521

Scientists Have Utterly Failed to Prove that the Coronavirus Fulfills Koch’s Postulates

Amory Devereux and Rosemary Frei

About 150 years ago, scientists painstakingly constructed a set of principles that can prove whether a particular microbe is the cause of a specific disease or is just a bystander. Those three principles are known as the Koch postulates.

From all the available information, the novel coronavirus doesn’t appear to meet any of these tenets, never mind all three.

Like most human endeavours, the Koch postulates were the product of collaboration. First, Jakob Henle developed the underlying concepts, and then Robert Koch and Friedrich Loeffler spent decades refining them until they were published in 1890. The resulting three postulates are:

  1. The pathogen occurs in every case of the disease in question and under circumstances that can account for the pathological changes and clinical course of the disease.
  2. The causative microorganism occurs in no other disease as a fortuitous and nonpathogenic parasite.
  3. After being fully isolated from the body and grown in tissue culture (or cloned), it can induce the disease anew.

The principles have been altered almost beyond recognition by various researchers over the ensuing 130 years. But the changes concomitantly watered down the postulates. That’s why they’re still used today by most researchers seeking to robustly prove or disprove the existence of a pathogen and its exclusive relationship with a particular disease.

There’s an urgent need for scientists to step up and do this conclusively with the novel coronavirus and COVID-19. But, strangely, the fire hose of scientific papers on the virus-disease dyad is only a sickly trickle on this tremendously important aspect of it.

A very straightforward and inexpensive experiment is all that’s needed to prove that the first postulate has been met.

Here’s how to do it. Test blood samples from a large number of people for the novel coronavirus using a test that’s been proven by several non-conflicted third parties to be accurate – i.e., to have very low rates of false positives and false negatives.

Then, if all the people who are diagnosed with COVID-19 are the same ones who tested positive for the novel coronavirus, that would prove the virus causes COVID-19. (Note that COVID-19 would have to be diagnosed based on a well-defined and finite set of symptoms. The currently-used and excessively broad diagnostic criteria – such as pneumonia, or the combination of fever and cough – doesn’t cut it, because those are present in many other respiratory conditions.)

But such an experiment has never been done, or if it has been done it hasn’t been made public.

The real kicker, though, is that the third postulate – isolating and sequencing the virus and then showing it causes the disease in other organisms – has not been fulfilled either.

We’ve scoured the internet and found no proof that scientists have done the simple steps required to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 conclusively meets even one – never mind all — of the third postulate’s constituent parts. Those parts are:

  • isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA*
  • sequencing of the isolated DNA, then determining that the identical sequence is not present in any other virus, and next replicating or cloning the DNA to form a new copy of the virus
  • injecting the new copy of the virus into a statistically significant number of living hosts (usually lab animals) and seeing whether those animals develop the discrete diagnostic symptoms associated with COVID-19 rather than developing the diagnostic symptoms of any other infection or disease.

A few scientists have claimed that some or all of the postulates have been fulfilled. Their papers have been given laudatory coverage by the media, public-health officials and politicians.

The problem is that each of these papers falls apart on even cursory examination.

For example, in February 2020 Chinese and Dutch researchers published studies purporting to show they had isolated the virus, which is the first step in fulfilling the third postulate.

But both teams sourced the virus from animals rather than humans. (And on top of that, the Dutch study was done 15 years ago on SARS-CoV, not SARS-CoV-2.)

Another example is a review paper by two Americans published in February 2020 and cinematically titled ‘Return of the Coronavirus: 2019-nCoV.’ Two places in the paper suggest the third postulate has been at least partially fulfilled.

The first is in the section titled ‘Emergence.’ There, the two authors write:

After extensive speculation about a causative agent [of the Wuhan outbreak], the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed a report by the Wall Street Journal and announced identification of a novel CoV on 9th January [2]. The novel CoV (2019-nCoV) was isolated from a single patient and subsequently verified in 16 additional patients [3]. While not yet confirmed to induce the viral pneumonia, 2019-nCoV was quickly predicted as the likely causative agent.

Strikingly, though, reference 3 that the authors link to at the end of the second sentence is a World Health Organization press release rather than a published study.

The section’s next two sentences describe several Chinese research groups’ virus-sequencing results. However, these sequencing attempts are shoddy. For example, one group’s paper has many red flags – and indeed, on the web page showing the group’s sequence, commenters point to such problems as ‘sequencing and assembly artifacts.’ That group also didn’t replicate or clone the DNA to form a new copy of the virus, as required by the third postulate. (All subsequent sequencing attempts also have fatal flaws with respect to meeting the postulates.)

Yet the Chinese researchers’ gene sequences are integral to all of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test kits.

The second place in the review paper that refers to the principles is in the fifth section, ‘Achieving Koch Postulates.’ The authors assert that:

Traditional identification of a microbe as the causative agent of disease requires fulfillment of Koch’s postulates, modified by Rivers for viral diseases [37]. At the present time, the 2019-nCoV has been isolated from patients, detected by specific assays in patients, and cultured in host cells (one available sequence is identified as a passage isolate), starting to fulfill these criteria.

What’s missing is even one reference to back up those assertions.

Meanwhile, public-health officials appear oblivious to this gaping hole in the science. They imperiously pronounce that they’re using the best data available, and act as if evidence-based decision-making is the substrate for the draconian measures they’re imposing.

Could it be that they’re in fact using decision-based evidence-making?

Here’s an idea: please email your local, state/provincial AND national/federal governments, asking for solid scientific evidence that:

  1. SARS-CoV-2 causes a discrete illness that matches the characteristics of all of the deaths attributed to COVID-19
  2. the virus has been isolated, reproduced and then shown to cause this discrete illness.

If you get a response, please share it below.

*The virus contains RNA, which it injects into the nuclei of cells. There, the RNA is converted to DNA by reverse transcriptase enzymes.^
Amory Devereux is a freelance writer and podcaster with 13 years’ experience as a language and communications trainer. He is the co-host of Liberty & Logos and is currently working on a book detailing his fleeing from England due to fears over the totalitarian nature of the UK Coronavirus Act. You can listen to an interview he recently gave about this journey and follow him on Twitter.
Rosemary Frei has an MSc in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and was a freelance medical writer and journalist for 22 years. She is now an independent investigative journalist. You can read her article on The Seven Steps from Pandemic to Totalitarianism, watch and listen to an interview she gave on the pandemic, and follow her on Twitter.

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

521 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scienceq
Scienceq
Sep 13, 2021 10:13 AM

Some things or phenomen present in this universe are beyond the discoverd theories by human beings. And it is the things that makes science always unique, interesting and a mammoth in it one.

James Lind
James Lind
Mar 30, 2021 12:30 PM

I think Kochs postulates werent so acurate still to date. Virus can not grow in a pure form. it needs a host cell to propagate (multiply) his postulates were not clear on that.
Corona virus needs host cell lines to grow just as same as bacteriophages (virus that eat bacteria)
https://www.thephage.xyz/2021/02/understanding-bacteriophages-in-details.html

Grant
Grant
Feb 4, 2021 9:43 AM

Is covid 19 narrative getting more Bizarre or this new isolation test will be the new Gold Standard? Here are 3 links that explains everything is there some truth to this?
Found this through WebMD explaining that scientists do indeed still use Koch Postulates
https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/how-scientists-identify-virus

Now here is the bizarre thing that this may end up being the new Gold Standard at least from what I read from this blog news article.

https://today.tamu.edu/2020/09/14/new-method-allows-scientists-to-quickly-identify-individual-virus-particles/

This is the research I found since I am not a Scientist of any degree maybe someone that has commented here already could explain the reason why or why not be the new Gold Standard. One thing is that this new virus testing not sure can be used in purification phase like how the 3rd or 4th Postulate can do.

https://mmbr.asm.org/content/75/2/268

https://www.news-medical.net/life-sciences/What-is-Infrared-Microscopy.aspx

Aurelio
Aurelio
Jan 14, 2021 9:12 AM

If Koch’s postulates are no longer relevant (because it is convenient for many), then why do the authors of the earliest studies on the isolation of NCoV-2019 bother to mention that they did not or did not comply with them? (Zhu et al. 2020; Gralinski et al. 2020). Koch’s postulates and Rivers’ criteria are the way to demonstrate the pathogen-disease causal relationship. As for bacteria and “viruses” present in “asymptomatic” people, if they do not produce symptoms, then these people ARE NOT SICK. The narrative of the asymptomatic patient became popular with HIV, whose existence has not been proven either. Many high-level scientists like Kary Mullys put it that way.

Benjamin Musclow
Benjamin Musclow
Feb 9, 2021 11:41 PM
Reply to  Aurelio

Exactly. This is HIV 2.0 with wicked government tyranny on top.

Doreen
Doreen
Dec 9, 2020 8:36 PM

“Over 30 institutions and offices around the world have been queried through Freedom of Information requests for records containing proof the alleged SARS-COV-2 virus in fact exists. The responses have yielded in total no records. Ontario public health officials have zero legitimate evidence to support their story of a “COVID-19 virus” let alone a “COVID-19” pandemic. The virus is unproven and purely theoretical. They have committed FRAUD on the population.” Christine Massey, Canada. https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2020/11/legal-action-taken-against-covid19-measures/

Paige
Paige
Nov 29, 2020 6:12 PM

This argument fails to stand once you consider that Koch’s postulates refer to microorganisms, namely bacteria (Segre, 2013). Today, viruses are still largely classified as “non-living” – they are not considered to be an organism, in other words – due to their need for host cells for reproduction. As a result, scientists can’t study them as bacteria, and must use different methods for understanding and classifying them and the diseases that they cause. While they are defined as pathogenic, they are, however, largely exempt from Koch’s postulates. The most obvious example of this is that you can’t isolate and grow a virus in culture by itself without cell lines. It doesn’t matter if it’s a simple cold virus, the norovirus, the flu, or COVID-19. The basis for viral reproduction negates this as a possibility. The limitations of Koch’s postulates are made obvious in the face of viral infection. Beyond that,… Read more »

Sonny
Sonny
Jul 5, 2021 12:46 AM
Reply to  Paige

How can corona virus not be considered an organism but still be considered to have a genome structure and the capabilities of reproduction?

Shannon Mohan-Dolphin
Shannon Mohan-Dolphin
Aug 22, 2021 3:47 AM
Reply to  Paige

No kidding, this is why the Postulates were updated specifically for viral pathogens.

Alex Usher
Alex Usher
Oct 19, 2020 9:53 AM

Koch’s postulate argument failings:

1. Cholera, Typhoid Fever, Polio, Herpes Simplex and Hepatitis C can be found in asymptomatic carriers.

2. Viruses need host cells to grow. i.e. can’t be grown in pure culture.

3. See point 1.

4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7036342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7366528/
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.11.2000266

Science has moved on from Koch’s imperfect rules, Koch himself abandoned the “must” from his first postulate when he saw it was flawed. They’ve been recognised as obsolete for 70 years despite their usefulness 130 years ago.

You’re welcome.

S Person
S Person
Oct 22, 2020 4:04 PM
Reply to  Alex Usher

His work maybe 130 years old and I could be mistaken but surely even now his postulates are at least useful as a starting point. It also seems as if many scientists didn’t go down this route / debunk if it really is that flawed (al be it yes old).

