," in order to educate a population that believes. Transmission failure has been so obvious to me in my work, but almost impossible to get people to accept as with virus claims.
Also - Alford RH, Kasel JA, Gerone PJ, Knight V. Human influenza resulting from aerosol inhalation, Proc Soc Exp Biol Med, 1966, vol. 122 (pg. 800-4) - found "Of 11 volunteers with antibodies of 1 in 20 or less who had received between 1 and 5 TCD50 of virus, 6 developed an antibody rise-5 with virus excretion as well (4 of these were clinically ill)."
Controls would have been as identical as possible to the test group, and would have been sham inoculated using material indistinguishable from the ostensibly infectious material. This kind of control is essential in order to blind both the subjects and the investigators.
You guys are the best one-trick ponies I’ve ever seen. Why do you keep banging this drum without moving forward? Clearly you do great research, and you have shown time and again there’s no proof of viral contagion, according to your standards. Great. Can we move on now?
Can you do something a bit more productive, like putting forward your thoughts on a direction to move in that builds on alternative theories for promoting health? There is a bit of sharing in that regard in the comments below, but more so this arrogant refusal to acknowledge any obligation to do anything beyond saying, ‘this is all wrong’. And that seems to be all you’ve got: ‘This is all wrong, but I’m much too busy to posit any of what I may think be an alternative.’
Naysaying is easy, anybody can do it by standing on the shoulders of all the scientists you’ve cited here. It takes bravery to take a position and publicize what you actually do believe, as opposed to what you don’t. I’m starting to question your courage, Mike (Tim, I don’t think you’re even human, so things like courage don’t come into it) with so much refusal to actually stand behind claims and provide information we can take action with.
Denial of viral transmission should really just be a footnote, if you’re actually interested in gaining a following whose welfare you care about. Why stay here banging this drum? Everybody’s heard it now. What’s next?
Mike, for someone who gets bored so easily talking with people who don’t agree with you, you sure are getting a lot of mileage out of this contagion thing. You’ve made your point, now get out there and show us what you can really do.
When you have human viruses being tested in animals, the first thing you must prove is that infectious virus particles can be produced in the animal, since if they are not, then of course there will be no animal-to-animal transmission of virus. If the disease is caused by the virus, then it won't be transmitted in animals if the animals don't produce sufficient amounts of infectious virus to transmit.
The second thing to say is that virus reproduction may not primarily occur in the disease state. In bovine cancer models, papillomavirus particles are produced in benign tumours, not in malignancy. Identifying infectious animals may not be the same as identifying diseased ones.
Finally, transmission and subsequent virus production in recipient animals may require specific conditions. Cattle merely rubbing skin against virus-coated surfaces does not lead to virus production in recipient cows. Scarification and exposure to virus, which induces a wound healing response, will lead on to virus production in newly infected cattle.
I am not challenging the hypothesis that respiratory illness is not contagious, merely pointing out some complexities in animal models for proposed human viruses, which may limit the value of some of the studies listed above..
I am talking of 40 years ago, long before in silico virus stuff. DNA sequencing was done manually.
You have mental health problems if you claim I believe the Covid story, you also have mental health problems if you claim that 'Covid is a hoax' implies that ALL virology since 1900 is a hoax.
I think Covid is a pile of sh**e, but I want to know how the src oncogene was discovered if RSV does not exist. I want to know how the myc oncogene was discovered if retroviral insertional mutagenesis is a fiction. I want to know how reverse transcriptase was purified when retroviruses don't exist and I want to know Epstein Barr Virus was cloned if it doesn't exist.
The answer to all your questions cones from going to source. Reading all the methods sections of papers.
Using your critical intelligence to separate the green from the pink. Deep assiduous due diligence.
The 5 and half hour series based on A Farewell To Virology will help answer many of your questions AND help you realise some questions are Overton Window Questions - that imply a false assumption.
If I have mental health problems you’ll no doubt be claiming the £3000 for evidence any biological pathogen has ever existed or is possible
Not understanding virology is pure pseudoscience at this stage is very lazy.
How can anyone not be aware of the overwhelming data and evidence at this stage? I have stopped feeling instantly suspicious of those still pushing pseudoscience. I understand how deep these fairy-tales have been bedded in and how people are afraid to let go of ‘certainties’
But really,
2025 and you imagine there is any evidence viruses and twin spiral DNA correspond to reality.
It’s little wonder you have to rely on Ad Hominem
Critique any part of this 5 and a half hour evisceration of this preposterous pseudoscience - that claims you show something exists by first assuming it exists in a fluid sample
It is utterly ridiculous this nonsense is called The Science™️.
Many assertions here. You may sincerely believe all you wrote.
I used to list off several things I “knew for sure” about a number of illnesses.
I would probably have hotly defended that “knowledge” if someone challenged me.
But I’m asking you courteously how many of these assertions you directly observed yourself?
The rest, I suggest someone told Iii & you chose to believe them. That doesn’t make them true. I’ve no doubt that the teacher was themselves being sincere, but this is how stories which aren’t true (as well as correct ones) are passed down the generations. Nobody is deliberately lying.
Back to the assertions that you’ve personally observed.
May I ask how many times you personally observed each one? For example, the claim of transmission requiring skin injury & not occurring in its absence. Let’s grant that the answer was “many times”.
I suggest what you’re observing is something other than transmission of illness from one animal to another. To exclude that hypothesis, you’d need to have a similar number of occasions where an animal incurred a skin injury but did not rub up against an alleged infectious animal, and did not acquire the disease. That’s going to be difficult because there may be no examples since herds always rub up against one another. But here we have an aspect of the proposed transmission mechanism which has never been tested. So it’s a story.
