The Continuation of the Virus – No Virus Discussion

Countering Arguments in Recent Virus Affirming Articles and a Remark about Flat Earth

Recently a few articles came out questioning the Viruses don’t exist arguments. One of them is by Doctors for Covid Ethics, written by Michael Palmer MD and Sukharit Bhakdi MD here:

https://doctors4covidethics.org/do-viruses-exist/#ref10

They write that the baby has been thrown out with the bath water and indeed, some misguided zealots now claim germs don’t exist at all which is absurd. Bacteria, Parasites and Fungi have been clearly identified microscopically and proven to cause disease by truly isolating them and then following the Koch postulates. Anybody who ever took probiotic supplements will know that bacteria are real. We have billions of them living symbiotically in and on our bodies.  Claiming these germs don’t exist is (purposefully?) shutting down the discussion about the existence of viruses and making it appear blatantly ludicrous.

I also want to make clear that I have great respect for Dr. Sukharit Bhakdi. He has shown tremendous courage coming out in the early days after the roll out of the fake vaccines warning about their dangers. In no way do I want to diminish his contribution during the plandemic.

The article criticizes the stance that pure isolation of virus particles is necessary to begin proving their existence. It lists the following reasons:

1. The particles of many viruses have very characteristic shapes that are not likely to be confused with any particles produced by living cells, or with debris left behind by dead cells.

2. There are many biochemical methods for characterizing viral particles, and moreover for establishing that they contain genetic information characteristic of the virus rather than the host cell culture.

3. Not all viruses can easily be grown in cell cultures. Those which cannot are indeed routinely propagated in, and directly isolated from, laboratory animals.

A good example of such an animal study was published by Theil et al. It concerned the isolation of a novel virus from gnotobiotic, i.e. otherwise germ-free pigs.

The abstract reads:

A rotavirus-like virus (RVLV) was isolated from a diarrheic pig from an Ohio swine herd. This virus infected villous enterocytes throughout the small intestine of gnotobiotic pigs and induced an acute, transitory diarrhea. Complete virions [viral particles] were rarely observed in the intestinal contents of infected animals … The genome of the porcine RVLV was composed of 11 discrete segments of double-stranded RNA … that produced an electropherotype distinct from the genome electropherotypes of reovirus, rotavirus, and porcine pararotavirus. Porcine RVLV was antigenically unrelated to rotavirus, porcine pararotavirus, or reovirus but was antigenically related to a bovine RVLV.

The full PDF of the study can be downloaded here: https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jcm.21.3.340-345.1985

Let’s look at this study and ask some questions:

How was that rotavirus-like virus (RVLV) isolated from the pig?
According to the study they took intestinal contents of a pig with diarrhea. The study further describes that “The RVLV was initially detected, along with a rotavirus, in the intestinal contents of a gnotobiotic pig orally inoculated with a bacteria-free filtrate of the original specimen”.

Unfortunately, they don’t mention how RVLV or a rotavirus was “detected” in the inoculated pig. The study describes that they did genome electropherotyping to find rotavirus. Now, how do they know what the genome of a rotavirus is if that was done in the same way as with all the other “viruses” that were not properly isolated and mixed in with cells, bovine serum albumin and cells of the diseased animal and then compared to genetic sequences of other “viruses” not isolated in the same way?

They then gave pigs who were immune to rotavirus RVLV (how? Intestinal contents of the sick pig?). And how did they know these pigs were immune? The reasoning is that these immune pigs would fight off the rotavirus and only leave the RVLV behind. They then took what came out of these immune pigs and gave it to pigs that are susceptible to rotavirus and did another genome electropherotyping which showed no rotavirus genome. This meant that it only contained RVLV they claim. Besides, how did they know the other pigs were susceptible to rotavirus?

Then they prepared an antiserum by injecting a pig recovering from having been given intestinal contents recovered from a rotavirus susceptible pig in the prior experiment with intestinal content of a pig supposedly sick with RVLV. The idea here is that the recovering pig had antibodies to the RVLV and would create more of them if it were reinfected with intestinal contents supposedly only containing RVLV. These antibodies/antisera were then recovered from that pig. They then attached a fluorescent material to this antiserum.

Now they gave 11 pigs intestinal contents that was free of rotavirus as it came from the non-immune pigs that showed no rotavirus in the genome electropherotyping, but supposedly contained RVLV. And they had one pig as a control, mind you only ONE pig as the control.

They base this experiment on the assumption that the first pig had RVLV and Rotavirus and the Rotavirus was eliminated by giving that pig’s poop to other pigs that were immune to Rotavirus to weed out the Rotavirus. It’s then the assumption that the poop of these pigs only contained RVLV and they checked this by giving that poop to pigs that were susceptible to rotavirus but then no such virus genome was found. Again, this is based on the assumption that the rotavirus genome was actually known and verified by conducting the standard virology experiments using cell cultures, bovine serum albumin, cells from the diseased animal, observing a cytopathic effect and so on which is exactly what critics of the virology methods have been pointing out as not being able to prove the existence of a virus.