Torgsyv
Torgsyv
Nov 7, 2020 8:53 PM
Reply to  Alex Usher

Isaac Newton’s Laws of Motion were published 333 years ago, and were superseded by Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity more that 100 years ago.
Fortunately, bridges and other earthly structures are still being built according to Newton’s Laws.
Age is no argument; correctness is…‽

jason snyder
jason snyder
Nov 9, 2020 9:54 PM
Reply to  Alex Usher

About point 1. You’re saying that the presence of the microbes claimed to be responsible for those diseases are found in people WITHOUT those diseases. Think about it.

You’re welcome.

Ronjia
Ronjia
Jan 19, 2021 11:14 AM
Reply to  Alex Usher

Even without Kochs postulate, it must be possible to aquire a full-length genom from one of the eledged millions suffering fron covid19, wouldn´t you agree?

Philip Grace
Philip Grace
Oct 18, 2020 10:17 PM

I made a FOI request to a major UK NHS Hospital Trust for evidence proving the virus exists and causes the alleged illness and deaths. Here is a link to its reply stating it doesn’t have such information: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10161122010462524&set=p.10161122010462524&type=3

Daisy
Daisy
Jan 13, 2021 10:12 PM
Reply to  Philip Grace

That link doesn’t work anymore. Would you have a new link?

Bill Wright
Bill Wright
Oct 18, 2020 4:12 PM

Another article that needs looking at re: isolation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7092803/

Doreen
Doreen
Oct 6, 2020 5:46 PM

An international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever ‘the corona fraud scandal’. CDC Admits Covid19 Test Does Not Exist. In the video, ATTORNEY REINER FUELLMICH summarizes facts that will become the core of a class-action suit. Reading from what sounds like the opening statement to the jury, Fuellmich brings together in one presentation virtually every major issue that lurks behind the controversies over testing, distancing, masking, and contact tracing https://youtu.be/kr04gHbP5MQ Back up if censored https://www.brighteon.com/cb101719-5bcf-4447-9298-887b8c2afbb9

Christine Massey
Christine Massey
Oct 4, 2020 5:34 PM

Here are 16 Freedom of Information (FOI) responses from various institutions in Canada, NZ, Australia, Germany, the U.K., England, Ireland, all indicating that they have no record in their possession, authored by anyone, anywhere, ever, describing the isolation of a “SARS-COV-2 virus” from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/FOI-and-formal-responses-re-covid19-virus-isolation-purification-from-16-institutions-Oct-2-2020.pdf

Tehani deGuzman
Tehani deGuzman
Oct 10, 2020 4:34 AM

Thank you for this!!!

Paul Buckingham
Paul Buckingham
Jan 14, 2021 1:41 PM

I can add to your list, which does include the Government Office for Science, whereby the response I have received goes a little further and laughably suggests the following link as ‘evidence’: https://fullfact.org/health/Covid-isolated-virus/

david
david
Aug 2, 2020 9:09 PM

“For example, in February 2020 Chinese and Dutch researchers published studies purporting to show they had isolated the virus, which is the first step in fulfilling the third postulate.
But both teams sourced the virus from animals rather than humans.”

According to
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.07.939389v3.full

“the virus used was: The SARS-CoV-2 (strain HB-01) was kindly provided by Professor Wenjie Tan1, from the China Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC). The complete genome for this SARS-CoV-2 was submitted to GISAID (BetaCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-01/2020|EPI_ISL_402119), and deposited in the China National Microbiological Data Center (accession number NMDC10013001 and genome accession numbers MDC60013002-01).”

And according to
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017

“one full-length sequence was obtained from a virus isolated from a patient (BetaCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-01/2020|EPI_ISL_402119).”

tulip4500
tulip4500
Aug 15, 2020 1:51 AM
Reply to  david

Hi David,

I don’t much about these things but from what I can see, study 1 used mice and not infected human patients.

And study 2 concluded “Although our study does not fulfill Koch’s postulates, our analyses provide evidence implicating 2019-nCoV in the Wuhan outbreak”.

Based on this alone, these studies do not appear to fulfill Koch’s postulates 🙂

david
david
Aug 15, 2020 6:30 PM
Reply to  tulip4500

Hello, my question is about this
“But both teams sourced the virus from animals rather than humans.”

I don`t know what does that mean.

Thanks.

Kevin Hart
Kevin Hart
Sep 14, 2020 7:49 PM
Reply to  david

Hi David. Basically that means they took a biological sample from an animal and purified everything else out until they just had the virus.

James Graham
James Graham
Jul 18, 2020 11:44 PM

Marx said that in exchange in the market the natural/scientific qualities and properties of goods and services, commodities, are extinguished. Their exchange value trumps their use value. That includes labour and the labour of scientists. Like the rest, the product of the labour of scientists, employed by capitalists, becomes capital…their exclusive private property.
 
Given the profit motive represents an incentive to cheat, then I am in no doubt an unregulated free market in health services could become a playground for business studies’ PR, sales, marketing, quack psychology people and rent-a-scientists.
 
The covid19 pandemic will go down as a monument to capitalist incompetence. But that is not news as there is a long line of said monuments stretching off into and beyond the horizon.
 
I’m with Allyson Pollock. It’s a mess because we have let the NHS go to the dogs.

Dusty
Dusty
Aug 15, 2020 8:41 AM
Reply to  James Graham

There wouldn’t be any money for scientists to blow if it wasn’t for our merged government healthcare system. Their using a tax payer credit card to fuel fear and greed. That isn’t capitalism. It’s crony capitalism. Without access to tax payer money only Gates could fund this and his little cult of friends. I really doubt they would bother. They have convinced governments to steal from the tax payer for them. If the tax payer could say no to what they spend their money on I’m going to call that capitalism. We don’t have free markets. We have people we can steal from and those that want to.

Hypnotoad666
Hypnotoad666
Jul 17, 2020 3:28 PM

Recent analysis of “excess deaths” show that covid is pretty harmless. But even those appear clearly rigged. For example, a fancy graphic in the Economist this week is based on a baseline of expected deaths that merely averaged the number of deaths in each week over the last five years. But as everyone knows, the US population of old people gets significantly larger with each passing year.   The correct way to calculate the expected death baseline would be to average the historic weekly death rate for each age, and then multiply that rate by the number of the current population at that age.   But instead they go out of their way to deliberately reduce the baseline and inflate the number of “excess deaths.”   I don’t like believing in conspiracies unless I have to. But every bit of actual hard evidence (and lack thereof), keeps pointing to the… Read more »

Allan
Allan
Jul 20, 2020 9:12 AM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

Then it would be Airborne as they say, if it were Flu` no??

Hypnotoad666
Hypnotoad666
Jul 20, 2020 6:28 PM
Reply to  Allan

Sure. It’s “airborne,” as in spread by little droplets of mucous or spittle. Just like most flu and cold viruses. But it’s not floating around like a poisonous gas. My issue isn’t the degree of contagiousness but the lack of any serious lethality.

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 18, 2020 12:27 AM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

Wrong. It’s 100% lethal to the people that die of it. And if wanting doctors NOT to put coronavirus on death certificates isn’t a conspiracy, I don’t know what is.

Hypnotoad666
Hypnotoad666
Oct 18, 2020 1:15 AM
Reply to  Derek Brent

So it’s 100% lethal to almost nobody. Good point. Like getting struck by lightening. Better stay on lockdown so a bolt doesn’t get you.

They can put “covid” on death certificates if they want. But then to be consistent they should also put “common cold” as well if the person had the sniffles in the prior 60 days.

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 18, 2020 6:33 AM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

Over 200,000 dead is not serious lethality? How many do you want?

Hypnotoad666
Hypnotoad666
Oct 19, 2020 5:00 PM
Reply to  Derek Brent

200K dead (with average age of 80), out of a population of 330M would not be a particularly big deal. If flu and common cold deaths were calculated the same way as covid deaths, they would probably account for an equal number in a given year. The risk from catching a dose of the ‘rona is not nothing, but it’s hardly enough to destroy the economy and suspend the Constitution over.

And the 200K number is most likely bogus anyway. It’s hard to say what the real number could be, because the powers that be have no interest in developing a legitimate statistical or medical methodology for attributing causation to corona when multiple factors result in a death.

Someone probably figured out a good way to do this. But then they would have been banned for “dangerous content” by social media, so we’ve never heard about it.

Mimi
Mimi
Mar 5, 2021 8:11 PM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

It could be poisoning gas, chemtrail warfare is an old technique and used many times in 18 – 19th century. Chemtrails are true and the symptoms of covid are the same as being suffocated by chlorine gas and pesticides

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 18, 2020 6:24 AM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

So, have you got the weekly population figures for the last five years? Has anybody?

Dan
Dan
Feb 4, 2021 10:24 AM
Reply to  Hypnotoad666

Covid is 100% harmless because it isn’t contagious because it doesn’t exist. It is the malevolent reaction to the host by your perceived overlords that is devastating.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 13, 2020 6:28 AM

THE TRUTH HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT ► There are those who do not want you to know the truth. They will do everything they can to distract from the real issues or make fun of those who are exposing fake modern science. THE CORONA SICKNESS IS NOT BEING CAUSED BY A VIRUS. THAT IS WHY WE CAN AFFIRM FOR CERTAIN THAT NO ONE HAS DIED FROM A VIRUS IN THE COVID-19 SICKNESS. THE KOCH POSTULATES BECOME IRRELEVANT AS WELL ONCE YOU KNOW WHAT IS REALLY CAUSING THE SICKNESS. FEW KNOW WHAT IT REALLY IS. THE TRUTH IS BEING HIDDEN BEHIND ALL OF THE NOISE AND CONFUSION ► They who attempt to obscure the truth from you cannot argue with Dr. Kaufman…. he has explained to us that viruses do not exist….they are in fact exosomes….but neither of those two are causing the CORONA sickness. WHAT FEW UNDERSTAND, THE CORONA SICKNESS… Read more »

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 6:02 AM

tommy, down the line, has a comprehensive list of material from competent, honest researchers.
For those who have some science training, search first of all the accepted definition of a “virus”.
It is hilarious!
It reminds me of the ramblings in physics, my domain.
Unless one considers both those and the virus definition to be of mystic origin, they are nonsensical and unprovable.
But if it’s mysticism, then they are both correct!
 
 

Mark Steele
Mark Steele
Jul 9, 2020 9:04 AM

Shocking how the 5G switch on is ignored as well as the the vast body of science showing the link between Oxidative stress and lowering the immune system. The virus cover up for the 5G Genocide agenda using contaminated vaccines. Far to many still watching to main stream to wake up.

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 17, 2020 3:55 PM
Reply to  Mark Steele

“Watching to” is the most gross of your grammatical errors. And yet you think you have been able to analyse the global pandemic. Where did you get your God-like powers from?

I’m sure it’s just an oversight that you haven’t explained why so many parts of the world don’t have infection based on proximity to 5G?

Mark Steele
Mark Steele
Oct 19, 2020 11:47 AM
Reply to  Derek Brent

The creator gives us those powers as long as you have eyes to see and ears to hear. You obviously don’t.. Shocking how stupid your reporting the main stream BS again..

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 19, 2020 3:57 PM
Reply to  Mark Steele

Who is us? Am I included? Which creator?