The need for a skin injury in order that alleged transmission can occur is a red flag to me. It is just as likely that trauma and endogenous responses is the trigger for illness as is alleged direct contact trigger.
As for distinguishing infectiousness from non infectious disease, that’s another red flag. It’s the typical conditional inserted into a story that explains why such & such a thing doesn’t happen, while retaining the core narrative. I recognise that kind of inserted conditional because it’s something I used to do myself in attempting to fit assumed true narratives that I’d been told by others (and chosen to believe).
The harder thought experiment is to reevaluate what one thinks one knows, starting with the assumption that it’s simply not true. That something else other than a submicroscopic infectious particle called a virus is responsible for an illness.
I put it this way because I’ve looked at a great deal of alleged virology papers and in no cases did I find scientific evidence for the existence of such a “virus”.
If you wish to stick with the story ad you’ve laid out, that’s for you to decide. I’m passed arguing over these things. I’m satisfied in the relevant domain of respiratory illnesses, which are almost always used by the perpetrators to deceive and frighten people, that it’s unquestionably all lies.
This shouldn’t be ignored by those who specialise in a different domain of illness. I suggest it ought to lead such a person to reevaluate everything they thought they knew about purported viral illnesses in their field.
If we’ve confirmed that persons unknown have been lying for decades about etiology & that viruses are purely a story, I suggest that this realisation ought to be highly relevant to other settings.
1. Who created a series of circular double stranded DNA episomes that you claim were not isolated from benign tumours in cattle, which vets agree exist in nature?
2. I personally worked with those DNA molecules, manipulated them and isolated subregions of them which changed the growth properties of tissue culture cells.
3. Do you deny that genital warts exist and do you further deny that episomal DNA of similar size to that you deny were isolated from cattle were isolated from warts removed surgically?
I want to know where that DNA was miraculously manufactured long before automated sequencing and in silico creationism were possible? Either they were isolated from papillomas or someone magically created them. We were working with them, so they existed.....and they existed in the late 1970s.
What causes a cold or respiratory dis-ease? The establishment’s model of physiology FAILS under scrutiny. I’ll explain why HYDRATION and not oxygenation underpins our physiology. Understanding this destroys the sickness industrial complex and big pHARMa’s profits.
A cough is a sign of respiratory dehydration not a virus or a bacterial infection. A runny nose is a sign of respiratory dehydration. Shortness of breath and difficulty breathing can be a sign of respiratory dehydration. To understand this concept you need to know the extremely important difference between air and oxygen.
We breathe air not oxygen.
Air is measured by its moisture or humidity. Oxygen is measured by its dryness Eg medical oxygen has 67parts per million or less of water contamination. Oxygen gas is extremely dry.
Inhalation air must be in the range 30-50% humidity and then the lung alveoli requires air reaching it to be at 100% humidity, that is dew point or drop point. The lung mucosa must increase the air humidity from 30-50% humidity to 100% humidity.
Can you see the mis-match?
Oxygen is manufactured by stripping air of moisture. Oxygen is a product of air NOT a constituent of air.
There is no wild/natural oxygen in air. Oxygen becomes nitrogen or black oxygen with the addition of carbon particles to become non-flammable oxygen. I have a link to a brilliant demonstration of this on my stack, a home oxygen concentrator is used.
Oxygen and nitrogen have zero humidity. Air allegedly has 99% of these two gases, but this doesn’t match reality as we know the air we breathe must be moist.
Temperature determines the holding power of air to retain moisture. Copilot supplied me these temps and moisture figures.
At -20 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 1g/cubic meter
At 20 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 17g/cubic meter.
At 45 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 65g/cubic meter.
At 55 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 147g/cubic meter.
Cold air holds the least moisture.
Mt Everest temperatures: -35 to -55 Celsius (-31 to -67 F)
Planes cruise in air -54 to -60 Celsius, a maximum of 0.64g/ cubic meter which (thanks to copilot) converts to 559ppm of water contamination.
Now let’s compare this to the product of air labeled: oxygen.
Medical oxygen has 67ppm of water contamination. Industrial oxygen has 0.5ppm of water contamination.
We breathe air not oxygen.
The lungs are responsible for re-hydrating the red blood cells as they pass through the alveoli capillaries with salt water. The red blood cells are salt water carriers. The saline intravenous drip rehydrates red blood cells as they pass through the fluid. The saline IV is a hospital's no 1 remedy for very good reasons.
The insult that causes respiratory dis-stress is dehydration. It’s seasonal because cold air holds the least moisture and indoor room air often dries out with air conditioning and heating.
The dry mucosa must re-establish itself and the production of mucus goes into overdrive. The mucosa requires salt and moisture and it will move both from any bodily reserves. This causes pain as the extraction process goes into motion.
Now you know why the old remedies are successful.
Salt water gargles, nasal irrigations/inhalations and chicken soup / bone broth soups all replenish salt plus water or hydration.
Sanatoriums were built along coastlines to take advantage of sea spray because it was known to heal injured lungs.
Healing begins with hydration.
Oxygen’s toxicity is directly related to its power to dehydrate. Reactive oxygen species ROS describes damage due to dehydration.
Oxygen’s toxicity is due to its power to dehydrate. On release from a container oxygen will extract moisture from its surroundings to become air, its natural state. Oxygen released inside the respiratory tract extracts moisture from the mucosa and the delicate alveoli causing dehydration. This can kill.
