Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts
 Share

Message added by Grumpy Owl,

This topic is for all general discussion regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic. There are of course numerous other related topics for discussing specific aspects of this pandemic in more detail. And there are other parts of this forum for more 'off-topic' discussions.

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Illmatic said:

 

I'm far from a virology or immunology expert so I'm more than happy for someone to educate me on this or direct me to some helpful sources, but from what I understand I think we have to be a bit cautious about the whole "they haven't even isolated the virus/used Koch's postulate to prove it exist" argument and the likes of Andrew Kaufman claiming it's just exosomes and Covid isn't real.

 

From what I've seen (again, very happy to be corrected) there's a school of thought within virology that all viruses are actually exosomes and just a way of the body detoxifying itself, not actually an infectious organism. If that's the case, I find the idea of this proving Covid is a hoax a little disingenuous, given if the theory has some weight it would apply to viruses in general, not just this one.#

 

There seem to be some very legitimate questions to be asked about the field of virology in general, but from what I understand there hasn't really been much done out of the ordinary, apart from the rushed through testing which has very questionable accuracy. With that in mind it might be more appropriate to ask what we actually really know about any virus and how much of it is assumption, but to make the leap from there to a deliberate invention of a virus and subsequent cover-up seems to be going a little bit too far for me.

 

That is the correct position to take - everything is questionable!

 

There are a number of researchers, microbiologists and suchlike who have been questioning viruses since they were claimed to have been discovered or rather invented.

"Pathogenicity" is the glaring question. and this has not been proven.

Dr Stephan Lanka has isolated viruses found in sea water using a gold standard equating to Koches methodology and found none to have pathogenic properties whatsoever.

The Perth group in australia have thoroughly researched the HIV/aids virus claims and found no link to pathogenicity and that the claims of such were false as was proven and upheld in court but then blocked and media censored. No one heard!  yet funds poured in and the then dying sphere of virology found a new cause - now azt kills 1.5 million per year but that is apparantly HIV! the testing for this is generally is also PCR  afaik

Pasteur fraudulently claimed viruses caused disease where Bechamp claimed  no link. Pasteurs journals released for publication by a later disgruntled family member showed that Pasteur had "fixed" his experiments by introducing poisons to get the desired results.

Bechamp logically claimed the terrain of health was determined by nutrition and levels of toxicity which formed what is referred to as  terrain theory.

A world leading expert in electron microscopy  Etienne de Harven (recently deceased) had much to say wrt the lack of any adherance to any gold standard in the field of virology and wrote the disparaging foreward in the book "Virus Mania"  by Torsten Engelbrecht and Claus Kohnlein where he cited concerns re: the still unanswered questions of the 1918 flu, polio, ddt and neurotoxicity! 

"Virus Mania  is  a  social disease of our highly developed society. To cure it will require conquering fear, fear being the most deadly contagious virus, most efficiently transmitted by the media. 
Errare humanum est sed diabolicum preservare.-.. (to err is human, but to preserve an error is  diabolic)." Professor Etienne de Harven, MD 

 

When modern tests or experiments are conducted in virology they do not create controls (placebos) often but refer to previous incarnations of controls conducted elsewhere.

For instance when monkey kidney epithelial cells (vero cells) are used to culture viral particles they add previously "apparantly" isolated viral particles which are generally externally sourced! and claim that the generation of viral particles (in vitro) to be proof of viral existence. They do not run parallel identical controls of the vero cell lines with the only difference is the addition of the so called viral particles added because they know that the generation of viral particles would be similar if not the same as it is well known that the chemicals used cause precisely the same results.

The strong antibiotics and other sanitising agents required to keep the vero cell lines alive for the duration of the testing always results in the endogenous (from within) generation & excretia of exosomes. As far as I can gather exosomal type & activity is dependant on the type of assault taking place so the exosomal expression logically will differ according to the chemical onslaught which is the only logical deduction that can be made. 

 

Cells will always attempt to protect themselves and produce solvents such as exosomes, lysosomes or antibodies, t-cells, metalothienines if they are functioning and able and in vivo even direct bacteria, fungi and yeasts to sites being assaulted. 