Ian Glen Walker
Ian Glen Walker
Jul 8, 2020 2:15 PM

Just not true   It was first Isolated on the 12th of January 2020 in China, that is where and when we got the confirmed source RNA sequence that identified it.   This was from a lung biopsy of the first person recorded to die from it on the 9th of January 2020, the biopsy was taken within a short while of their death they knew it was coming so they prepped for it.   Autopsy of a level 3 Pathogen is dangerous and thus only taken in rare circumstances, that is why Covid 19 deaths are sealed casket and off to cremation.   During autopsy body fluids and particles are aerosolised and viral load is in the the Trillions of virid particles. So full precautions including separate air supply, air scrubbing and full decontamination are required. For an unknown novel virus, the poor autopsy doctor would have been in… Read more »

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 4:57 AM

You are brain-dead!

Ian Glen Walker
Ian Glen Walker
Jul 11, 2020 4:00 PM
Reply to  Bubba

Hi all   In reply to Bubba   Koch’s postulate was made in 1890. https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7105   Viruses were first mooted after Koch’s postulate in 1892; after Dmitri Ivanovsky proved the existence of infections that were smaller than the Bacteria of Koch’s postulate, using filtration methods, thus disproving part of the postulate. Peer Review eh.   Koch and his heirs have been trying to fix the postulates ever since.   In fact after Koch died in 1910.   Viruses were first identified in microscopes in 1926 by Thomas Milton Rivers.   And it was not until 1931 and Wendell Meredith Stanley’s invention of the electron microscope that we truly started to understand viruses.    Here are some photographs of the virus you claim does not exist. https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-what-the-covid-19-virus-looks-like-under-electron-microscopes   Here is a story about the Mississippi Lawmakers who refused to wear masks and caught the virus you and they, thought does not… Read more »

Stef
Stef
Jul 23, 2020 11:49 AM

You need to look up the impact factor of sciencealert.com be serious. Don’t just post things without checking the IF rating of the journal/website. You may end up feeling foolish if you don’t do due diligence. You might have also noticed that the site resembles a Hollywood rag mag with endless scrolling and a large amount of completely unscientific information. I mean no disrespect, just want to help blah blah never mind I’m sure you don’t care one wit. Nevertheless I mean well to all here on planet titanic

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 17, 2020 3:58 PM
Reply to  Stef

How often do you think Bubba does due diligence?

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 19, 2020 3:59 PM
Reply to  Bubba

Well, I can tell you would be the expert on that.

rick
rick
Jul 12, 2020 6:47 PM

Someone has been into the cool-aid…

Kanaka 108
Kanaka 108
Sep 26, 2020 4:08 PM

If you read the paper of this first isolation in China, you will see with your own eyes that no isolation from the sick patient was performed.
They just observe particules around the culture cells and assumed it was the sars cov2.

Kanaka 108
Kanaka 108
Sep 26, 2020 4:12 PM

If you look with your own eyes into this first paper from China, you will see that no isolation was performed. They just observed particules around the culture cells and they assumed it was the sars cov 2.

Jerry
Jerry
Jul 6, 2020 6:08 PM

The limitations of Koch’s criteria are even more obvious when we consider viral diseases, which were not yet discovered when the postulates were formulated. Thomas Rivers, who has been called the ‘father of modern virology’, wrote:   ‘‘It is unfortunate that so many workers blindly followed the rules, because Koch himself quickly realized that in certain instances all the conditions could not be met. . . . Thus, in regard to certain diseases, particularly those caused by viruses, the blind adherence to Koch’s postulates may act as a hindrance instead of an aid.’’   Many viruses do not cause illness in all infected individuals, a requirement of postulate #1. An example is poliovirus, which causes paralytic disease in about 1% of those infected. Further compromising postulate #1 is the fact that infection with the same virus may lead to markedly different diseases, while different viruses may cause the same disease.… Read more »

Ryan Matters
Ryan Matters
Jul 7, 2020 8:13 PM
Reply to  Jerry

Many viruses do not cause illness in all infected individuals, a requirement of postulate #1″
 
bye bye germ theory

Superbuggg
Superbuggg
Jul 8, 2020 3:45 PM
Reply to  Jerry

Unicorn poo! Does Koch’s first postulate not say that the same illness must be present in all the sickos from whom you extract the puss, and all must present the same symptoms? It’s not about those who test positive for the, ahem… ‘virus’ but are not visibly ill!- that’s sooo last millennium! Germ theory is the new Flat Earth!

Kevin Hart
Kevin Hart
Sep 14, 2020 8:04 PM
Reply to  Superbuggg

What theory do you think is correct? Just asking, I’m not scientist so I’m just wondering.. although a reason some people get sick and not others could be the strength of the immune system, comorbidities, how much of the pathogen came into the body as well as any immunity to the pathogen (or it’s relatives). Although I’d be more than open to hearing any other theories.

Kevin Hart
Kevin Hart
Sep 14, 2020 8:16 PM
Reply to  Superbuggg

No disease/pathogen will show the same symptoms in everybody though – not viruses , bacteria, fungi or any others (maybe prions???, I’m not very familiar with those). For example some criteria nessesary for diagnosis will be presented as a list of POSSIBLE symptoms and then 3-4 if those sx must be present for diagnosis.

Superbuggg
Superbuggg
Sep 15, 2020 9:09 AM
Reply to  Kevin Hart

I’m not a scientist either, but I know those suffering illness do the research, and generally always know, and care more about a specific disease than does the doctor, and that germ theory has sold an awful lot of SOAP! The germ theory is plain wrong, and it’s about the ‘terrain’! Fungi grows and can causes illness – but mushrooms are fungi and taste GOOD! We once had bad bacteria only – now we know we must maintain GOOD bacteria in our gut and on our skin. There was ‘high cholesterol’ but now divide cholesterol in to GOOD and bad with our level expressed as a ratio of the two. Viruses have been thought of for over a century as pernicious external invaders, but the word is out – bad ‘Viruses’ are actually GOOD ‘Exosomes’ – inter cellular messengers generated by our body’s defences. Make sure you’re sitting down when… Read more »

anonymint
anonymint
Nov 15, 2020 9:56 PM
Reply to  Jerry

Consider this comment as edited in way that doesn’t change the reality or what was observed but completely changes the interpretation:

An example is p̶o̶l̶i̶o̶v̶i̶r̶u̶s̶[exosomes misnomered as ‘poliovirus’], which c̶a̶u̶s̶e̶s̶[is present along with] paralytic disease in about 1% of those i̶n̶f̶e̶c̶t̶e̶d̶[who exhibit these exosomes]. Further c̶o̶m̶p̶r̶o̶m̶i̶s̶i̶n̶g̶[reinforcing the importance of] postulate #1 is the fact that i̶n̶f̶e̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶a̶m̶e̶ ̶v̶i̶r̶u̶s̶ ̶m̶a̶y̶ ̶l̶e̶a̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶[exosomes are present in] markedly different diseases, while different v̶i̶r̶u̶s̶e̶s̶[exosomes] may c̶a̶u̶s̶e̶s̶[be present with] the same disease.

clort76
clort76
Jul 6, 2020 11:50 AM

The author writes:
“done the simple steps required to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 conclusively meets even one – never mind all — of the third postulate’s constituent parts. Those parts are:
* isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA*”

Sars-Cov2 is an RNA virus. It contains no DNA. The failure of the author(s) to understand this most basic distinction proves they are incompetent to write on the subject.

Additionally, the failure of all prior commenters to notice the distinction proves the same with respect to themselves.

clort76
clort76
Jul 6, 2020 12:20 PM
Reply to  clort76

Perhaps an analogy or two can help make my case:
 
Would you take seriously a reporter who reviews a theatre performance while calling it a symphony?
 
Would you take seriously an environmental issues reporter who calls a Bird a Fish?
 
These would be obvious disqualifying errors, not mere ‘slip-ups’. To confuse and conflate RNA and DNA in the field of microbiology is the kind of error that proves complete incompetence to get the most basic concepts right.

guerry
guerry
Jul 7, 2020 3:54 AM
Reply to  clort76

Did you reply to your own comment? Now you got two incompetent comment on this article, congrats 🙂

And just in case you didn’t read it before (at the very bottom of the article):

*The virus contains RNA, which it injects into the nuclei of cells. There, the RNA is converted to DNA by reverse transcriptase enzymes.^
🙂

Guerry
Guerry
Jul 7, 2020 3:42 AM
Reply to  clort76

the author writes):
isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA*’

Did you see the mark * after DNA?
At the very bottom of the article,
(the author also writes):
‘*The virus contains RNA, which it injects into the nuclei of cells. There, the RNA is converted to DNA by reverse transcriptase enzymes.^’

Did you read it? You didn’t, did you?
The failure of your thinking that RNA can’t be converted to DNA, proves you are incompetent to comment on this subject 🙂

guerry
guerry
Jul 7, 2020 3:56 AM
Reply to  clort76

the author writes:
isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA*’

Did you see the mark * after DNA?
At the very bottom of the article,
(the author also writes):
‘*The virus contains RNA, which it injects into the nuclei of cells. There, the RNA is converted to DNA by reverse transcriptase enzymes.^’

Did you read it? You didn’t, did you?
The failure of your thinking that RNA can’t be converted to DNA, proves you are incompetent to comment on this subject 🙂

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:01 AM
Reply to  guerry

Keep it on, guerry!
Good stuff!

Valerie Keefe
Valerie Keefe
Jun 20, 2020 10:23 PM

While this is good reportage, it’s freaking hilarious to see Rosemary Frei accuse others of “Decision-based evidence-making” while arguing the female-assigned are at unique risk of violence and ignoring the evidence on the efficacy of transition medicine, especially hormone replacement, preferring anecdotes from those whom doctors are least-likely to deny same to.

Jon L Brown
Jon L Brown
Jun 23, 2020 5:05 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

Valerie, do you agree with what she reported in this article? I think you are pointing out hypocrisy as an additional observation. Only wanting to confirm.
 
Jon

Valerie Keefe
Valerie Keefe
Jun 23, 2020 5:54 AM
Reply to  Jon L Brown

I think that would be a fair characterization, except that it’s indicative of bias which may colour her reportage in future incidents.

Jon L Brown
Jon L Brown
Jun 23, 2020 6:28 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

Thanks Valerie. I’m not a scientist and wanted to be sure Her claim is accurate. Bias abounds, but if we work together to get to the truth we will be better as people. Thanks, Jon

Leo Angelovitzka
Leo Angelovitzka
Jun 29, 2020 6:10 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

It’s freaking hilarious that you say there is any ‘effective transition medicine’ for a religion.
 
Also it’s insulting and unscientific to use the term ‘female assigned’. No one is assigned a sex. It is simply observed. When there is ambiguity, further testing is done.
 
There are only women and men, no intermediate sexes.
 
All of those who imagine they were ‘born into the wrong body’ prefer anecdotes to any science.
 
Also there is no such thing as using estrogen as a hormonal replacement in men. Men taking estrogen aren’t replacing anything but rather adding a potentially harmful hormone to their body’s existing balance and propagating the anecdote that men be changed into women.

Valerie Keefe
Valerie Keefe
Jun 29, 2020 10:55 AM

Just because you repeat the tautology while ignoring science on birth control medicine, poly-cystic ovarian syndrome, declines in depression rates on post-transition people to about 40% that of the general population, and Premenstrual DYSPHORIA Disorder doesn’t make you anything but a tautology-spouting adherent to a flawed hypothesis.
 