Oxygen is a prescribed drug. It is primarily prescribed for the terminally ill. Palliative care is not kind. Notice the portable oxygen tanks have no mitigation for oxygen’s known dryness. Humidity is monitored in anaesthesia and mechanical ventilation. Even CPAP machines have humidifiers included. But the terminally ill are left with straight oxygen, to dry up inside, to endure immense suffering, so they wish for their own demise.
We all need to comprehend the difference between air and oxygen. Read the material safety data sheets for oxygen and nitrogen. Both have unconsciousness and not breathing listed under inhalation.
How does salt restriction lead to heart dis-ease and fear based reactionary thinking? I link dehydration with the adrenals. Dehydration or low salt or hyponatremia are the same condition. Dehydration is an emergency. All emergencies are managed by the adrenals. All the adrenocortical hormones are released, not just aldosterone. This brings the FIGHT/FLIGHT/FREEZE response. It prevents critical thinking and it causes stress intolerance. This makes people very easy to manipulate.
I assert learning the symptoms of dehydration or low salt is necessary so we can identify and remedy with salt plus water.
Hydration is necessary for healing. Hence with salt we are a robust healthy lot.
Without salt due to the fraudulent salt restriction directives, sickness increases. Just compare any dis-ease statistics from 1970 to today and see the growth. This growth is also the growth of big pHARMa.
On the 20th Dec I came down with the Grippe. An absolute honker. On the 19th I was on the train opposite a woman who obviously had a bad case of it, so I got up and moved seats and seemed fine. On the 20th I wore a hoody that had been left out after being washed and had gone damp and sour. I put in on and it stank but it was warm so I tried to put up with it. Within an hour I had a sore throat and a sore head and for the next three days a fever and all the usual symptoms. The idea that the Flu is a means for the body to purge itself of a toxins makes sense in my case. The Hoody might have created a biological toxic environment and maybe it triggered my body to develop the grippe to purge itself. I cant be certain but in my case, the toxic brew of the hoody seems to be the likely culprit and not the lady on the train. Or maybe even a combination of both. Or Maybe there needs to be a toxic environment as well as the presence of a flu virus.
But I’m encouraged that you used the word ‘supposedly’. This healing technique has been called chicken pox, smallpox, monkey pox, rubella… all the same. No evidence at all anything can be contagious.
Surely 220 years of transmission experience with no successes are enough.
Its difficult to see how Chicken Pox can be seen as a Healing technique. It generally hits young people and children who are in perfect health. There might be a case for things like the Flu being the body purging the system of toxins, but I dont think you can apply that to all illnesses. There's seems to be illnesses that are infectious, plague, typhoid, stds, rabies
I got Chicken Pox at 18 and I wasn't exposed to a single person with the illness, so I can understand where the argument that viruses dont exist comes from. It's interesting, but I agree that it's a red herring. The thing that matters is that fear of disease has been weaponised and peoples ignorance and blind faith in the medical establishment has been weaponised, with the purpose of imposing the dystopia you mentioned. Even if you could conclusively prove that viruses dont exist, they just move on to Climate Scam or War On Russia or Fake Alien Invasion and ther'll be a queue of Scientism experts telling us the only solution is state surveillance, control and totalitarianism (and defacto slavery). The Good thing is that there are now vastly more people who have woken up to whats going on.
GNM deals extensively with these final stages of healing crises. There’s only ‘pox’ Chicken Pox Smallpox Monkey pox rubella measles - all the same thing.
Dear reader, please note that we are told that the viruses that cause acute respiratory illnesses like the common cold & a group called “influenza-like illnesses” (ILI) are supposedly extraordinarily easy to transmit.
Remember the two metre separation rule? Though this has officially been admitted that there is no scientific or empirical basis for it. We were made to queue up outside shops in all weathers.
Recall the installation of Perspex screens in many shops? Surely almost everyone looked at these and thought “How in the world could this prevent an airborne infection?”. Of course it wouldn’t, though this isn’t how these illnesses develop in the first place. They’re not infectious in nature nor are they contagious.
Remember the masking obligation? You do realise that they could even theoretically only have been effective if they filtered the air you breathe in as well as which you exhale? And either the mesh size is huge, so it won’t filter supposedly tiny particles, or the mesh size is very small indeed, so it simply offers an extreme resistance to airflow and you’d suffocate. The air you breathe in & out while wearing such a mask entirely bypasses the mask fabric itself.
Remember “If the masks are good enough for surgeons….”? Did you talk to any surgeons? They don’t wear masks, but splashguards. These prevent them dropping anything into the surgical field. More importantly, they prevent anything from the patient directly squirting into the surgeon’s mouth, nose and eyes, things like blood, pus & bone fragments.
I added these reminders because none of them work or were even intended to work. Their intention was to maintain fear and to force compliance with absurd charades, to teach you that resistance is useless. The authorities didn’t much need to enforce these “guidelines” because the public did it for them.
Yet again, we were given to understand that acute respiratory illnesses & especially “covid19” was extremely contagious. This means, very easy to become infected.
With that backdrop, it ought immediately to strike the critical reader that investigators have tried scores of times to demonstrate, thereafter to characterise, transmission or contagion of symptoms. They’ve tried and failed. Not once, but scores of times. This is extraordinary. If the narrative is true, the hardest thing would be to prevent almost everyone from acquiring the infection.