They butchered the pigs and did exams of their intestines histologically (tissue under the microscope), immunofluororescence to see if the fluorescent antiserum attaches to anything and electronmicroscopy.  Here they describe how tissues were prepared for electronmicroscopy:

Segments of the duodenum, jejunumn, and ileum (different parts of intestines) were rinsed with saline to remove adherent mucus and residual intestinal contents and fixed in a solution containing 3% glutaraldehyde, 2% paraformaldehyde, and 1.5% acrolein in 0.1 M collidine buffer at pH 7.3. Fixed tissues were then dehydrated in an ethanol-Freon series and gently vacuum dried (8). Dried specimens were sputter coated with ca. 15 nm of platinum, viewed, and photographed' with an ISI-40 scanning electron microscope.

You need not understand all that, but it makes clear that the tissues are subjected to extreme treatments with chemicals, dehydration and vacuum drying. This kind of treatment of formerly living tissues will cause alterations and artifacts that are then interpreted as a virus. If you did this to your finger, it would no longer look like a finger but something completely different.

They checked if the fluorescent antiserum was bound to viral particles under an electron microscope.

They also did electrophoresis of viral double stranded RNA or let’s say of RNA from intestinal contents and from cell cultures. The cell cultures were checked for the cytopathic effects which critics of virology have demonstrated as not being able to prove infection. Trypsin was added to the cell culture. This dissolves proteins and will create artifacts not normally seen in living cells and their components and will then look like round spiky things. It then becomes an explanation of something foreign is in the cell which must be a virus. No, it’s part of a cell that was altered because of the addition of Trypsin.

The results section describes the pigs getting sick. Well, they were given other pigs’ poop to eat, so that’s really no surprise. Poop is what the body excretes because it’s waste. Eating waste will make anyone sick, virus or no virus.

Immunofluorescent staining showed intestinal villi (tube like protrusions of the intestinal mucosa) glowing. This is interpreted as the antiserum attaching to the RVLV in these villi. But if we go back and look at how the antiserum was determined to be against RVLV then we need to question whether the first pig had such a virus as this was never proven in the first place. It takes us back to the first question of how they isolated this RVLV from the original sick pig. The antiserum will have attached to something, but there is no evidence of what that something is. Could these antibodies have been made against a toxin or proteins from the first pig that are foreign to the antiserum-producing pig?

The histopathological exam only showed some sloughing of intestinal cells at the tips of the villi which really doesn’t mean much as this is happens as a normal process in these tissues as they renew themselves frequently.

Electron microscopy showed changes in tissues which isn’t surprising after the treatment these tissues goes through. The article claims the uninfected pig was normal but then goes on to describe abnormal findings in the villi as well. Immune electron microscopy showed particles aggregated by fluorescent antiserum. Again, we need to go back and see how this antiserum was created in the first place. It’s based on the assumption that there was a RVLV in the first pig.

Finally, cell cultures showed no cytopathic effect and no infected cells were detected.

The article then goes on to state that viruses have a diverse look under the electron microscope, and an even finer distinction is made by genome analysis of virus isolates. As stated earlier, the procedural torture tissues are subjected to in order to prepare them electron microscopy will create artifacts of varies forms and shapes. Certain cell organelles, when captured in a cross section will look round. It’s like taking a round wood stick and looking at it from the top. You won’t see the long stick, but a round slice.

Regarding the genetic sequences, the arguments have been laid out in detail that without true isolation of a virus, we don’t know what the origin is of the genetic sequence as the material sequenced is - as per virology’s standards - taken from a mix of cell culture, patient sample, bovine serum albumin.

The article then goes on to say that symptoms of illness help us distinguish viruses and mentions for example polio. Intoxication with DDT will cause polio symptoms. The problem is that as soon as a virus is blamed for an illness, all searches for other causes stop. Just because we don’t know what causes an illness, or rather compilation of specific symptoms, does not mean that it’s caused by a virus.

Lastly, the authors claim that SARS-CoV2 was isolated but the first study which was a review of studies refers to cell cultures and the main diagnostic tool used was the PCR Test which has been debunked as a test ad nauseam. *

The second study presented as proof of virus isolation also used the PCR Test and Vero6 cell cultures. This method of virus isolation, which really is not true isolation, is exactly what critics of the virus theory have explained as not being a valid method to prove the existence of a virus. The study also mentions seroconversion, meaning the patients produced antibodies. They did, but to what exactly?