More androgens (in women), more depression:
 
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/03/pill-linked-depression-doctors-hormonal-contraceptives
 
 
PS: Note how you skated-by the assault, domestic violence, and homicide bits of what I had to say, because that’s ideologically inconvenient to deal with.
 
PPS: We also have people who are clearly non-dyadic, who don’t have XX or XY Karyotypes or genital morphology that matches that of an archetypical penis or vagina (or testes, ovaries, uteri, vas deferens, etc). What part of bi-modal are you not-interested in understanding?

Pat Enery
Pat Enery
Jun 30, 2020 12:53 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

& how often does that occur in nature? Hemaphrodites are rare. Genetic mistakes that do occur. Not enough to create other gender types.
 

Mister Bump
Mister Bump
Jul 4, 2020 10:24 PM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

But there are only 2 sexes, regardless. Where as monotremes for example have 5 sex chromosomnes. Humans are sexually dymorphic. They have 2 and only 2. UIncluding intersexed people (xxy or xyy). More or less copies of a sex chromosome does not make a separate sex, just male or female.Thats all there is. At best any other gender percieved to exist is only intersexed.

Valerie Keefe
Valerie Keefe
Jul 5, 2020 4:55 AM
Reply to  Mister Bump

Mr. Bump:   There are both male-assigned and female-assigned people who have XXY Karyotypes. Different Catholic Bishops have, in attempting to maintain an oversimplified model, declared all people with Kleinfelter’s (XXY) to be male… and also all people with Kleinfelter’s to be female. This is ideology trumping both what we know about science and what we know about selection of mates. If we want to focus on karyotypes and gametes further, there is at least one case of a male-assigned person with XX chromosomes who still produced small gametes and, via a tear in ducting, managed to impregnate themselves.   Again, sapient species, does the vast majority of its reproducing voluntarily… I think your metric of sex is wrong.   I totally agree we’re sexually dimorphic, just that it’s a bi-MODAL system, not a binary one. The existence of trans men and trans women (as opposed to politicized attempts to… Read more »

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:09 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

Valerie,
You are not copy-and-paste correctly, or the lexicon is too daunting for you and memory feeble.

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 19, 2020 4:16 PM
Reply to  Bubba

All your responses are short and without supporting evidence, so who’s feeble and can’t tell the difference between a computer technique and a human. of course she is not copy-and-paste!

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:06 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

Valerie,
What is tautology?!
Break it down in what you have just scribbled above.

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:03 AM
Reply to  Valerie Keefe

Substance of the article, Valerie!
Not ad hominem warble vis-a-vis other matters!

Jens
Jens
Jun 16, 2020 4:12 PM

In this study they isolated SARS-CoV-2 from a patient in Hong Kong and could consistently replicate it in Syrian hamster.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32215622/

I wonder why they couldn´t replicate SARS-CoV-2 in this study in dogs, pics, chickens and ducks, but in ferrets and cats?
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6494/1016

Looks dodgy to me. What do you think?

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:00 AM
Reply to  Jens

Both of these studies clearly show that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is the causative agent for disease. And your questions are good questions and I am sure there are many scientists trying to figure it out.

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:11 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Ryan,
“Clearly shows” and “trying to figure it out” don’t mesh.
You think?

Derek Brent
Derek Brent
Oct 17, 2020 3:22 PM
Reply to  Bubba

Whether somebody punches you in the face in daylight or in the the dark, yiou will feel the pain.

However in one case you will know who did it. In the other you’ll maybe figure it out!

I think that “meshes”.

northerntracey
northerntracey
Jun 28, 2020 7:49 PM
Reply to  Jens

Neither study isolated a virus. PCR is not an isolation technique.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 7, 2020 11:18 PM
Reply to  northerntracey

BUT THEY DID NOT USE PCR IN THE SECOND STUDY. THEY USED THE ELISA METHOD DESCRIBED ABOVE!

this article states:
Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in all ferrets by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a neutralization assay, although the antibody titers of the two ferrets that were euthanized on day 13 p.i. were notably lower than those of the ferrets euthanized on day 20 p.i. (Fig. 1, I to L).
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6494/1016

Performing an ELISA involves at least one antibody with specificity for a particular antigen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELISA

The first article quoted clearly states that the Koch postulates were met:
Conclusions: Besides satisfying the Koch’s postulates, this readily available hamster model is an important tool for studying transmission, pathogenesis, treatment, and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32215622/

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Jul 8, 2020 12:59 AM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

It must be pointed out that the debate settles around what defines isolating a virus, and what doesn’t. Many papers are claiming to have isolated it, whereas it is argued by some that they haven’t.
 
Also, with regards the hamster paper, which is the only one I’ve looked at, it should be noted – for the sake of perspective – that none of the hamsters died or suffered permanent injury.
 

At 14dpi, only mild pulmonary congestion and inflammatory infiltration were still detectable (Figure4C). The air exchange structures were remodelled and restored to normal.

 
Given some of the scary, scary papers and opinions circulating around, this is a pretty important thing to remember, I think.
A2

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 1:09 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

True, we need to know if the novel coronavirus has or has not not fufilled Koch’s postulates. So the work of Andy Kaufman is really relevant. What it at stake is what is a virus really? At the time such Koch postulates were formed, there was no such notion of viruses. Kaufman does a nice job to define them… my next comment takes this in consideration as Andy explains MYCROZYMA, MYCOPLASMA, also known as protids or somatids.   The hamsters did not die or suffer permanent injury, apparently, as the test was to prove transmissibility of the virus, which was proven, and not cause them death. (So was an antidote treatment given to them…apparently so… [Please double check the paper, I think you’ll find no ‘antidote’ was given. They were infected and dissected at the latest 14 days later – Ed]   So in order to determine if a virus… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 1:25 AM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

See these videos and info:
 

 
There Is No Virus – The Rooster in the River of Rats – Patrick Herbert
 
https://patrickherbert.org/2020/06/28/there-is-no-virus-the-rooster-in-the-river-of-rats/

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 3:05 AM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Ok, maybe they were euthanized before the virus could cause a more serious damage? Or are you saying the virus did not do serious damage to them? Certainly it would affect animals in a different way than humans and this would be expected. But the test does seem to prove the disease is transmitted….the articles show also that by using ELISA which involves at least one antibody with specificity for a particular antigen, that indeed antibodies for Covid-19 were detected and antigens were being developed to react to the disease…. Now whether the sequence is coming from the SARS 2, from the mycoplasma or from a combination of things is the question. Thanks.
 

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:12 AM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

cannotfoolme,
Antibody to what?
That is the question that you and the valeries are overlooking!

northerntracey
northerntracey
Oct 5, 2020 7:00 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Antibody tests are just as nonsensical as PCR. Have you read the Feli Popescu paper? Dawn Lester wrote this short article on it which I helped to translate. It might help you to understand. https://whatreallymakesyouill.com/antibodies-immunity-dispelling-two-more-myths/

northerntracey
northerntracey
Jun 20, 2021 8:47 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Antibodies are non specific and they do not ‘fight viruses or bacteria. That test is even less use than the PCR and it is also not an isolation technique.
https://northerntracey213875959.wordpress.com/2020/11/26/antibodies-debunked/
https://northerntracey213875959.wordpress.com/2020/11/26/the-misinterpretation-of-antibodies/

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Jun 14, 2020 3:10 PM

“Scientists Have Utterly Failed to Prove that the Coronavirus Fulfills Koch’s Postulates […] About 150 years ago, scientists painstakingly constructed a set of principles that can prove whether a particular microbe is the cause of a specific disease or is just a bystander. Those three principles are known as the Koch postulates. […] The principles have been altered almost beyond recognition by various researchers over the ensuing 130 years. But the changes concomitantly watered down the postulates.”

Tell me, were those postulates hewn into tablets of stone or inscribed on plates of gold?

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:16 AM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

robogobblin,
 
It has to do with logic.
So, foreign stuff to you…

Arby
Arby
Jun 13, 2020 11:47 PM

“What’s missing is even one reference to back up those assertions.” It’s hard to miss something else. The authors there refer to the researchers own admission that they are ‘not’ using Koch’s postulates, even though they sort of try to trick us into thinking that Rivers’s postulates are still Koch’s postulates. As Dr Kaufman (whose video “The Rooster In The River Of Rats” goes through all of this) explains, Rivers watered down Koch’s postulates in order to make it easier to find (claim to have found) viruses.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 7, 2020 11:47 PM
Reply to  Arby

I saw that Kaufman video last night and he sounds convincing. However, one needs to consider that:   The Koch postulates needed updating. They were not written for viruses as those had not been detected at the time. The Koch postulates needed a general updating and that is why the Rivers postulates were generated. However, Rivers indeed omitted at least one key element needed to prove the existence of the virus.   Kaufman demonstrates how the virus is identified via a filter. But mycoplasma infections act as viruses and are smaller than viruses. So they would pass through the filters and the RNA inside the mycoplasma would be picked up on a antigen test.(The PCR tests may pick-up the Corona sequences but with much error).. Doctors are not performing urine antigen tests or other such mycoplasma detection tests on Covid patients for the most part and this is the huge… Read more »

Arby
Arby
Jul 8, 2020 12:40 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Thanks. There’s lots to dig into there. I don’t have a lot of free time right now, unfortunately. But this is here and I will bookmark it on my bookmarks toolbar.   It’s going to be very hard for anyone, now, to convince me that nature is my enemy. True, self-modified people – who now believe in deceit, violence and inequality and follow a ‘riches for the strongest’ philosophy – are not exactly natural. And some of those ones are quite smart. There’s no denying the advances in technology, including in the area of small things. (Look at the chemicals causing problems. Bayer just got nailed, but not stopped. I agree with Jon Rappoport that viruses and the whole health care industry around viruses are a convenient cover for the problem of manmade chemicals [which probably explains swine flu], which are a problem mainly because those who create, use and… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 3:52 PM
Reply to  Arby

You are welcome. Yes, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. I have a 30-40 page article I created on this topic. I posted only some of the key info. We are discussing here the Kochs postulates and what I have to share below is all about this. It is all inter-related and indeed a complex subject. But we need to understand the related issues in order to tie it all together. Whether you accept those Kochs postulates or not depends on your views of micro-biology, as noted below. This is important to determine if a new virus exists, if enough monoclonal antibodies are present and such issues. The issues are thus all inter-connected.   In order to see the connections, here it goes:   Kauffman has touched on the subject of “MYCROZYMA”, also known as protides or somatids, in his video I cited, noted again below. (The… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 3:58 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Continued from my previous post….   ► Notice also that mycoplasma go into a dormant mode and are activated under conditions of immunity stress. They can live without oxygen and can be crystallized so they can thus be weaponized and introduced in the body via airplane aerosols, via nano-bots and nano-tubes of the type being developed by Charles Lieber (see the material of AIM and Americans for Innovation for details).   ► This article establishes also the connection between mycoplasma – “microzymas” and neuro-sistemic diseases, if one considers they are actually one and the same: (It is important to understand this so we can determine what is causing the Corona disease and also so we can determine how to apply such Koch postulates). This article connects to the other article I posted on how mycoplasma is behind all neuro-systemic diseases, if microzymas and mycoplasma are in fact related: This would… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 4:07 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