There are some studies where the investigators claim to have succeeded in demonstrating transmission. In all cases I’ve looked at, they’ve often used a PCR-based diagnostic, which isn’t a valid way to go about it & why would they even need to adopt complicated endpoints? Simply observe whether or not the “recipients” developed symptoms of a cold or the ILI.
The commonplace weakness I’ve seen involves leaving out controls. Controls replicate every part of the study, except they’re not inoculated/challenged with potentially infected material. How any study got past peer review while lacking controls is beyond me. Best practice involves not only incorporating controls, but having a neutral third party to prepare the innoculum and blank controls for that, and code the challenge material employed. That way, both the subjects and the investigators are “blind” to which subject got what challenge. If you know you’ve extensibly been infected, or the converse, the likelihood of distortion of the entire study is both high and unevaluable.
This might amuse you, Mike. In 2021 in a cold damp day in late January or early February, I went to a builder's merchants, Covers, in Chichester. The place was nearly deserted but they had the masks required sign up on the doors.
I went in anyway, and was accosted by an overweight member of staff who insisted I wear a mask. He was not wearing a mask! I asked him about this and he pointed at the Perspex screen at the payment desk and said ‘That’s my mask’.
I didn’t have the energy to argue as I have been struggling with my health so had to wait outside in the cold and damp whilst he got the things I asked for and I paid outside.
In all my life I have never known such stupidity and lack of common sense and consideration.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/long-stupid?utm_source=publication-search
But if there are no viruses, what is the RNA in the vaccines and what the hell are the spikes? No particles from a virus?? The more I read and learn, the less I understand!
ReginaH
Dr Mark Bailey and Tom Cowan have gone over this, and if I remember for convid had to add Tripsum to see the "spikes". Dna and rna Bailey Cowan Kaufman have questioned how suspect all these claims are.
Factually transmission by low virus concentration doesn't work. Usually our mucosa is powerful enough to shield us.
But SARS-COV-2, as an US army lab virus, has been engineered with adding powerful receptors (from AIDS virus - 1 virus is enough! for infection) and an optimal cleavage sub-chain (optimized receptor passing) that is not present in any natural virus. So we estimate that SARS-COV-2 is at least 1000x more contagious than any other respiratory virus.
I personally treated many people that had air to air transmissions and confirmed (plate test) infections. Only if you understand how this virus works and when/how you must treat it, you will have a fair chance. Best is to prepare yourself with enough V-D3 + zinc.
After infection use 1:10 Betadiene lotion to roll a cotton stick over all your throat and sniff the rest of the iodine through your nostrils. Gargling might work too.
This is what the informed Chinese people did after getting a sore throat. This 1 cent treatment will enhance your survival rate by a factor of 19!
So please forget all fiction of a impossible transmission as with SARS-COV-2 this has completely changed.
What do you make of the claim that SARS-C2 has never been isolated?
As you correctly say:: It's just a claim - usually made by people that have no relevant education or try to attract such people to support other wired claims.
Independent (from Big Pharma money) scientists that understood the nature & origin of the virus never did believe the official pandemic charade but these scientists based all their comments (countering Big Pharma) on a real existent SARS-COV2 virus.
Ha Ha. You are funny. Do the ‘climate change emergency is real’ next.
Chat bots are not allowed on redit/substack!
Please provide one, excellent paper on “isolation of SARS-CoV-2”.
An original research article, please. Not a media report.
Thank you.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3
from 03.02.2020
I’m going to assume you mean well.
That assumption won’t hold if you do no research.
The Fan Wu?
Seriously!
How often has that paper in particular been eviscerated?
You are VERY VERY NEW to all of this.
That paper is dealt with for example extensively in these 5 hours.
Part 1
https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/viruses-unplugged/a-farewell-to-virology-part-one/
Part 2 in
https://open.substack.com/pub/drsambailey/p/a-farewell-to-virology-part-two-dr
Part 3
https://open.substack.com/pub/drsambailey/p/a-farewell-to-virology-part-3-drw
Then what the heck is going on? How are people getting sick? And in the case of chicken pox or measles showing the same symptoms.
The Book: What Really Makes You Ill. Also Dr Tom Cowan's weekly webinar.
Not buying a book for an answer to a question that shouldn't take more than one paragraph.
Measles Chicken pox smallpox monkey pox rubella
Same thing. One of the handful of healing strategies.
If you want to cut through 300 years of nonsense a paragraph won’t cut it.
You don’t need to spend money
How much have you spent on "health" insurance, Drs, vitamins, meds, etc? The info is available for free on my substack.
They’ve made claims but not experimentally confirmed any of them.
Thank you, Tim, for bringing this together.
To all the individual contributors who painstakingly compiled numerous publications, thank you also.
Please post other studies in the comments.
Daniel Roytas has also published a book, Can You Catch a Cold?, after reviewing >200 studies and finding zero scientific evidence on contagion!
I also have several FOI responses from the CDC, etc on the topic - resulting in zero scientific evidence:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/freedom-of-information-responses-re-contagion/
Also, see
Evidence against the alleged contagion of Scarlet Fever:
https://aldhissla.substack.com/p/the-infectious-myth-busted-is-scarlet
Evidence against the alleged contagion of the plague:
https://aldhissla.substack.com/p/the-infectious-myth-busted-is-plague
Will include
An other nice addition:
Scientists tried to give people COVID - and failed
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01284-1
Without paywall https://archive.is/qfGvA
Thank you gentlemen. Great resource for this coming fall.