Many toxic chemicals are not fat soluble and I beleive this is why we are also experiencing an epidemic of obesity as the body is overwhelmed with various toxicities it has no choice but to isolate and store the toxins until the body is able to  process and remove them safely.

 

Modern medicine disrupts the natural and intelligent process of the body by increasing the assault while modern industrial culture  excuse for food deprives the body of sustaining nutrition required to fight all assaults.

 

This has been the modus operandi for centuries - the ubiquitous use of calomel as a universal treatment for disease was infamous and still persists as various analogues of mercury.

Rockerfeller senior was a snakeoil salesman recruited by the rothschild arm of the establishment - already familiar with models of deceit!

 

as stated - Pathogenicity of viruses has never been proven nor cited beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

Isolation, although possible at great length and cost, and despite being a purely indirect process and with reliance on assertion, rather than empirical evidence, it seems to have been deliberately avoided because claimed novelty of specific pathogenesis attributed to these particles would bring about the destruction of the hypothesis once disproven, and an end to the mantra of so called germ theory and an end to the cash flow and control reaped by the industrial petrochemicalmedicalmilitarypoliticaleconomic complex. 

 

Inert/dead particles of protein!

Apparantly now some disinfectants are being advertised with the claim that they kill the already dead coronavirus particles.

 

Edited by zarkov
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, zarkov said:

 

That is the correct position to take - everything is questionable!

 

There are a number of researchers, microbiologists and suchlike who have been questioning viruses since they were claimed to have been discovered or rather invented.

"Pathogenicity" is the glaring question. and this has not been proven.

Dr Stephan Lanka has isolated viruses found in sea water using a gold standard equating to Koches methodology and found none to have pathogenic properties whatsoever.

The Perth group in australia have thoroughly researched the HIV/aids virus claims and found no link to pathogenicity and that the claims of such were false as was proven and upheld in court but then blocked and media censored. No one heard!  yet funds poured in and the then dying sphere of virology found a new cause - now azt kills 1.5 million per year but that is apparantly HIV! the testing for this is generally is also PCR  afaik

Pasteur fraudulently claimed viruses caused disease where Bechamp claimed  no link. Pasteurs journals released for publication by a later disgruntled family member showed that Pasteur had "fixed" his experiments by introducing poisons to get the desired results.

Bechamp logically claimed the terrain of health was determined by nutrition and levels of toxicity which formed what is referred to as  terrain theory.

A world leading expert in electron microscopy  Etienne de Harven (recently deceased) had much to say wrt the lack of any adherance to any gold standard in the field of virology and wrote the disparaging foreward in the book "Virus Mania"  by Torsten Engelbrecht and Claus Kohnlein where he cited concerns re: the still unanswered questions of the 1918 flu, polio, ddt and neurotoxicity! 

"Virus Mania  is  a  social disease of our highly developed society. To cure it will require conquering fear, fear being the most deadly contagious virus, most efficiently transmitted by the media. 
Errare humanum est sed diabolicum preservare.-.. (to err is human, but to preserve an error is  diabolic)." Professor Etienne de Harven, MD 

 

When modern tests or experiments are conducted in virology they do not create controls (placebos) often but refer to previous incarnations of controls conducted elsewhere.

For instance when monkey kidney epithelial cells (vero cells) are used to culture viral particles they add previously "apparantly" isolated viral particles which are generally externally sourced! and claim that the generation of viral particles (in vitro) to be proof of viral existence. They do not run parallel identical controls of the vero cell lines with the only difference is the addition of the so called viral particles added because they know that the generation of viral particles would be similar if not the same as it is well known that the chemicals used cause precisely the same results.

The strong antibiotics and other sanitising agents required to keep the vero cell lines alive for the duration of the testing always results in the endogenous (from within) generation & excretia of exosomes. As far as I can gather exosomal type & activity is dependant on the type of assault taking place so the exosomal expression logically will differ according to the chemical onslaught which is the only logical deduction that can be made. 

 

Cells will always attempt to protect themselves and produce solvents such as exosomes, lysosomes or antibodies, t-cells, metalothienines if they are functioning and able and in vivo even direct bacteria, fungi and yeasts to sites being assaulted. 