….Continued from my previous post……   “Cancer And Most Diseases Are Caused By BACTERIA   Bechamp’s Microzymas & Human Disease”   By Alan Cantwell, M.D.   3-17-17   https://rense.com/general96/bechamps.htm   THE IDEAS THAT GO AGAINST GERM THEORY   ► Bechamp did not have the benefit of the electron microscope at the time. Could it be that what he observed were in fact mycoplasms or the basic structures that build them? Could it be that “microzyma” and mycoplasmas are somehow related or even the same? If so, all seem to be missing something here……Could it be that they can develop into larger bacteria as suggested by Bechamp and those who believed in pleomorphism? As noted in the article:   The transformation of “microzymas” into bacteria – why this is important in the entire context of the coronavirus, the Koch postulates, monoclonal anti-bodies and whether a virus even exists. What is actually… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 4:15 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Continued from the previous post…   (The Youtube video I posted above on microzymas also explains this subject). Per the article:   ► After many laboratory experiments and microscopic examinations of these granules, the physician-scientist claimed that microzymas were capable of developing into common living organisms that go by the name of bacteria. Some of these intermediate bacterial stages were regarded by experts as different species, but to Bechamp they were all related and derived from “microzymas.”   HOW DOES ALL OF THIS RELATE TO KOCH, THE SUBJECT OF THIS ARTICLE?    ► It all relates because Koch was against such ideas and believed in monomorphism (as do most modern scientists): (So as a result, his Koch postulates and especially those of Pasteur may be thus entirely flawed. Not even to mention that at the time, there was no concept of viruses. And now scientists in general believe in germ… Read more »

Arby
Arby
Jul 8, 2020 8:46 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

If today’s scientists actually had a sound reason for jettisoning Koch’s common sense approach to proving that there is a microorganism that causes a specific disease, they would have provided it, because there are powerful special interests who are in charge of their health care system who don’t like Koch’s postulates. It’s a ‘gold’ standard for a reason. If they were to jettison that, people would notice the scam that Rockefeller health ‘care’ is.
 
People, as ruined as they are, can still see, when they care to look closely, that something’s up. I’ve always said that ‘how’ you sell something tells us something about ‘what’ you’re selling: For example:
 
https://www.bitchute.com/video/VpDpVtoZhgrc/

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 9:04 PM
Reply to  Arby

They do not have a reason because they are protecting the big pharma industry, owned by the Black Nobility Banking Cartel, the Neo-Nazi Pharanonic blood-line families, the Rockefeller health care system which belongs to the 13 main families which control banking. The powerful special interests who are in charge of their health care system like Koch postulates or don´t like them? The same ones pushing the fake science behind SARS Cov-2, fake history, fake space programs, fake religion, fake politics, fake elections, fake news,faulty educational system and everything else fake, And yes, I saw this video you posted before…nice to see someone post it again. Dr. Cowan as well does a nice job and I have promoted this video as well 🙂

Arby
Arby
Jul 8, 2020 11:03 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Acknowledged.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 10:32 PM
Reply to  Arby

The Youtube video which I meant to post above on microzymas, but now see was not posted, can be found here: (This video is key).   Pleomorphism in Human Body -Mystical Science Pt6    ► Notice how stabilizing the P.H. levels of the body are key to controlling the mycoplasma in the body. The mycoplasm mutates to bacteria which then mutates to form viruses, the video above suggests. A later state is mutations to parasitic form. This would explain why broad sprectrum anti-biotics attack the Corona virus as those which are anti-malaria attack the parasite forms…the hydroxychloroquine and zinc will attack the viral mutation. The drugs which attack like or flees are also effective to attack the plasmoid state. Anti-malarial drugs are effective as well. By eliminating the mycoplasma, one can eliminate cancer, AIDS, Corona virus, cystic fibrosis and many other neural-systemic diseases.   ► There Is No Virus – The Rooster… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 10:37 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Correction to my text above:
 
The drugs which attack lice or flees….. a few items like this to correct…did not see an edit button for my comment above….
 

Arby
Arby
Jul 8, 2020 11:08 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Yes, that edit button is a wee bit hidden. But I’m so happy that it’s there. This is truly a great resource. Kudos to OG!

Arby
Arby
Jul 8, 2020 11:07 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

When I come across the word “mutate,” I automatically assume that I am not going to agree totally with what follows. Darwinian (functional) evolutionary theory promoted the idea that mutations are drivers of biological evolution. I don’t buy it at all. Are there mutations? It wouldn’t surprise me. ‘We’ are assaulting nature. But mutations in fruit flies have been observed to fade away. That is, for those insects that could survive the mutation and reproduce, the mutation eventually faded. God’s creation asserted itself.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 9, 2020 12:34 AM
Reply to  Arby

While “mutate” can have a Darwinian suggestion, it does not mean I am advocating evolution in that sense. It is a fact of nature but does not mean one species can become another. It is just adjustments which God programmed into species to allow them to become more suited to their environment, my friend.
 
Hope that helps explain.

Arby
Arby
Jul 9, 2020 12:36 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Acknowledged.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 9, 2020 5:05 PM
Reply to  Arby

Ok!

Bubba
Bubba
Jul 11, 2020 5:52 AM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Kaufman is a psychiatrist,not biologist, even though he has an undergraduate degree in that.
No hands-on experience.
But he has the common sense to pay heed to Stefan Lanka.

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 11, 2020 12:59 PM
Reply to  Bubba

Kaufman explains nicely the exosome model based upón the polymorphic nature of the militarized mycoplasma disease infection of the cells which is causing this so called pandemic. It is not a Corona pandemic nor should it be characterized this way. It is a bio-weapons generated mycoplasma infection pandemic. It was created for profit, so the Rothschild – Warburg – Rockefeller – Queen – Black Nobility – Nazi Swiss Octogon banking cartel can rake in trilions from their contaminated vaccines which will spread the sickness even more. All vaccines are contaminated with the mycoplasma. See the videos and work of Judy Mikovitz to understand this. Yet even Judy does not understand that viruses do not exist. What she isolated was not an AIDS virus but rather exosomes which are manifestations of the mycoplasma infections, the root cause of all neuro-systemic diseases. So SARS Corona-1, 2, 3, 4 or whatever are not… Read more »

Cora
Cora
Nov 1, 2020 10:22 PM
Reply to  CannotFoolMe

Actually, viruses DO exist but in these forms: https://www.etymonline.com/word/virus. Examples: https://www.thoughtco.com/toxic-chemical-definition-609284. It’s very sad that scientists & doctors keep confusing people about viruses & exosomes. They aren’t the same. Viruses are non-living toxins that can cause disease/illness/death, as can living bacteria/parasites, & exosomes are what are released by the cells to clean them up. A lot of the people publishing papers on exosomes are still misleading people as to their proper function & not helping people see that toxins and viruses are ONE & THE SAME!!! “Toxicant” is the new word for what the original meaning of a virus is, & “virus” is now the word for a so-called living germ (that has never been photographed & that CGI has us believing looks like a little spiky landmine) that actually doesn’t exist, has never existed, & will never exist, & therefore cannot cause disease/illness/death. Some are trying to pass off… Read more »

CannotFoolMe
CannotFoolMe
Jul 8, 2020 1:46 AM
Reply to  Arby

In order for people to understand the context, I will post the relevant videos here:
 
There Is No Virus – The Rooster in the River of Rats – Patrick Herbert
 
https://patrickherbert.org/2020/06/28/there-is-no-virus-the-rooster-in-the-river-of-rats/
 
 

 
So my previous reply to Arby will be understood within the context of these videos which establish the revelancy to this discussion and all of the related issues. It will be important for all to see my previous reply for this reason.
 
Thank you.

Arby
Arby
Jun 13, 2020 11:36 PM

“The principles have been altered almost beyond recognition by various researchers over the ensuing 130 years. But the changes concomitantly watered down the postulates. That’s why they’re still used today by most researchers seeking to robustly prove or disprove the existence of a pathogen and its exclusive relationship with a particular disease.”
 
That was very contradictory. Scientists now want a emasculated set of postulates because they are trying to robustly prove or disprove the existence of a pathogen?

richard cuthbert
richard cuthbert
Jun 29, 2020 7:19 PM
Reply to  Arby

i have to agree with ARBY…not i think what was wont to be said.

Rosemary Frei
Rosemary Frei
Jul 8, 2020 5:17 PM
Reply to  Arby

It was a bit awkwardly written, although it becomes clear if one thinks about it for a second or two: the original Koch’s postulates are still being used because the changes watered them down.

A leaf
A leaf
Jun 13, 2020 5:43 PM

Dear admin1
I am writing you this letter to inform you that there is a person in the comments section who is insulting me which would have been perfectly ok if i were to be able to wrote him back. I can not for some reason. his insult stays there open as a sky while my polite to a point replys dissepears. Is it because of a glitch ? i very much would like to continue my intellectual conversatio with that person. Thank you

“Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 11:10 AM
Reply to A leaf
They cancelled New Year you lying moron.”

Best regards
Yours truly
A leaf

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 8:19 PM
Reply to  A leaf

“Dear Admin…“

Let me get see if I understand what you are saying:

“ 😢😢😭😭😭…”

Correct me if I got that wrong.

Oh and I just replied to your response below and quoted FACTS.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30421-9/fulltext

Tommy
Tommy
Jun 13, 2020 10:55 AM

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (1).   More recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness” (2).   Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4572812/?fbclid=IwAR1jNHjkrE-WXjg7CBHtRdSIQ5QS9z69mHrtnik3rZhhI1L7EkxNy4rXPKw   and furthermore:   “The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms… Read more »

WorldParole
WorldParole
Jun 13, 2020 3:34 PM
Reply to  Tommy

Excellent! Thank you greatly!!

Arby
Arby
Jun 13, 2020 11:58 PM
Reply to  WorldParole

I’ll have to bookmark this and comb through it. Germ Theory is not, I must point out, a myth. A theory is a theory. It may refer to unicorns, but the theory itself is just a theory.

WorldParole
WorldParole
Jun 16, 2020 12:22 AM
Reply to  Arby

Phrenology was once a theory, too. 😉

Leo Angelovitzka
Leo Angelovitzka
Jun 29, 2020 6:27 AM
Reply to  Tommy

That’s very interesting about the lack of science in science. Reminds me of when I was an English teacher in Japan and part of my job was to vet the English used by doctors and scientists in their papers which were due for public presentation outside of Japan.
 
It was very hard for me to explain to them that their use of English wasn’t the only problem. Their theses were simply lacking in logic. Even I as a non-scientist could tell that they were producing unscientific works.
 
Also reminds me of a section in Michael Crichton’s book Travels in which he explains how peer reviewing actually works: not scientifically.

Tommy
Tommy
Jun 13, 2020 10:55 AM

Germ Theory: The Lynchpin Holding the Entire Hoax Together   There’s no such thing as a contagious “virus.” Unbelievable? Shocking? Yes, it is. Here are quotations from doctors, authors and experts that refute Louis Pasteur’s fraudulent “germ theory.” This is the lynchpin issue that holds this entire planned-demic together. When you disprove the theory that so-called viruses can be transmitted through the air from one person to another, the entire house of cards falls to the ground:   “The entire fabric of the germ theory of disease rests upon assumptions which not only have not been proved, but which are incapable of proof, and many of them can be proved to be the reverse of truth. The basic one of the unproven assumptions, wholly due to Pasteur, is the hypothesis that all the so-called infections and contagious disorders are caused by germs.” — M.L. Leverson, M.D.   “… Viruses are… Read more »

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 13, 2020 12:13 PM
Reply to  Tommy

Thank God a voice in the wilderness !