Hi Mike, There is no battle greater won than the defence of Humanity verses the Almighty Dollar $. RR
Agree, if virus transmission was a thing then everyone using the underground on a daily basis would be permanently sick or dead
If contagion was a real thing pHARMa would have done 1000s of controlled scientific studies written in plain english with HD video to document all the gory details and scare the living crap out of everyone. The fact they haven't done a single controled scientific study speaks loudly about their house of cards. There would also be dozens of Jackass style reality TV shows where people infected each other with colds and the flu, or they drank bacteria and got violently ill, all backed up by solid scientific evidence.
Good points, thank you.
I'm not arguing against the thrust if the article, but if indeed transmission does not occur this way, how does one explain it when a class of kindergardeners all come down with a sniffle at the same time? What is the mechanism at play? This a common occurrence that everyone has experience with.
It’s important to separate things.
It’s not the scientific method to be in any way obligated to answer questions that arise when taking down a false narrative.
I challenge your assertion that all the kids get sick, anyway. But even if you are right, it doesn’t trump the extensive literature showing that attempted transmission does not occur.
In response to this realisation, we are collectively obligated to think of new explanations. Even if there are no explanations forthcoming that you find acceptable, it doesn’t overrule the formal failures to demonstrate transmission.
It’s important to undertake this distinction. Human desire for apparently easy certainty is a huge trap.
Plenty dealing with that. Check @Dawn Lester for a start. There’s a link in the article.
In short
Common exposure
Common anxiety
The symptoms are not the illness but the natural healing symptoms of our body trying to expel toxins which are the cause of being ill.
Sniffles, flu, skin rash, pimples, diarrhea, vomiting and more are all ways (behavior) of the body to detox and some of these seem to be contagious, just like laughing or smiling which are not transmissible.
Menstruation moments of woman living together are also said to sync up.
.
The mechanism for sniffles and Flu is AFAIK still unknown. Pheromones and exosomes are possible candidates I know of. Some dogs are said to be able to smell if someone is ill.
Dear Dr Mike Yaddon, you have done it again: created a stir in the duck pond and with common sense and loving reasons, thank you if anyone I consider to be trustworthy and honest, and you claim not to know everything, but I am humbled by the knowledge you process and share. Your honesty earns you respect, and everyone will love you for it. I had the mindset before this pandemic that no virus that makes me sick has ever been proven. This attitude has made my work as a naturopath/Heilpraktiker extremely difficult, even among colleagues. You have had quite an 'alternative' opinion about that and the whole disease system, and shaming is not unknown to me either. Being at a lecture and asking such 'alternative' questions rarely goes down well with the many. But since I know from experience that it is rarely or almost never the many who hold the truth, they live on mantras of lies without walking the globe. I am grateful to you for your contribution to bringing truth to this insanity because it is what it is if you ask me. I have shared your views and your understanding and annoyance at the world that is at the door right now, from the point of view that the population are easy victims because they do not take responsibility for their own lives and well-being. Thanks, Mike. Hugs from a friend, Cliff
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/q4uj3U1bK3npoxuC/
Some links and a little explanation:
This link will lead to one of the platforms I have shared on. I often share on Not On The Beeb: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/URAQxXUSZp56SPme/
Mark Playne is a good friend of mine because we share life views and physical mysteries. Science is a tool by which we have shaped this planet. One can use this tool in all manner of ways. For so long, we have viewed the tool of science in an egotistical manner, thinking we must control what is around us, causing us to lose sight of the larger picture and resulting in an asynchronous flow with the universe. This technology's purpose seems to suggest a shift in perspective from the egotistical to the universal. There is a fundamental intelligence/geometry at play within the vacuum of creation, and when we align our perspective with this, we realign with universal thought. In this manner, science can now work synchronously with the universe, resulting in harmony with our environment.
"We are one at the root - we just part at the branch" - Rasheed Ogunlaru
Learn how we are literally all connected by studying the physics of the universe: enroll in the free Unified Science Course in the Resonance Academy at ResonanceScience.org
Art from the Wurzel Atlas
Cliff Lind Hjulskov, Denmark
Link to “The Connected Universe” movie here;
PHYSICIST https://youtu.be/o4uY4hyBh9k.
I currently live in Denmark, but we, my wife Birthe and the undersigned, are pulling up tent poles and want to seek freedom if it exists somewhere on the planet. One of my FB platforms has been started under the pandemic, "Gå For Friheden I Kærlighed Til Biologien," in order to educate a population that believes. Transmission failure has been so obvious to me in my work, but almost impossible to get people to accept as with virus claims.
Best wishes
Cliff
Thank you, Cliff. I only just saw your kind & informative post.
Study #51 - though uncontrolled with respect to disease transmission - shows efficacy of disease transmission: " Seven in each group became ill ..."
Ha ha
????
Also - Alford RH, Kasel JA, Gerone PJ, Knight V. Human influenza resulting from aerosol inhalation, Proc Soc Exp Biol Med, 1966, vol. 122 (pg. 800-4) - found "Of 11 volunteers with antibodies of 1 in 20 or less who had received between 1 and 5 TCD50 of virus, 6 developed an antibody rise-5 with virus excretion as well (4 of these were clinically ill)."
‘Antibodies’
Right
So - these totally non-specific secondary markers convince you that something was being measured?
You don’t mind that an entirely fictitious ‘virus’ is invented to ‘explain’ a proof of the existence of contagion?
"4 of these were clinically ill"
How many of the controls became clinically ill?
Controls would have been as identical as possible to the test group, and would have been sham inoculated using material indistinguishable from the ostensibly infectious material. This kind of control is essential in order to blind both the subjects and the investigators.