Many toxic chemicals are not fat soluble and I beleive this is why we are also experiencing an epidemic of obesity as the body is overwhelmed with various toxicities it has no choice but to isolate and store the toxins until the body is able to  process and remove them safely.

 

Modern medicine disrupts the natural and intelligent process of the body by increasing the assault while modern industrial culture  excuse for food deprives the body of sustaining nutrition required to fight all assaults.

 

This has been the modus operandi for centuries - the ubiquitous use of calomel as a universal treatment for disease was infamous and still persists as various analogues of mercury.

Rockerfeller senior was a snakeoil salesman recruited by the rothschild arm of the establishment - already familiar with models of deceit!

 

as stated - Pathogenicity of viruses has never been proven nor cited beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

Isolation, although possible at great length and cost, and despite being a purely indirect process and with reliance on assertion, rather than empirical evidence, it seems to have been deliberately avoided because claimed novelty of specific pathogenesis attributed to these particles would bring about the destruction of the hypothesis once disproven, and an end to the mantra of so called germ theory and an end to the cash flow and control reaped by the industrial petrochemicalmedicalmilitarypoliticaleconomic complex. 

 

Inert/dead particles of protein!

Apparantly now some disinfectants are being advertised with the claim that they kill the already dead coronavirus particles.

 

 

Thanks for that. Like I suspected then the whole field as it practices now is potentially up for question, not just how it's treated Covid.

 

I find the approach by DI (via Andrew Kaufman) and others a little bit disingenuous then, given their approach from what I've seen is to imply there's some gold standard not being adhered to in this instance, when this may not be the case for the field in general. 

 

Not saying they are wrong but it's potentially and easy dismissal if you're trying to have a serious conversation, and I've seen them criticised for this in several different places. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shaun Attwood link to Trafalgar Square Unite4Freedom protest: 

 

 

Has anyone found any other links to the Unite4Freedom protest? . It is on Brand New Tube as well. Sorry for the blank space in the post, I don't know why it has done that. 8: A study by statistician Dr Dennis Cook shows that the incidence of birth malformations in the UK rose in tandem with sales of the drug.

He recommends the German manufacturer, Schering, conduct further studies. He said years later he believed these were not carried out.

1970: The Department of Health committee asks Schering to remove pregnancy testing as one of the uses of Primodos, stating it should only be used to treat irregular periods .

 
 
 

 

 

1975: A warning appears on Primodos packets saying: "May cause congenital abnormalities".

1977: The regulator sends a leaflet to doctors warning that "an association is confirmed" between the use of HPTs and birth defects.

1978: Primodos is taken off the market in Britain amid allegations that hormonal pregnancy tests cause miscarriage and a range of birth defects

1982: A court case collapses after it is deemed unlikely that claimants could prove a causal link between the drug and birth defects.

2014: A review by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency concludes it has found the evidnce for adverse effects to be inconclusive.

 
 
 

 

 

March 2017: Hidden papers unearthed in the Berlin National Archives of a study by Professor William Inman show that women who took a hormone pregnancy test had a relative five to one risk of giving birth to a disabled child. The findings are exposed in a Sky News documentary.

November 2017: UK Commission on Human Medicines publishes a report concluding scientific evidence does not support a "causal association" between Primodos and malformations, stillbirths or miscarriage.

On the day it was published Sky News reports significant changes were made from an earlier draft report, which was less conclusive about a lack of association.

February 2018: A study produced by Dr Neil Vargesson from the Institute of Medical Sciences in Aberdeen University showed that when Primodos is applied to zebra fish 

 

The research, published in The Scientific Reports, also found the drug caused greater damage the earlier in development the embryo is exposed to it, and that higher doses can be lethal.

November 2018: Oxford University links Primodos to malformations in babies born to mothers who used the drug in a ground-breaking study.

Professor of Evidence based medicine, Carl Heneghan, who 

 

 

Hundreds of files about Primodos were discovered after being stored unseen in the Berlin National Archives for decades.

They showed that, in January 1975, a Professor William Inman, principal medical officer for the UK government, had found that women who took a hormone pregnancy test "had a relative five-to-one risk of giving birth to a child with malformations".

