The Lack of Balance
Examining the two extremes of thought regarding viruses.
During the past three years, I have noticed the existence of two contrasting perspectives within the "truth movement" concerning viruses and so-called pathogenic diseases. These opposing viewpoints represent the extreme ends of the spectrum.
These two extremes are:
Viruses exist and are contagious and are to blame for many diseases.
Viruses do not exist and have never been proven, and therefore cannot be contagious.
Between these two dominant sides, little balance exists within the “truth movement”.
However, there exists a third option that is far more rational and logical, yet none of these sides are actively pursuing or publicly discussing it.
So-called pathogenic viruses arise from a state of disease, are intrinsic to living cells, and are not contagious, while many other viruses play important roles in ecology and biological functioning.
Option 3 demands a significant amount of effort to comprehend, as it involves delving into the beliefs and theories of contemporary medical science concerning viruses. Subsequently, extensive work is necessary to develop a comprehensive theory that challenges the conventional pathogenic virus model and provides an explanation for the occurrence of viral illnesses and their illusory contagious nature. In Option 3, it becomes essential to understand virology based on the observations it has made, rather than casually and arrogantly dismissing its findings, as Option 2 (“No-Virus”) has done.
Option 1. states in greater detail that: Viruses act as disease-causing agents by infiltrating and targeting the cellular machinery of living organisms to reproduce. They can be transmitted among individuals, making them contagious. Furthermore, certain viruses have been manipulated as potential bioweapons and have been intentionally introduced into the world.
This option views viruses as the ultimate enemy that must be eradicated at all costs. It sees viruses as a threat to public health, a danger to national security, and a menace that could potentially wipe out humanity. It advocates for extreme measures to prevent the spread of viruses, such as enforced/mandated vaccination, and strict quarantine measures.
Option 2. states in greater detail that: Viruses do not exist and cannot be contagious because viruses have never been conclusively proven to exist due to a lack of direct purification and isolation from host fluids, among other factors.
A word about Option 2: I have provided direct evidence of the purification and isolation of viruses from living animals here. Additionally, proponents of Option 2 consistently dismiss the necessity of a supporting theory to explain the evident and unmistakable occurrence of contagious-like illnesses and diseases. They often attribute it broadly to toxicity, which is indeed a valid factor, but they fail to elucidate the body's mechanisms for breaking down and eliminating disease-causing toxins and how only non-living agents can achieve the task of diluting non-bio-organic compounds. This significantly weakens their argument, among other things. Moreover, supporters of Option 2 have consistently misinterpreted and distorted available scientific literature in an attempt to validate their belief that viruses are non-existent, with a few of them going to great lengths to write lengthy diatribes that employ such methods of misdirection.
Option 3. states in greater detail that: Viruses are undeniably genuine and present in all living organisms. Their existence has been conclusively proven, but their so-called pathogenic qualities are misunderstood in the totality of biology. They are protein enzyme solvent structures created by cells to uphold homeostasis and equilibrium within the organism and its intricate systems. Viruses hold great significance in the ecology and biology of all living entities. The emergence of so-called pathogenic viruses is predominantly linked to the presence of diseases caused by various forms of industrial pollution. Contemporary scientific research is progressively comprehending this truth and investigating the impact of pollution on the manifestation of such illnesses.
Option 3 states that toxicity and environmental pollution, both natural and manmade, are the ultimate cause of almost all disease.
If one were to carefully evaluate the evidence and were honest, one would conclude that Option 3 is the most supported and plausible theory. This option acknowledges the existence of viruses while also recognizing their role in maintaining homeostasis and balance in living organisms. It also highlights the impact of industrial pollution on the manifestation of so-called pathogenic viruses, which is an important consideration in modern science. As well, it explores how the body deals with such toxicity, and its modes of detoxification.
In contrast, Option 1 oversimplifies the role of viruses as agents of disease, without considering their potential benefits or the impact of pollution on their manifestation, among other things. Option 2, on the other hand, is not supported by the available scientific evidence, as viruses have indeed been purified and isolated directly from host fluids and have been observed and characterized. Option 2 ignores any need for a theory by which to explain the appearance of viral illness.
To provide a more detailed explanation, let's consider the following points:
Viruses have been isolated and purified: Despite the claims of Option 2, viruses have been isolated and purified from host fluids using various techniques such as ultracentrifugation, filtration, and chromatography. This evidence supports the existence of viruses and refutes the claim that they have never been proven to exist.
Viruses play important roles in ecology and biology: Option 3 recognizes the importance of viruses in maintaining homeostasis and balance in living organisms. Studies have shown that viruses play a crucial role in regulating the populations of certain microorganisms, and they also help to transfer genetic material between organisms, which can lead to the development of new species.