Here is another Study - Hall et al on RSV transmission - described here:
https://journals.lww.com/pidj/fulltext/2000/10001/transmission_of_viral_respiratory_infections_in.2.aspx
Study found that transmission of RSV from symptomatic infants to nurses was determined by the type of contact with the infant.
You guys are the best one-trick ponies I’ve ever seen. Why do you keep banging this drum without moving forward? Clearly you do great research, and you have shown time and again there’s no proof of viral contagion, according to your standards. Great. Can we move on now?
Can you do something a bit more productive, like putting forward your thoughts on a direction to move in that builds on alternative theories for promoting health? There is a bit of sharing in that regard in the comments below, but more so this arrogant refusal to acknowledge any obligation to do anything beyond saying, ‘this is all wrong’. And that seems to be all you’ve got: ‘This is all wrong, but I’m much too busy to posit any of what I may think be an alternative.’
Naysaying is easy, anybody can do it by standing on the shoulders of all the scientists you’ve cited here. It takes bravery to take a position and publicize what you actually do believe, as opposed to what you don’t. I’m starting to question your courage, Mike (Tim, I don’t think you’re even human, so things like courage don’t come into it) with so much refusal to actually stand behind claims and provide information we can take action with.
Denial of viral transmission should really just be a footnote, if you’re actually interested in gaining a following whose welfare you care about. Why stay here banging this drum? Everybody’s heard it now. What’s next?
Mike, for someone who gets bored so easily talking with people who don’t agree with you, you sure are getting a lot of mileage out of this contagion thing. You’ve made your point, now get out there and show us what you can really do.
When you have human viruses being tested in animals, the first thing you must prove is that infectious virus particles can be produced in the animal, since if they are not, then of course there will be no animal-to-animal transmission of virus. If the disease is caused by the virus, then it won't be transmitted in animals if the animals don't produce sufficient amounts of infectious virus to transmit.
The second thing to say is that virus reproduction may not primarily occur in the disease state. In bovine cancer models, papillomavirus particles are produced in benign tumours, not in malignancy. Identifying infectious animals may not be the same as identifying diseased ones.
Finally, transmission and subsequent virus production in recipient animals may require specific conditions. Cattle merely rubbing skin against virus-coated surfaces does not lead to virus production in recipient cows. Scarification and exposure to virus, which induces a wound healing response, will lead on to virus production in newly infected cattle.
I am not challenging the hypothesis that respiratory illness is not contagious, merely pointing out some complexities in animal models for proposed human viruses, which may limit the value of some of the studies listed above..
It is hard to take anything you say seriously if you say you believe these in silico fictions exist in reality.
A ‘virus’ as defined now is just a story.
I am talking of 40 years ago, long before in silico virus stuff. DNA sequencing was done manually.
You have mental health problems if you claim I believe the Covid story, you also have mental health problems if you claim that 'Covid is a hoax' implies that ALL virology since 1900 is a hoax.
I think Covid is a pile of sh**e, but I want to know how the src oncogene was discovered if RSV does not exist. I want to know how the myc oncogene was discovered if retroviral insertional mutagenesis is a fiction. I want to know how reverse transcriptase was purified when retroviruses don't exist and I want to know Epstein Barr Virus was cloned if it doesn't exist.
The answer to all your questions cones from going to source. Reading all the methods sections of papers.
Using your critical intelligence to separate the green from the pink. Deep assiduous due diligence.
The 5 and half hour series based on A Farewell To Virology will help answer many of your questions AND help you realise some questions are Overton Window Questions - that imply a false assumption.
Like the old example:
Have you stopped kicking your dog? Yes or No’
.
‘By hand’
Exactly - the same creative nonsense.
If I have mental health problems you’ll no doubt be claiming the £3000 for evidence any biological pathogen has ever existed or is possible
Not understanding virology is pure pseudoscience at this stage is very lazy.
How can anyone not be aware of the overwhelming data and evidence at this stage? I have stopped feeling instantly suspicious of those still pushing pseudoscience. I understand how deep these fairy-tales have been bedded in and how people are afraid to let go of ‘certainties’
But really,
2025 and you imagine there is any evidence viruses and twin spiral DNA correspond to reality.
It’s little wonder you have to rely on Ad Hominem
Critique any part of this 5 and a half hour evisceration of this preposterous pseudoscience - that claims you show something exists by first assuming it exists in a fluid sample
It is utterly ridiculous this nonsense is called The Science™️.
Part 1
https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/viruses-unplugged/a-farewell-to-virology-part-one/
Part 2 in
https://open.substack.com/pub/drsambailey/p/a-farewell-to-virology-part-two-dr
Part 3
https://open.substack.com/pub/drsambailey/p/a-farewell-to-virology-part-3-drw
Many assertions here. You may sincerely believe all you wrote.
I used to list off several things I “knew for sure” about a number of illnesses.
I would probably have hotly defended that “knowledge” if someone challenged me.
But I’m asking you courteously how many of these assertions you directly observed yourself?
The rest, I suggest someone told Iii & you chose to believe them. That doesn’t make them true. I’ve no doubt that the teacher was themselves being sincere, but this is how stories which aren’t true (as well as correct ones) are passed down the generations. Nobody is deliberately lying.
Back to the assertions that you’ve personally observed.
May I ask how many times you personally observed each one? For example, the claim of transmission requiring skin injury & not occurring in its absence. Let’s grant that the answer was “many times”.