Tommy
Tommy
Jun 13, 2020 1:45 PM
Reply to  LeRuscino

I’m here. 🙂

Richard Son
Richard Son
Jun 13, 2020 1:40 PM
Reply to  Tommy

Turns out that Huxley’s prediction was slightly rosy. “The people” don’t apppear to be enjoying it very much but are simply resigned to their slavery because they’re too afraid to live or to die.

AliasM
AliasM
Jun 13, 2020 7:14 PM
Reply to  Richard Son

“Fun fact”, Aldouses brother, Julian (internationalist), was the first director of UNESCO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley

Arby
Arby
Jun 13, 2020 11:59 PM
Reply to  AliasM

Never examine your heroes, unless you’re prepared to be disappointed.

AliasM
AliasM
Jun 14, 2020 12:25 AM
Reply to  Arby

O, I’ve no problem with that.
Besides, personality cults and those in favour of them, make me itch.

P Kegs
P Kegs
Jun 12, 2020 4:44 PM

My understanding is reverse transcriptase occurs with retroviruses but not RNA viruses, is this wrong?

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:04 AM
Reply to  P Kegs

That is entirely correct, the SARS-CoV-2 virus, like many other RNA viruses use an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase to copy its genome and make all of the mRNA transcripts for its proteins.
 

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:05 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Sorry. I meant to write “That is entirely correct”

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Jun 22, 2020 3:12 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Edited for you. You can edit your comments for approx 15 minutes after you submit. A2

Richard Son
Richard Son
Jun 12, 2020 12:22 AM

Can we take the government to court over this? The lockdown measures are a crime against humanity, based on scientific fraud. Today I saw one of the yellow rags celebrating that BoJo has “allowed” old people to hug…. We cannot let this continue.

Germs Bond
Germs Bond
Jun 12, 2020 7:33 PM
Reply to  Richard Son

Probably in theory but our legal system is as bent as Westminster.

Pearly Q
Pearly Q
Jun 13, 2020 9:31 AM
Reply to  Richard Son

The Government IS being taken to Court over this! The Coronavirus Act 2020 is Null and Void as Koch’s Postulates have not been followed!
 
Please support the new legal action against the lockdown, social distancing, testing etc. in the UK that will lead to the failure of lockdowns, social distancing, testing and coronavirus vaccine policy around the world. The fight back starts here! https://click.pstmrk.it/2sm/www.crowdjustice.com%2Fcase%2Fthe-coronavirus-act-2020%2F/iwKdMQg/UnpD/peaXLgm8or/Y2FzZV9hcHByb3ZlZA

T Brites
T Brites
Jun 11, 2020 8:16 PM

Why waste time trying to prove something exists if almost the ENTIRE Herd of Morons believe it exists?!

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 11, 2020 8:24 AM

On average “allegedly” a virus is 1,000 Angstroms in size (a millionth of a mm) & an atom is 0.2 of an Angstrom meaning a virus is (c) 5000 Atoms.   There are (c) 204 Billion atoms in a single strand of DNA.   There are (c) 100 Trillion atoms in a human cell   When Luis Pasteur claimed the existence of viruses the electron microscope had not been invented.   Luis Pasteur’s private diaries where he wrote down everything (warts & all) were given by an ancestor to a US Museum in 1990’s because this family member no longer wanted to live with the fraud that had made the family so much money. Pasteur created an imaginary monster – how he injected dogs brains with puss to make them mad (rabies) is documented & can be found.   To date no virus has ever been photographed – everything thing… Read more »

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 9:14 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

Black holes and Neutron stars are bigger than a hair some are calculated to be about 20 miles in diameter –

Seen any photos of them?

The Higgs Boson is the biggest boson – it apparently exists for a very short time – ever

Seen a photo of one?

The double helix of DNA was not ‘seen’ or photographed when it was discovered.

The Corona virus has 30,000 ‘letters only’

Do you only believe photographs???

Did you ever do chemistry or physics or trigonometry or anything that didn’t require the proof of your own eyes of a photo???

Dave
Dave
Jun 11, 2020 9:37 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Lol

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 10:29 AM
Reply to  Dave

Don’t know what that random link to is – be nice if you could put information about it or a link to its information.

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 11, 2020 9:46 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

In essence you have accepted that no photo of a virus exists – Thanks! You got point 1.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 9:53 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

In essence – I don’t need to see a photo of oxygen to know I need to breathe it to live – do you?

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 11, 2020 11:00 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

OK so the photos are fake because nobody can isolate a virus (Ref Luc Montagnier & read his exact words on HIV for which he got a Nobel Prize).
 
Let’s assume these mythicals exist & have life remembering that a Human cell has (c) 100 Trillion Atoms & a Virus only (c) 5,000 Atoms.
 
Now can you show a believable video of a dog & human with rabies?

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 10:13 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

I’d like you to state you will have unprotected sex or blood transfusion with or from someone who tests positive with HIV.

Would you do that?

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 13, 2020 12:10 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Consider https://www.newstarget.com/2019-11-13-fda-admits-vaccines-may-spread-more-disease.html   Then consider https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/vaccine-development-spanish-flu   If you look deeper you will see that the Spanish Flu was a mass vaccination before science was ready.   Ask yourself is it plausible that of the very 1st cases of HIV that 3 out 5 people survived & then when they went on the 1st wave treatments they died like flies until today when you have a gigantic cash cow for Big Pharma?   My background is Molecular Science using non-cryogenics to separate atoms & molecules VIP in Oil & Gas. During the lockdown I thought to apply my science to the so called “Medical Science” & something does not add up on Viruses……….The deeper you look the smellier the rat becomes! I respect your opinion but if there was no money in it then would viruses exist ?   5,000 Atoms is not life ! I can’t get past this….… Read more »

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 14, 2020 12:42 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

30,ooo ‘letters’ in this virus genome – I’ll venture that consists of a lot more than 5,000 atoms – don’t you think your molecular science Knowledge is a tad inadequate?

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 14, 2020 6:23 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Then Viruses would be bigger – can’t have it both ways !
 
This is what should concern you when the mass vaccinations start?
 
http://news.mit.edu/2019/storing-vaccine-history-skin-1218

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:13 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

First, SARS-CoV-2 is 170nm (1700 A) in diameter. Second, that’s just a diameter. So you have to cube it. That is ~2.6 billion cubic Angstroms which is certainly large enough to fit a billion atoms, not just 5000 like you claimed.

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 13, 2020 12:15 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Read the comment from “Tommy” above – We need to know these things before we are all hung !

42.Answer
42.Answer
Jul 8, 2020 8:15 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Yes I would, but only if I fancy them. Sex-wise. Blood transfusion has to be my type too though…;-)

rachel
rachel
Jun 11, 2020 11:06 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

if you eat the wild soon u will be x vaxx cult. thxs.

Objective
Objective
Jun 11, 2020 11:02 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino
LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 11, 2020 12:21 PM
Reply to  Objective

Thanks, the size shown of 0.5um = 5,000 Atoms exactly as per my calculation.
 
The “theory” is that this is not a living organism because no known arrangement of that few atoms can be alive but is actually a fragment of dead RNA or DNA.
 
This is not proof in anyway they 5000 Atoms are a living mobile invasive virus. It has never to date been shown.
 
Representations such as below are pure fantasy! Colour does not exist in Electron Photos.
 
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.13Y4g4AeLjP9FvmYiCktNQHaDf%26pid%3DApi&f=1

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 11, 2020 1:36 PM
Reply to  Objective

Nanobes are bigger than 5000 Atoms but nobody can agree they meet the definition of “Life”
 
life līf

  • n.The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism.
  • n.The characteristic state or condition of a living organism.

 

Linda
Linda
Jun 13, 2020 2:22 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

Never seen so much BS for a long time. There are numerous photos of Viruses, indeed, these were among the reasons why the electron microscope was developed. By “artists impressions” you may mean false colouring of the black and white images gained from EM, necessary to show the different areas more clearly. From 1939, images have been taken by EM of Viruses, the first one being of tobacco mosaic virus. Viruses have been discovered and typed using EM over the last 80 years. Norovirus was discovered by EM use, so was Ebola, in Zaire, in 1976. But it is nonsense to say that if you cannot see the object, then you cannot photograph it! That’s the whole point of EM – to photograph the extremely tiny, using electrons that have a far greater resolving power than visible light. I think people spreading rubbish like this should be prosecuted.

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jun 13, 2020 8:22 AM
Reply to  Linda

Nobody has ever isolated a live virus – FACT – Please refute with science
 
5,000 Atoms have never shown life – FACT – Please refute with science
 
Luis Pasteur diaries show he was a fake – FACT
 
So what are these images EM claim to show & why do people get sick – It’s a reasonable question ? YOU CAN PHOTOGRPAH EM – Don’t get so upset.
 
DO YOU KNOW THAT HARD EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE SO-CALLED SPANISH FLU WAS THE 1ST MASS VACCINATION ROLL OUT! Started in Kansas BTW not Spain. There was a mass cover up & they used the name “Spain” to throw people off the track.

LeRuscino
LeRuscino
Jul 5, 2020 12:55 PM
Reply to  Mister Bump

Can’t be both – Why the fakery?comment image

Arby
Arby
Jun 14, 2020 12:02 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

As with prehistoric ape-men.

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 2:53 AM
Reply to  LeRuscino

Completely false. I worked on x-ray crystal structures of icosahedral viruses 28 years ago. Electron microscopy preserves biological samples ALL THE TIME. The tobacco mosaic virus is an RNA virus shaped like a rod and is a classic model of biological self-assembly. It was used as an internal length standard for EM images.

Cora
Cora
Nov 2, 2020 10:28 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Actually, viruses DO exist but in these forms: https://www.etymonline.com/word/virus. Examples: https://www.thoughtco.com/toxic-chemical-definition-609284. It’s very sad that scientists & doctors keep confusing people about viruses & exosomes. They aren’t the same. Viruses are non-living toxins that can cause disease/illness/death, as can living bacteria/parasites, & exosomes are what are released by the cells to clean them up. A lot of the people publishing papers on exosomes are still misleading people as to their proper function & not helping people see that toxins and viruses are ONE & THE SAME!!! “Toxicant” is the new word for what the original meaning of a virus is, & “virus” is now the word for a so-called living germ (that has never been photographed & that CGI has us believing looks like a little spiky landmine) that actually doesn’t exist, has never existed, & will never exist, & therefore cannot cause disease/illness/death. Some are trying to pass off… Read more »

Delta Gee
Delta Gee
Jun 11, 2020 5:22 AM

Absolutely on the mark and 100% correct. I do not want to steal you thunder but this is a fact that should be obvious to any Infectious Disease Specialist. So why is it not discussed or being pointed out. Basic Microbiology. Anyone with a Bachelor’s Degree in Microbiology knows this fact. Its a major question on all the exams for the first year students.
 
I love this quote and those who want to maintain their sanity need to repeat it every day like a Mantra.
 
You can fool almost everyone all the time, but you can never fool reality.

