Mr. Green, with all due respect, this rant of yours is just that a rant. It's your opinion and you make assumptions of what happens inside the body. Have you observed any of what you say happens inside the body. I don't think so. I have an easy question. Lanka has isolated bacteriophages, which are smaller that "viruses", Why can't they find viruses the same way, by just centrifuge?
Polio virus infects the anterior horn cells, why can NO virus be found in these cells?
HIV virus is said to damage the blood vessels. Why can't ANY virus be found in a tissue sample?
Sars-CoV-2 infects lungs and nasal cavity. Why can't virologists find ANY virus in the fluid or tissue. And if no virus can be found in a "sick" person's sputum, doesn't that question the whole transmission theory. Someone coughs and the droplets have viruses which then infect other people. Can we find viruses in those droplets. No. Why not? "Oh you're not a virologist, you cannot possibly understand.
Finally, I do not think God would make a viral particle. Everything he made was for a purpose.
I misunderstood your stance initially. But probably more because of the vitriol you expressed towards Cowan and Kaufman and the rest. And I think you're confused at what Cowan thinks. Have you read or listened to him? Cowan does think that the body makes what they call "viruses" in response to toxins. It is confusing when he or others say viruses aren't real, because the body does make a particle when dealing with toxins. Maybe that side should be more clear. But you and he are on the same page so why do attack him like you do? Not sure why the $1000+ shower head triggers you so. He doesn't make that shower head. He is just a retailer. And how do you know that the crystals inside the shower head don't do anything. Maybe it changes the frequency and is more healing. You seem like a smart guy but come on, you do not know.
And not sure why the challenge to you is so problematic. If you say that virologists can find viruses in the human fluid sample, then why the need for the nutty monkey kidney cell culture with other toxins. Why can't they take fluid out the lungs, filter it, then sequence it? These are supposedly human viruses so shouldn't the human culture be the best place to grow viruses. Sars-CoV-2 should grow just fine in the lung tissue and should be seen in lung fluid, right. I think the labs would fail the challenge miserably. Let's just take Sars-CoV-2. Do you think giving 5 labs the same sample to process will result in the exact same genome? They need to be blinded from each other so they can't cheat. If not, you should be a supporter of this challenge.
": any of a large group of submicroscopic infectious agents that are usually regarded as nonliving extremely complex molecules, that typically contain a protein coat surrounding an RNA or DNA core of genetic material but no semipermeable membrane, that are capable of growth and multiplication only in living cells, and that cause various important diseases in humans, animals, and plants
As there is no infectious/contagious agent, just like you tell us, I do think we should not call these particles viruses but exosomes. Virology thinks these exosomes are parts of viruses like sars-cov2 which only exist as an idea, a computermodel which is never found in nature as a whole or in 1 piece.
Sars-cov2 does not exist in the physical world/ reality.
We are all in team truth and against the genocide by injection.
Jeff, do you realize that what virology calls isolation, is not purification? So no so called 'virus' is ever purified and thus proven to exist.
And do you realize that virology never did control experiments and when Stefan Lanka did these, he could find any so called virus in a clean sample after 'isolation', which was the only source of genetic material.
I would love the see you have a debate about this with Stefan Lanka.
Hi Jeff, it’s been an informative discussion in the comments as usual (here and elsewhere you contribute to). You make a lot of sense. However, I don’t know why there often seems to be a combative nature to your exchanges. Perhaps prior discussions are influencing current ones with regard to certain people? Personally I think ridicule is too quickly adopted in these exchanges and it evolves into animosity such that one can never see the truth that the other is saying, despite it being there.
Anyway, irrespective of the issues you point out with regard to the suggested procedure, doesn’t the virus challenge seek to establish what you yourself propose doesn’t exist - that being the existence of pathogenic viruses? “We propose the following experiment as the first step in determining whether such an entity as a pathogenic human virus exists…”. An aside, have you reached out to these people? Kaufman, Lanka et al and attempted to combine your knowledge? If so, have they dismissed you? Disrespected you? If not, you should. Again, maybe I’m late to the party in terms of your relationships. In any case, I appreciate the knowledge you share.
Please tell us if you know, can, and/or will what convinces you that the physicians in the original two papers reporting a novel coronavirus (n-CoV-19 later renamed as SARS-CoV-2) have carried out the proper investigations for the cause of admission of the patients complaining of respiratory symptoms.
Mr. Green, with all due respect, this rant of yours is just that a rant. It's your opinion and you make assumptions of what happens inside the body. Have you observed any of what you say happens inside the body. I don't think so. I have an easy question. Lanka has isolated bacteriophages, which are smaller that "viruses", Why can't they find viruses the same way, by just centrifuge?