I suggest what you’re observing is something other than transmission of illness from one animal to another. To exclude that hypothesis, you’d need to have a similar number of occasions where an animal incurred a skin injury but did not rub up against an alleged infectious animal, and did not acquire the disease. That’s going to be difficult because there may be no examples since herds always rub up against one another. But here we have an aspect of the proposed transmission mechanism which has never been tested. So it’s a story.
The need for a skin injury in order that alleged transmission can occur is a red flag to me. It is just as likely that trauma and endogenous responses is the trigger for illness as is alleged direct contact trigger.
As for distinguishing infectiousness from non infectious disease, that’s another red flag. It’s the typical conditional inserted into a story that explains why such & such a thing doesn’t happen, while retaining the core narrative. I recognise that kind of inserted conditional because it’s something I used to do myself in attempting to fit assumed true narratives that I’d been told by others (and chosen to believe).
The harder thought experiment is to reevaluate what one thinks one knows, starting with the assumption that it’s simply not true. That something else other than a submicroscopic infectious particle called a virus is responsible for an illness.
I put it this way because I’ve looked at a great deal of alleged virology papers and in no cases did I find scientific evidence for the existence of such a “virus”.
If you wish to stick with the story ad you’ve laid out, that’s for you to decide. I’m passed arguing over these things. I’m satisfied in the relevant domain of respiratory illnesses, which are almost always used by the perpetrators to deceive and frighten people, that it’s unquestionably all lies.
This shouldn’t be ignored by those who specialise in a different domain of illness. I suggest it ought to lead such a person to reevaluate everything they thought they knew about purported viral illnesses in their field.
If we’ve confirmed that persons unknown have been lying for decades about etiology & that viruses are purely a story, I suggest that this realisation ought to be highly relevant to other settings.
Happy new year!
Some tougher questions for you:
1. Who created a series of circular double stranded DNA episomes that you claim were not isolated from benign tumours in cattle, which vets agree exist in nature?
2. I personally worked with those DNA molecules, manipulated them and isolated subregions of them which changed the growth properties of tissue culture cells.
3. Do you deny that genital warts exist and do you further deny that episomal DNA of similar size to that you deny were isolated from cattle were isolated from warts removed surgically?
I want to know where that DNA was miraculously manufactured long before automated sequencing and in silico creationism were possible? Either they were isolated from papillomas or someone magically created them. We were working with them, so they existed.....and they existed in the late 1970s.
https://open.substack.com/pub/controlstudies/p/the-dna-hoax
Parts 2 and 3 follow in the publications feed
What causes a cold or respiratory dis-ease? The establishment’s model of physiology FAILS under scrutiny. I’ll explain why HYDRATION and not oxygenation underpins our physiology. Understanding this destroys the sickness industrial complex and big pHARMa’s profits.
A cough is a sign of respiratory dehydration not a virus or a bacterial infection. A runny nose is a sign of respiratory dehydration. Shortness of breath and difficulty breathing can be a sign of respiratory dehydration. To understand this concept you need to know the extremely important difference between air and oxygen.
We breathe air not oxygen.
Air is measured by its moisture or humidity. Oxygen is measured by its dryness Eg medical oxygen has 67parts per million or less of water contamination. Oxygen gas is extremely dry.
Inhalation air must be in the range 30-50% humidity and then the lung alveoli requires air reaching it to be at 100% humidity, that is dew point or drop point. The lung mucosa must increase the air humidity from 30-50% humidity to 100% humidity.
Can you see the mis-match?
Oxygen is manufactured by stripping air of moisture. Oxygen is a product of air NOT a constituent of air.
There is no wild/natural oxygen in air. Oxygen becomes nitrogen or black oxygen with the addition of carbon particles to become non-flammable oxygen. I have a link to a brilliant demonstration of this on my stack, a home oxygen concentrator is used.
Oxygen and nitrogen have zero humidity. Air allegedly has 99% of these two gases, but this doesn’t match reality as we know the air we breathe must be moist.
Temperature determines the holding power of air to retain moisture. Copilot supplied me these temps and moisture figures.
At -20 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 1g/cubic meter
At 20 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 17g/cubic meter.
At 45 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 65g/cubic meter.
At 55 Celsius air can hold a maximum of 147g/cubic meter.
Cold air holds the least moisture.
Mt Everest temperatures: -35 to -55 Celsius (-31 to -67 F)
Planes cruise in air -54 to -60 Celsius, a maximum of 0.64g/ cubic meter which (thanks to copilot) converts to 559ppm of water contamination.
Now let’s compare this to the product of air labeled: oxygen.
Medical oxygen has 67ppm of water contamination. Industrial oxygen has 0.5ppm of water contamination.
We breathe air not oxygen.
The lungs are responsible for re-hydrating the red blood cells as they pass through the alveoli capillaries with salt water. The red blood cells are salt water carriers. The saline intravenous drip rehydrates red blood cells as they pass through the fluid. The saline IV is a hospital's no 1 remedy for very good reasons.
The insult that causes respiratory dis-stress is dehydration. It’s seasonal because cold air holds the least moisture and indoor room air often dries out with air conditioning and heating.
The dry mucosa must re-establish itself and the production of mucus goes into overdrive. The mucosa requires salt and moisture and it will move both from any bodily reserves. This causes pain as the extraction process goes into motion.
Now you know why the old remedies are successful.
Salt water gargles, nasal irrigations/inhalations and chicken soup / bone broth soups all replenish salt plus water or hydration.