BDBinc
BDBinc
Jun 11, 2020 3:38 AM

No deaths from a totally fake ” new” disease called COVID.
 

R Anand
R Anand
Jun 11, 2020 3:21 AM

I have been wondering about what the medics/media means when they talk about asymptomatic people (those who were ‘tested positive’ for sars-cov-2.

If a body is not producing any symptoms that, to my mind, means there is no problem in the body. So, when a rt-pcr test tells a asymptomatic person that you have ‘sars-cov-2’ virus it is a lie. There is no mystery of how that person is ‘infected’ with a ‘virus’ but not showing any symptoms.

It simply confirms that the test is detecting not a ‘killer virus’ but one of any harmless exosome.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 9:56 AM
Reply to  R Anand

You may not show any symptoms of a STD after having sex but it doesn’t mean you won’t infect your husband or wife with that STD.

Understand now?

R Gajra
R Gajra
Jun 11, 2020 3:59 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

If you don’t have symptoms but a test kit is telling you that you have a STD bacteria/organism/’virus’ then the test kit would most likely be lying.
 
If the test kit is also telling your wife/partner that he/she has the same organism and if he/she shows symptoms of the disease associated with that organism then it is likely that the symptoms are due to some other known/unknown toxins/disease and not due to that particular organism.
 
The tests are as good as useless.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 14, 2020 12:45 AM
Reply to  R Gajra

You need to at least talk to an STD doctor if not actually get tested if you have been labouring under that understanding. Soon.

R Gajra
R Gajra
Jun 14, 2020 4:25 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

You brought up the STD example. Onus is on you to share your understanding after speaking to your STD doctor.

In case you seek better understanding of viruses, diseases, toxins, this is one of several good places to start –> https://harvoa-med.blogspot.com/2019/04/measlesbrklyn.html

Rahul G
Rahul G
Jun 12, 2020 7:42 AM
Reply to  R Anand

Nice to find there are quite a few people who are as baffled by the ‘tests’ mania as I am. Around the first week of April I wrote emails to several scientists at the Indian Council of Medical Research and to bureaucrats in India’s Ministry of Health to ask, what will the tests you have ordered look for and how? But by then the wagon was rolling. The media was already producing scary graphs and the ministry was producing “daily dashboards”. The words ‘PCR’, ‘antibody’, ‘antigen’ were flying around with no-one the wiser as to what did any of it mean when a test produced ‘positive’. Was ‘positive’ good (I am healthy and resistant) or was ‘negative’ good (I show no sign of an infection and am healthy)? No-one cared to answer. The media in India – completely unchecked by the administration, I should emphasise – rolled from one scare-mongering… Read more »

R Anand
R Anand
Jun 12, 2020 12:23 PM
Reply to  Rahul G

Yes, Rahul. I agree with you on the the sheer nonsensical and tragic manner in which the the ‘virus’ tests are being carried by India’s health ministry, its prime minister’s office and the other authorities in the states.
 
Am glad that you actually wrote to ICMR and sought a response. I have been wanting to do the same but haven’t yet except share the perspectives from here in Off-G and other places to people & mediapersons in India through the social media.
 
Lets hope more Indians join in the effort. The insanity and the panic levels among educated but unthinking elite-middleclass Indians must come down sooner rather than later.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 10, 2020 8:07 PM

Such obstinacy and enough braying flat earther types ready to keep shilling gobbledygook so read real science and understand – before you start lining up for the magical thinking purveyed here. “ The Evolution of Koch’s Postulates Jonathan Cohen, in Infectious Diseases (Fourth Edition), 2017 Conclusions – and a Note of Caution Koch’s postulates were invaluable at the time they were developed and remain largely valid for a relatively small number of defined circumstances in which bacteria can be precisely tied to the cause of a particular clinical syndrome. But in a world in which viruses cause cancer and noncultivable bacteria can be demonstrated by molecular probes, Koch’s postulates are no longer fit for purpose. What is more, used uncritically they have the potential to mislead.16 Their main purpose now is to provide a framework to ensure that scientific rigor is applied when proposing an organism as the cause of… Read more »

rachel
rachel
Jun 10, 2020 11:12 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

wtf? you didnt manage to say pseudoscience in your rant.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 9:17 AM
Reply to  rachel

It’s a quote.

You’d realise that if you bothered to look before gibbing off, dimbo.

deninbtnb
deninbtnb
Jun 11, 2020 10:35 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Just rude.

ThereisaGod
ThereisaGod
Jun 11, 2020 2:17 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Bullsh*t.   The PCR test (apart from being ridiculously unreliable, as the 40+ page CDC document on the test admits) does NOT identify a virus. It identifies configurations of RNA, some of which are selected as “identifiers” and then ATTRIBUTED to an imaginary entity that establishment “experts” call a virus … that no doctor can demonstrates actually exists.   The same holds true for any “viral” illness, as ‘German New Medicine’ has been declaring for decades.   The biomedical “germ” model of disease is founded on a fraud, as at least one biographer has claimed its inventor, Louis Pasteur, admitted on his deathbed.Pasteur admitted that his great rival in the field, Bechamp, had been right and he was wrong.   A century ago particular bacteria, labelled as the “germs” that cause cholera, were isolated from a cholera patient and multiplied in a Petrie dish. The Doctor concerned (and his assistant)… Read more »

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 11, 2020 9:58 AM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

You probably refuse to wash your hands after wiping your arse too I bet.

ThereisaGod
ThereisaGod
Jun 11, 2020 10:38 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

The kind of reply I was expecting from a dirty little moron.

ariel
ariel
Jun 11, 2020 11:15 AM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

Your summation was excellent, BUT DON’T FEED THE TROLLS. It just encourages them. The ENTIRE ALLOPATHIC SYSTEM is based on a) Rockefeller ‘medicine’ petrochem based drugs and social control, b) fallacies about the alleged ‘immune system’ which is a measurement of how in touch and IN LOVE with the life force, NOT the life FARCE you are.
We are not in Kansas any more, Toto. We NEVER WERE.

ThereisaGod
ThereisaGod
Jun 11, 2020 1:38 PM
Reply to  ariel

Thanks for that. Like the last line.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 10:19 AM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

So you’d be happy to have unprotected sex and blood transfusion from HIV positive persons would you???

That really would be moronic.

It may even be dirty or downright filthy if you do it right!
🤣🤣

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 14, 2020 12:47 AM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

I should have prefaced it with Bull Shit!

Riccotelaly
Riccotelaly
Jun 11, 2020 3:13 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Why are you angry – it is the classic response by the believers. I won’t get into the weeds as I admit I don’t know – but my expertise is in law. Those who choose to diminish, insult and censor are those with no case. That is a truism in law – avoid the details at all costs. When the heads of Oxford, Stanford, literally thousands of professionals whose assessment is this is a nasty virus but fully within the CDC’s seasonal range are censored and removed from social media, not invited to talk on MSM – then I know what I am seeing. We saw it WMD’s – bail outs in 2008 – “the sky will fall unless…. fill in the blanks”. All major indicators of a fraud. Don’t need to be a doctor to see that. When government doctors are called “authorities” – whereas those with CV’s a… Read more »

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 10:42 AM
Reply to  Riccotelaly

You ain’t seen me angry, bro! This is just fun propaganda bursting of the narrative manufacturers and pushers and their trolley bus loads of paid posters – with maybe an occasional naive but otherwise innocent reader led to their lair and boudoir getting in my firing line – which I really regret and try very hard to avoid. What you see and class as anger is merely a progression of the discussion- which requires keeping track of, as THEY try to revert to the narrative by refusing to accept the facts that counter their fake proposition. Mostly they operate using a script – obviously since they are not paid to think but to spread the narrative. I’m pretty certain now, that when certain ‘senior’ Members of the 77th and their cohort here, have tried to go off-piste with me , they have inevitably gone off the edge! The modus operandi… Read more »

Bill Rodger
Bill Rodger
Jun 13, 2020 11:32 AM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Dungroanin
That was a dramatic change of ton and an admiral attempt at distraction to divert off topic. You appear to be very familiar with this 77th brigade.

You have not countered any of the points made by Riccotelely or Thereisagod. Since you make out that you are a font of knowledge then I’d be particularly interested in reading your counter arguments to the points they raised.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Jun 13, 2020 8:04 PM
Reply to  Bill Rodger

Yes yes Bill, I got a bunch of ‘tones’ for a bunch of scripted narratives deployed here btl.

Surprised? I don’t care.
Engage with their narrative management? Nah … I’d rather eat glass.

You can read my counter arguments on many a story and thread over the many months. Go look.

I would point but the shitty comment system doesn’t allow us to look up our past comments or replies to them. Even after the ‘upgrade’.

Riccotelaly
Riccotelaly
Jun 13, 2020 1:46 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

er – I could cite Mercer’s lyrics to Moon River – Two drifters off to see the world…. no better yet – you took the part that once was my heart so Why not take all of me.

Binra
Binra
Jun 13, 2020 3:06 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Well you can see it however you choose, but what is ‘THEY’?   You read as a reactive set against ‘They are lying to us’ without giving witness to the truth you insinuate you are protecting.   If I cant (wont) agree with you – am I one of ‘THEM’?   I posit that cognitive dissonance does not know that it is cognitive dissonace. But love knows itself in the sharing. And I dont mean mutual stroking and reinforcement.   You said you had already answered me here in another post – so I come here and find its all about ‘THEM’.   If I hadnt just had a coffee machine moment with you I would have to meet the thought that you are one of these 77 brigade operating the protection of narrative control as the right of elitists – who pull the levers of social controls by which… Read more »

Riccotelaly
Riccotelaly
Jun 14, 2020 3:31 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

There has been censorship of opposing positions of doctors and scientists who disagree. Both the CDC and WHO are largely funded by Big Parma and the Health Insurance industry. Hence the schizophrenic responses of these organizations battling responsible messages vs corporatist messages. Vaccines are manufactured by private corps without full transparency. You have missed ground zero – corporate science is not science as it meets none of the rigor of transparency. Are you on board with oil company global warming scientists? But you are on board with big pharma scientists working to create corporate property. Are you innumerate? Using lousy CDC numbers and allowing for Covid19 deaths that are in fact Covid19 lockdown deaths – the numbers are in the yearly range. 2017 650,000 died – no Marshall law 1968 over a million – world Population 1/2 of today – no Marshall law 1957 over a million – world Population… Read more »

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:33 AM
Reply to  Riccotelaly

There were exactly two reasons for a widespread lockdown: 1) inadequate testing capabilities, and 2) preventing an overrun of ICU capacity. If the USA federal administration has been prepared and acted quickly on making tests available, the chance of hospitals ICU being overrun would have diminished. Without tests, there was no way to tell where the virus was spreading until 1-2 weeks after (when people would get sick). Other countries responded quickly and the citizens complied with broad testing, contact tracing, and strict but specific quarantining.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Jun 22, 2020 4:21 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Since you project a knowledge of things viral and things scientific in your replies here, please be aware that you invite an added level of scrutiny of your scientific approach.
 