Pollution affects the manifestation of viruses: Modern science is beginning to understand the impact of pollution on the manifestation of so-called pathogenic viruses. Studies have shown that exposure to pollutants such as heavy metals, pesticides, and industrial chemicals can weaken the immune system and increase the risk of viral infections. This supports the idea that viruses are not the sole cause of disease, but rather a symptom of a larger problem.
The pathogenic virus model is not complete: While Option 1 acknowledges the role of viruses in disease, it oversimplifies the relationship between viruses and their hosts. The pathogenic virus model assumes that viruses are inherently harmful and that their presence alone is enough to cause disease. However, studies have shown that the relationship between viruses and their hosts is much more complex, and that factors such as host genetics, environmental factors, and lifestyle choices can all play a role in the manifestation of viral disease.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the debate surrounding the existence and role of viruses in the "truth movement" has led to a polarization of opinions, with two contrasting perspectives emerging, and little to no balance. Option 1, which states that viruses are real and contagious, and Option 2, which denies the existence of viruses, are both inadequate in fully explaining the complex relationship between viruses and their hosts.
Option 3, which recognizes the existence of viruses but also acknowledges their role in maintaining homeostasis and balance in living organisms, offers a more nuanced and comprehensive explanation. This option takes into account the impact of pollution on the manifestation of so-called pathogenic viruses and recognizes that the pathogenic virus model is not complete. Pollution has been shown to weaken cells and thereby increase the manifestation of viral infections, further supporting the idea that viruses are not the sole cause of viral disease.
Option 3 states that viruses are protein enzyme solvent structures created by cells to uphold homeostasis and equilibrium within the organism and its intricate systems in times of systemic toxicity. This means that viruses are not just passive particles that infect cells and cause disease, but rather they are active participants in the cell's metabolic processes.
The idea that viruses are solvents suggests that they play a role in dissolving and breaking down cellular waste and toxins, which helps to maintain homeostasis within the cell. This is supported by studies that have shown that viruses can degrade extracellular matrix proteins, which are proteins that provide structural support to cells and tissues. By breaking down these proteins, and diluting them, viruses can help to maintain the balance of cellular components and prevent the systemic accumulation of toxic waste.
Furthermore, viruses can also help to regulate the expression of cellular genes, which is important for maintaining homeostasis within the cell. By interacting with cellular DNA, viruses can influence the transcription and translation of genes, which can affect the production of proteins and other cellular components. This can help to maintain the balance of cellular processes and prevent the cell from becoming overactive or underactive.
In addition, viruses can also play a role in cellular signaling pathways, which are important for coordinating cellular activities and maintaining homeostasis. By interacting with cellular receptors and signaling molecules, viruses can help to transmit signals that regulate cellular behavior and prevent the cell from becoming dysfunctional.
Overall, the idea that viruses are solvents and help cells maintain homeostasis highlights the complex and multifaceted role that viruses play in cellular metabolism. By catalyzing cellular waste and toxins, regulating gene expression, and participating in cellular signaling pathways, viruses help to maintain the balance and equilibrium of cellular processes, which is essential for the proper functioning of cells and organisms.
The scientific evidence supports Option 3, with viruses having been isolated and purified from host fluids and studies showing their importance in regulating microorganism populations, transferring genetic material, and facilitating homeostasis.
In conclusion, a more balanced approach to understanding viruses and their role in disease is necessary if one wishes to truly understand the body and its relationship to disease—one that takes into account the complexity of the relationship between viruses, the body, and the impact of pollution on the manifestation of viral illnesses, and the biological processes the body uses to remove toxicity.
Jeff Green
Much appreciate this article , a concise and erudite explanation ( fully comprehensible to a layman) for what fuels an almost taboo issue viz.:the conflicting and scientifically unsafe proclamations of of both option 1 and option 2 camps ; the cause of disease clearly proven now to be primarily pollution and nutrition .I think your article gives greater clarity still as to why vaccines are wrong .This fact has yet to reach those who ( for humane reasons admittedly ) are now publicly disputing the quality of the COVID vaccines .
May i meanwhile wish you all the best for 2024
Ted
Option 1 —unfortunately has instilled fear/psychosis/indoctrination into the masses for decades in order to line the pockets of big pharma/big medicine while keep the masses $ick and di$ea$ed as lab rats/guinea pigs further lining their pockets…no care or concern for the real health of the people but rather control of them..
Option 2 —is too simplistic and shows shear ignorance, lack of basic laboratory skills/knowledge of testing and methods..
Option 3 —makes common sense! It is sad that we even have to refer to viruses as ‘so-called pathogenic’… It makes sense that our bodies have other avenues to use to detoxify what ails us in this ever-increasing toxic world.