Sanatoriums were built along coastlines to take advantage of sea spray because it was known to heal injured lungs.
Healing begins with hydration.
Oxygen’s toxicity is directly related to its power to dehydrate. Reactive oxygen species ROS describes damage due to dehydration.
Oxygen’s toxicity is due to its power to dehydrate. On release from a container oxygen will extract moisture from its surroundings to become air, its natural state. Oxygen released inside the respiratory tract extracts moisture from the mucosa and the delicate alveoli causing dehydration. This can kill.
Oxygen is a prescribed drug. It is primarily prescribed for the terminally ill. Palliative care is not kind. Notice the portable oxygen tanks have no mitigation for oxygen’s known dryness. Humidity is monitored in anaesthesia and mechanical ventilation. Even CPAP machines have humidifiers included. But the terminally ill are left with straight oxygen, to dry up inside, to endure immense suffering, so they wish for their own demise.
We all need to comprehend the difference between air and oxygen. Read the material safety data sheets for oxygen and nitrogen. Both have unconsciousness and not breathing listed under inhalation.
How does salt restriction lead to heart dis-ease and fear based reactionary thinking? I link dehydration with the adrenals. Dehydration or low salt or hyponatremia are the same condition. Dehydration is an emergency. All emergencies are managed by the adrenals. All the adrenocortical hormones are released, not just aldosterone. This brings the FIGHT/FLIGHT/FREEZE response. It prevents critical thinking and it causes stress intolerance. This makes people very easy to manipulate.
I assert learning the symptoms of dehydration or low salt is necessary so we can identify and remedy with salt plus water.
Hydration is necessary for healing. Hence with salt we are a robust healthy lot.
Without salt due to the fraudulent salt restriction directives, sickness increases. Just compare any dis-ease statistics from 1970 to today and see the growth. This growth is also the growth of big pHARMa.
Click on my blue icons to find my articles.
On the 20th Dec I came down with the Grippe. An absolute honker. On the 19th I was on the train opposite a woman who obviously had a bad case of it, so I got up and moved seats and seemed fine. On the 20th I wore a hoody that had been left out after being washed and had gone damp and sour. I put in on and it stank but it was warm so I tried to put up with it. Within an hour I had a sore throat and a sore head and for the next three days a fever and all the usual symptoms. The idea that the Flu is a means for the body to purge itself of a toxins makes sense in my case. The Hoody might have created a biological toxic environment and maybe it triggered my body to develop the grippe to purge itself. I cant be certain but in my case, the toxic brew of the hoody seems to be the likely culprit and not the lady on the train. Or maybe even a combination of both. Or Maybe there needs to be a toxic environment as well as the presence of a flu virus.
Flu viruses like all viruses exist only in stories - not the real world.
There are still things like Chicken Pox that are supposedly highly infectious and the explanation of it being a virus seems plausible.
A century ago you’d have been saying there are still things like leprosy and invading devils seem plausible.
Invading Devils sounds like a better a description of the Human Condition as anything psychology ever came up with.
All pink stuff
But I’m encouraged that you used the word ‘supposedly’. This healing technique has been called chicken pox, smallpox, monkey pox, rubella… all the same. No evidence at all anything can be contagious.
Surely 220 years of transmission experience with no successes are enough.
Its difficult to see how Chicken Pox can be seen as a Healing technique. It generally hits young people and children who are in perfect health. There might be a case for things like the Flu being the body purging the system of toxins, but I dont think you can apply that to all illnesses. There's seems to be illnesses that are infectious, plague, typhoid, stds, rabies
Lack of contagion is key.
We don’t understand many diseases. I don’t think not understanding another has anything to do with whether or not it’s contagious.
That it is is a story,
Many people will say they definitely caught it from a relative. I thought that’s where I got chicken pox at 31, from our baby.
We think this because of overlap in time of symptoms.
That’s consistent with contagion but not proof of it.
When we seek evidence of contagion/ transmission, it has never been confirmed.
Personally I find discussion beyond acute respiratory illnesses a distraction.
Put another way, I find it unhelpful to jump from disease to disease without reaching a conclusion on anything.
The reason for focus on acute respiratory illnesses in my case is two fold.
1. It’s being used to crush freedoms
2. The evidence that despite a century of attempts to demonstrate it, contagion is conspicuous by its absence.
These illnesses aren’t infectious or contagious.
Obviously a pandemic is impossible and a lie.
Furthermore, a “vaccine” is clearly nothing less than a ploy to inject billions of people with intentionally harmful materials.
If this is rebutted I will retire.
If it isn’t, I’d appreciate more voices pointing it out before our one way trip to dystopia reaches its destination.
I got Chicken Pox at 18 and I wasn't exposed to a single person with the illness, so I can understand where the argument that viruses dont exist comes from. It's interesting, but I agree that it's a red herring. The thing that matters is that fear of disease has been weaponised and peoples ignorance and blind faith in the medical establishment has been weaponised, with the purpose of imposing the dystopia you mentioned. Even if you could conclusively prove that viruses dont exist, they just move on to Climate Scam or War On Russia or Fake Alien Invasion and ther'll be a queue of Scientism experts telling us the only solution is state surveillance, control and totalitarianism (and defacto slavery). The Good thing is that there are now vastly more people who have woken up to whats going on.
GNM deals extensively with these final stages of healing crises. There’s only ‘pox’ Chicken Pox Smallpox Monkey pox rubella measles - all the same thing.
Thank you for this. I still have a lot to learn and likely more unlearning to do. I appreciate the assistance in a proper education.