Please won’t you take full account of all the facts, rather than make blanket declarations about this virus? Honestly, that time really has passed, there are many, many holes in the narrative which require answers now. If you want to engage in more rewarding chat, please check out the coronavirus section on this website and read the many, many pieces we have published dealing with a huge range of things relating to covid and lockdown. Thanks. A2

Richard Son
Richard Son
Jun 13, 2020 1:56 PM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

There was a recent study on the safety of 5G by a European body of “experts” and it was announced in The Guardian of the lies (with a “safe ” verdict of course). There was no mention of whether anyone looked at the effects of mobile telecomms tech on smaller creatures, or indeed human DNA.

Binra
Binra
Jun 13, 2020 4:05 PM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

While I am attentive and involved in an ‘electric Universe’ idea – i am not putting all my eggs into another ‘man made threat’ basket. Though we are effectively denying our own Life Support under a false sense of self-protection.   Nor am I discounting toxic EM exposures by negligence, indifference or design. But I see a synergy of ’causes’ in the realm of cause and effect (world) as part of the defended identity in effect that can be seen as part of why some are susceptible and others not – to all kinds of things – and the attempt to fit everything into general terms as the World, is not subject specific enough.   Anyway, that is the part I noticed a dissonance with in your post.   If 5G AND bioweapons were involved in the Covid 19 event – it still operated within and apparently instead of a… Read more »

ThereisaGod
ThereisaGod
Jun 13, 2020 4:23 PM
Reply to  Binra

It’s not a matter of “all eggs on one basket”. The issue is that one major basket (possible cause) is being determinedly ignored … indeed excluded, forbidden, declared taboo by those that claim to be protecting us.
Why would they do that with so much historical scientific evidence recorded demonstrating the danger?

“The protection of the people is the usual alibi of tyrants” Albert Camus
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to control.”
H.L.Mencken

Those who rule over us don’t care about us THE TINIEST BIT. When you know this the wilfull ignoring of the EMF radiation issue is a mere detail and the only reason to raise it is to emphasise the larger point.

We are governed by lying fiends.

RyanL
RyanL
Jun 22, 2020 3:25 AM
Reply to  ThereisaGod

The fact that this ridiculous, insane comment gets 29 upvotes and 4 downvoted tells you exactly the kindness of nutjob that is reading this garbage.

ThereisaGod
ThereisaGod
Jun 22, 2020 8:55 AM
Reply to  RyanL

Read “The Invisible Rainbow” by Arthur Firstenberg, you nitwit.
The fact that you cannot demonstrate (or even argue against) this “insanity” but, rather, offer familiar abuse … speaks volumes regarding the desperation of media-addicted establishmentarians, devoted (as you are) to the outpourings of lying fiends … [not that political class REPEATERS are even aware that they are forwarding falsehoods to the subject audience].

kevin king
kevin king
Jun 10, 2020 5:55 PM

At last someone pointing out the Virology is a cargo cult science. Koch’s postulates have not been satisfied for ANY virus.
An excellent demolition of the SARS papers from 2003 by Andrew Kaufman MD
 



No longer available….what a surprise. The truth must be supressed at all cost.
Here he points out the obvious flaws in the entire hoax,not yet taken down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHREpsETpTM
 
As Kaufman points out here they never isolated the virus, but simply identified a stretch of RNA that they assumed to be the virus (taken from a sample contaminated with stuff like antibotics that are known to produce exosomes) and claimed this was a novel virus. Pure nonsense of course. But don’t ask the sheep to use their brains.
 

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Jun 10, 2020 7:13 PM
Reply to  kevin king

“Koch’s postulates have not been satisfied for ANY virus”.
 
Maybe any human virus. They were satisified for tobacco mosaic virus, over a century ago.
 
Of course the new-found ability to sequence viral DNA and RNA complicates the issue. Now that is feasible, it should be done whenever possible to make absolutely sure that the virus is positively identified. The symptoms of TMV are a lot more unique and distinctive than those of “Covid-19”.

Binra
Binra
Jun 13, 2020 7:15 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

I have read differing accounts of the percentage match of presumed fragments of presumed unique identifying strands of RNA and DNA material. The ability to move the goalposts is not always obvious to those who think a test is a test is a test.   There is also the matter of increasing expert processes working within corporately funded environments that cannot be simply made transparent and so can only be taken on face value.   Along with the ability to splice and clone lab versions for whatever reasons. I read of capacity to ‘fake’ human DNA. there was a time when a photograph was considered proof.   I am not much aware of tobacco mosaic virus, but I see it was the first such discovery. Most of my reading on this has been in the context of fraud – such as Koch’s Tuberkulin.   I have a sense of biological… Read more »

rachel
rachel
Jun 10, 2020 10:59 PM
Reply to  kevin king

it is all pretty irrelevant. they admit most people r not effected so right there you can dismiss causation. it is regenerative detox that solves things.

rachel
rachel
Jun 11, 2020 12:07 AM
Reply to  rachel

say there was car fumes the only way it could kill people instantly would be in an enclosed space. that would be the factor to adress urgently. if you didnt know if it was fumes in enclosed space or just enclosed space you would know enclosed space was priorityto look at. you wouldnt waste time with fumes on beach.

rachel
rachel
Jun 11, 2020 12:44 AM
Reply to  rachel

it would be like if someone claimed there was a new star responible n not to look at enclosed spaces. the syptoms occred b4 the new star and were associated with enclosed spaces not stars.

Objective
Objective
Jun 11, 2020 6:17 AM
Reply to  kevin king
Reg
Reg
Jun 10, 2020 4:54 PM

Jon Rappoport’s latest in his tireless campaign against stupidity.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/06/10/covid-fake-study-fake-drug-fake-land-of-loons/

Tim Drayton
Tim Drayton
Jun 10, 2020 5:09 PM
Reply to  Objective

Thanks for posting. I would urge all decent human beings to watch this video. Something very wrong, amounting to murder, is going on in New York hospitals and the same thing could well be happening everywhere ventilators are being used as the intervention of first choice with suspected Covid patients.
 
 

JudyJ
JudyJ
Jun 10, 2020 5:23 PM
Reply to  Tim Drayton

Tim,
 
I agree with all you say. I feel sure that similar travesties must have been happening in the UK and other countries. I hope global governments have set aside sufficient money to meet compensation claims. The drug user who was the sole escapee from the ventilator death programme in New York had better be careful that he doesn’t die from an ‘overdose’ as I am sure he or someone he knows will soon get to hear about this nurse’s account.

JudyJ
JudyJ
Jun 10, 2020 5:18 PM
Reply to  Objective

Objective
 
As @Tim Drayton has just said, thanks for posting this very disturbing testimony. @Charlotte Russe posted it earlier on the “95%” thread and it had crossed my mind to repeat post it on this thread, such is its significance, but you beat me to it! The nurse confirms many suspicions but it is still distressing to have the details presented first hand, recorded undercover and so explicitly as to leave little room for doubt as the validity of the claims. It’s another video that is sure to be removed by YouTube sooner rather than later.

Aldous Hexley
Aldous Hexley
Jun 10, 2020 8:58 PM
Reply to  Objective

Thank you for drawing attention to this important video, and thanks also to John Kirby and this nurse interviewed.

Richard Son
Richard Son
Jun 13, 2020 1:59 PM
Reply to  Objective

Wow… the medical zombies basically murdered a whole bunch of people in hospitals. Those ventilators are proper frankenstein science… not even that. They are obvious murder machines.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Jun 10, 2020 3:43 PM

Great article unfortunately no one is listening . The authorities are now into the disgustingly facile patting each other on the back for stopping the pandemic phase of this fraud while assuring the sheeple that it will be worse in Phase 2 this fall.

P R Ivy
P R Ivy
Jun 10, 2020 9:01 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

Ceredigion County Council invented a “gold command” to deal with this idiot shit, they are patting themselves on the back for preventing the virus from causing the deaths it never was going to cause in the first place, a few of us are determined to campaign at local and national elections to try and get these cretins out of public office.   I am finding I am getting more and more uptight the longer this idiot shit goes on, I am going to assume I am not alone and if we can all find away to channel our frustrations and pent up agression in a positive way that kicks back at the absolute and utter cretins who not only live in our areas but in our streets too. all the better, it is getting spookier by the day as they seem incapable of absorbing reality which in turn has me… Read more »

Gary Weglarz
Gary Weglarz
Jun 10, 2020 2:33 PM

The excellent Swiss Propaganda Research site has just published it’s monthly updated information and links for June. This material is worth sharing widely with friends, family and others you know who have bought into the hysteria narratives of MSM.
 
https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

Don
Don
Jun 10, 2020 4:15 PM
Reply to  Gary Weglarz

Regarding treatments in the Swiss Propaganda Research update, they left out an important development: a group of critical care physicians has found an effective treatment for Covid-19 using methylprednisolone, ascorbic acid, and heparin. https://covid19criticalcare.com/

JudyJ
JudyJ
Jun 10, 2020 6:10 PM
Reply to  Don

Madagascar and several other African countries have been using a well-known and trusted herbal plant-based remedy, artemisia, apparently with success. It’s been in use for generations to treat other conditions safely and with success. The WHO tried to discredit it recently saying it must not be used as it is unproven and potentially dangerous (familiar narrative). But the Madagascan President stood up to them, told them where to go and said that they were going to continue using it irrespective of the WHO’s instruction.

Willem
Willem
Jun 10, 2020 6:20 PM
Reply to  Don

Heparin is an anticoagulant and Covid19=venous thromboembolism (that needs treatment with anticoagulants as is known for more than 60 years)

So that explains a lot!

Cheezilla
Cheezilla
Jun 11, 2020 5:21 PM
Reply to  Willem

I’d spotted that.
 
I seem to recollect that, early in the outbreak, the use of steriods was strongly advised against.
Am I correct (my memory not being what it was)?
 

bob
bob
Jun 10, 2020 2:28 PM

A very intelligent and unassuming woman, Zoe tells it like it is about anti-social distancing
 
https://www.zoeharcombe.com/2020/06/social-distancing-the-evidence/

Objective
Objective
Jun 10, 2020 2:53 PM
Reply to  bob

After the mask article a few days ago in Off-G I consulted my wife (30 year experienced RGN) for her perspective, on the pros/cons of masks. She asserts her training has always been that (surgical) face masks are only worn in surgery or if dealing with infectious patients BUT in the latter instance (surgical) masks are only beneficial for 10 minutes before they become ineffective! She added nothing beats washing your hands. And shes pretty strict with hygene she wouldn’t wear her uniform outside of hospital.
 
She tells me PPE at work is a joke, even if it were necessary what they are supplied is worthless.

Mike Ellwood
Mike Ellwood
Jun 10, 2020 5:11 PM
Reply to  Objective

I had to take my mother to a hospital (large, modern teaching hospital) today for a routine ultrasound scan. (She’d been having regular scans prior to the Coronapanic; this is the first since then; they seem to have opened up for more general business.   In view of https://rcni.com/nursing-standard/newsroom/news/covid-19-surgical-masks-compulsory-all-hospital-staff-england-15-june-161646   …we thought we’d better wear masks, and gloves also, just in case.   I was surprised that almost no one else was wearing a mask; at least, in the general areas.   The nurse who came out to take her in for her scan was indeed wearing one, as you might expect, as personal contact was necessary as part of the scan.   And no doubt others, away in treatment areas or whatever, behind closed doors. But in reception, corridors, etc, etc, and in the courtyard outside where there were plenty of staff coming and going, hardly a one wearing… Read more »

Watt
Watt
Jun 10, 2020 6:10 PM