Polio virus infects the anterior horn cells, why can NO virus be found in these cells?
HIV virus is said to damage the blood vessels. Why can't ANY virus be found in a tissue sample?
Sars-CoV-2 infects lungs and nasal cavity. Why can't virologists find ANY virus in the fluid or tissue. And if no virus can be found in a "sick" person's sputum, doesn't that question the whole transmission theory. Someone coughs and the droplets have viruses which then infect other people. Can we find viruses in those droplets. No. Why not? "Oh you're not a virologist, you cannot possibly understand.
Finally, I do not think God would make a viral particle. Everything he made was for a purpose.
Jeff,
I misunderstood your stance initially. But probably more because of the vitriol you expressed towards Cowan and Kaufman and the rest. And I think you're confused at what Cowan thinks. Have you read or listened to him? Cowan does think that the body makes what they call "viruses" in response to toxins. It is confusing when he or others say viruses aren't real, because the body does make a particle when dealing with toxins. Maybe that side should be more clear. But you and he are on the same page so why do attack him like you do? Not sure why the $1000+ shower head triggers you so. He doesn't make that shower head. He is just a retailer. And how do you know that the crystals inside the shower head don't do anything. Maybe it changes the frequency and is more healing. You seem like a smart guy but come on, you do not know.
And not sure why the challenge to you is so problematic. If you say that virologists can find viruses in the human fluid sample, then why the need for the nutty monkey kidney cell culture with other toxins. Why can't they take fluid out the lungs, filter it, then sequence it? These are supposedly human viruses so shouldn't the human culture be the best place to grow viruses. Sars-CoV-2 should grow just fine in the lung tissue and should be seen in lung fluid, right. I think the labs would fail the challenge miserably. Let's just take Sars-CoV-2. Do you think giving 5 labs the same sample to process will result in the exact same genome? They need to be blinded from each other so they can't cheat. If not, you should be a supporter of this challenge.
I hear you saying the same as Kaufman, Lanka and Cowan, the only difference is that what you call viruses, they refer to as exosomes or cell debri.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virus
": any of a large group of submicroscopic infectious agents that are usually regarded as nonliving extremely complex molecules, that typically contain a protein coat surrounding an RNA or DNA core of genetic material but no semipermeable membrane, that are capable of growth and multiplication only in living cells, and that cause various important diseases in humans, animals, and plants
As there is no infectious/contagious agent, just like you tell us, I do think we should not call these particles viruses but exosomes. Virology thinks these exosomes are parts of viruses like sars-cov2 which only exist as an idea, a computermodel which is never found in nature as a whole or in 1 piece.
Sars-cov2 does not exist in the physical world/ reality.
Christine Massey has now collected FOIs from 200 institutions looking for SARS-CoV-2: so far, "NO RECORD FOUND" https://apocalypticyoga.substack.com/p/christine-massey-200
Virus Theory vs Exosome Theory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yRSKLs2OrY
The website exosomes.nl was removed when covid started, but look who we see here: http://web.archive.org/web/20210412053707/http://www.exosomes.nl/bill--melinda-gates-foundation.html
We are all in team truth and against the genocide by injection.
Jeff, do you realize that what virology calls isolation, is not purification? So no so called 'virus' is ever purified and thus proven to exist.
And do you realize that virology never did control experiments and when Stefan Lanka did these, he could find any so called virus in a clean sample after 'isolation', which was the only source of genetic material.
I would love the see you have a debate about this with Stefan Lanka.
Hi Jeff, it’s been an informative discussion in the comments as usual (here and elsewhere you contribute to). You make a lot of sense. However, I don’t know why there often seems to be a combative nature to your exchanges. Perhaps prior discussions are influencing current ones with regard to certain people? Personally I think ridicule is too quickly adopted in these exchanges and it evolves into animosity such that one can never see the truth that the other is saying, despite it being there.
Anyway, irrespective of the issues you point out with regard to the suggested procedure, doesn’t the virus challenge seek to establish what you yourself propose doesn’t exist - that being the existence of pathogenic viruses? “We propose the following experiment as the first step in determining whether such an entity as a pathogenic human virus exists…”. An aside, have you reached out to these people? Kaufman, Lanka et al and attempted to combine your knowledge? If so, have they dismissed you? Disrespected you? If not, you should. Again, maybe I’m late to the party in terms of your relationships. In any case, I appreciate the knowledge you share.
Please tell us if you know, can, and/or will what convinces you that the physicians in the original two papers reporting a novel coronavirus (n-CoV-19 later renamed as SARS-CoV-2) have carried out the proper investigations for the cause of admission of the patients complaining of respiratory symptoms.
I am referring to https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7 and,
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2001017