It’s a bit surprising that they use these two studies as proof of virus isolation when these methods are exactly the ones that have been debunked.

For more information, read my prior substacks:

https://anitabaxasmd.substack.com/p/the-questionable-virus-theory

https://anitabaxasmd.substack.com/p/gas-lighting-and-misdirection-with

Another article published on Alliance for Natural Health discusses both sides (it’s rather one sided in my opinion) of the arguments here:

https://www.anhinternational.org/news/anh-feature-does-the-virus-exist-a-critical-need-for-resolution

The writer starts out by stating he is neutral and simply lists both sides of the arguments. Reading through the article though it becomes clear very fast, that he believes in viruses and ultimately compares “virus deniers” with flat earthers.

It lists as virus proponents Dr. Peter McCullough, Ryan Cole and Dr. Robert Malone. The first is closely tied to the Wellness Alliance whose main business is selling supplements to combat the spike protein. No virus – no spike protein- no sales. The second is a denier of the existence of Graphene oxide in the jabs, even going so far as to rip the microphone out of Dr. Astrid Stückelberger’s hands when it was her turn to give a presentation. The latter in my opinion is not trustworthy for many reasons.

The article too claims the virus has been isolated and the deniers claim that it’s because the genome found is compared to genomes in a computer database that this isn’t valid. That is not the reason. The reason is the methods by which these genomes were obtained in the first place, and they all come from cell cultures with a multitude of genetic material in them from various sources.

He goes on to list all the arguments by virologists that have been called into question with good reason by the critics.

Is the Flu contagious?

Regarding contagion of the flu, I recently read an old book from the late 70ies about disease from space. They make a lot of claims without evidence regarding viruses coming from space flown in by meteorites, but they did some good work and statistical analysis of flu infections in English schools and could prove that the flu is not contagious.

Contagion experiments during the Spanish flu showed that it was not contagious. Even shoving snot from a sick patient up the noses of healthy people couldn’t get them sick.

Is it possible that viruses exist?

I think we should remain open to new evidence once it comes out and look at it critically as we always should and see where it leads. Jumping to conclusions on incomplete information is never a good idea.

Important Questions

If there was a Covid virus, there are some very important questions that nobody ever asks except for David Icke:

If there was such a contagious, dangerous virus killing people, why did they have to bribe hospitals to put Covid on every death certificate including guns shot wounds? Why did they ramp up the PCR cycles to such levels, that almost everybody had a positive test (PCR can’t test if you’re sick) ? Why did they murder patients with Remdesivir, Intubation, Midazolam and Morphine overdoses to create deaths? Why were hospitals empty? There would be no need to create deaths by medical murder and incorrect death certificates if there was a real virus.

A word about Flat Earth

I have so far neither heard nor read any evidence by flat earthers that stand up to scrutiny and makes sense. There are however two pieces of evidence confirming the Earth is a sphere:

1. Orthodromic navigation. In flight school I learned about orthodromic navigation which is used to navigate the shortest distance between two points on a sphere. If you ever flew on a East-West long-haul flight and had the route displayed on a map you may have noticed that the plane doesn’t fly a straight line between the origin and the destination, but a curved route. For example, flying from Switzerland to Florida will not be on a straight line but follow a curve over Newfoundland and then down the East coast of the America. That’s because the distance between two points on lines of latitude becomes shorter the further away you get from the equator because Earth is a sphere. Airlines wouldn’t fly these curves if they were longer than a straight line as it would take more time and more fuel driving up the costs. I was on a flight from Miami to Zürich once that took a straight line because of storms in the North Atlantic. The flight flew over the Bahamas towards Europe, had to stop in Lissabon to refuel and took much longer than the regular curved route.

2. As an FAA Aviation Medical Examiner I had the privilege of examining private, commercial and airline pilots to make sure they were fit to fly. One commercial pilot who came to my office regularly told me he flew for a Russian Oligarch who owned a Dassault Falcon private jet which flew higher than most airliners. He regularly flew so high that he could see the curvature of the Earth. A friend of mine had flown in the Concord which also flew higher than regular airliners and he recounted seeing the curvature of the Earth.

Thus, based on the above, I think Earth is not flat but a sphere until someone shows me verifiable evidence that this is not so. If we take this further though into the matrix simulation, then nothing exists except in the form of energy, vibration and information. So then the question comes around again. Is Earth a sphere??? And that leads us into a rabbit hole regarding viruses too: could a virus just be a computer code? If so, then no cell culture or microscope are able to provide proof. Food for thought.

* ·  Jefferson, T. et al. (2020) Viral cultures for COVID-19 infectivity assessment. Systematic review. Clin. Infect. Dis. ciaa1764

·  Wölfel, R. et al. (2020) Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019. Nature 581:465-469