Dr Inman spoke to Schering, but explained he'd made contact so that the manufacturer could "take measures to avoid medico-legal problems"; he doesn't tell it to recall the drug, and it doesn't.

A later document explains that Dr Inman destroyed the materials on which his findings were based, "to prevent individual claims being based on 

 

 

It stated that the drug should not be taken during pregnancy because of the risk that it may cause malformations. At this stage, it had already been on the market for 17 years.

Two years later, regulators wrote to doctors stating: "The association is confirmed."

But campaigners argue that the warnings on the packet and eventual removal of the drug came too late - especially as a potential link had been discovered 10 years earlier by Dr Isabel Gal who had observed a worrying pattern in babies born with spinal defects.

Mr Murphy also found correspondence which had been leaked from a Schering employee, between the UK branch of the drug company and the German head office. It showed that British scientists at Schering were concerned about the drug as early as the late 1960s. 

They refer to a report from the Royal College of GPs by Dr Norman Dean which found a higher incidence of miscarriage, stillbirths and abnormalities in babies of mothers who used hormone pregnancy tests.

Dr Dean recommended the drug be removed from sale. His full report has never been published. Sky News later found a letter from Dr Dean saying he had a bad conscience about the whole thin

 

The manufacturer Schering, now owned by Bayer, has always denied that Primodos could be damaging.

It insists that the drug was on the market in the UK "in compliance with prevailing laws".

A company spokesman said in a statement: "Bayer denies that Primodos was responsible for causing any deformities in children.

"Since the discontinuation of the legal action in 1982, no new scientific knowledge has been produced, 

 

Nicky Gubbins said: "I always knew that it was the drugs that caused my birth defects. Mum and dad told me when I was very young why I was born like this. So I always knew that it was the Primodos.


 

"I don't 

 

n and his sister were in the back of my car and Sean suddenly said: 'I can't see'.

"I heard the alarm in his voice and I turned tside for 20 minutes and eventually a doctor came out and said, 'I'm sorry, nothing we can do'."

Edited by Number6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Illmatic said:

 

I'm far from a virology or immunology expert so I'm more than happy for someone to educate me on this or direct me to some helpful sources, but from what I understand I think we have to be a bit cautious about the whole "they haven't even isolated the virus/used Koch's postulate to prove it exist" argument and the likes of Andrew Kaufman claiming it's just exosomes and Covid isn't real.

 

From what I've seen (again, very happy to be corrected) there's a school of thought within virology that all viruses are actually exosomes and just a way of the body detoxifying itself, not actually an infectious organism. If that's the case, I find the idea of this proving Covid is a hoax a little disingenuous, given if the theory has some weight it would apply to viruses in general, not just this one.#

 

There seem to be some very legitimate questions to be asked about the field of virology in general, but from what I understand there hasn't really been much done out of the ordinary, apart from the rushed through testing which has very questionable accuracy. With that in mind it might be more appropriate to ask what we actually really know about any virus and how much of it is assumption, but to make the leap from there to a deliberate invention of a virus and subsequent cover-up seems to be going a little bit too far for me.

 

 

 

With all the false positives AND false negatives that have occurred  the test is inaccurate and unreliable  

i do not trust the test to give accurate results

 

COVID-19 alert
Common question

How accurate is the coronavirus test?

"The test is not 100% accurate; at present it is thought to detect approximately 70% of coronavirus infections. A negative test does not mean that you stop self-isolating if you have coronavirus symptoms. Tests are completely voluntary"

 

A claim of 70% accuracy has been made this is unsatisfactory

i require an accuracy of 99.8% or grater for me to take any kind of test seriously

 

no authority can convince me 70% is an acceptable standard 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, metak88 said:

What happened with the live talk they were streaming from Austin? Seems like it dropped just shortly after the start.

 

Not sure but they were asking for a car battery for a generator earlier, maybe the power has gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mishy said:

The crowd at Downing Street chanting to the police "choose your side" and  "pedo protectors" 😅

 

Fantastic! Britain finally found it's cojones and it's voice. We are the resistance!

Edited by Velma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...