Viruses aren't contagious thread (Previously: "viruses don't exist")

Roosh

Cardinal
Orthodox
I have seen comments from a few members stating that viruses don't exist, which usually are connected to terrain theory proponents. I don't currently hold this belief, and think person-to-person contagion is involved in diseases, though not as explicitly and easily like the "experts" state, but I'd like to investigate the matter further.

Here's a transcript of a podcast I recently read...
That all of these things that we think were caused by viruses, scurvy was supposedly contagious, people’s teeth fell out and then the next person, or the people in the same families and then somebody ate a lime and the whole thing away because they were deficient in vitamin C. There is no way that anybody can prove that there’s a virus by using those stories.

[...]

The whole idea [of infection] is a misconception. It’s what happens when your tissues break down. They break down and form particles. This is an out-fection, not an infection. It’s what happens if you blow up your house, you get little bits of paper. Nobody thinks the little bits of paper infected your house.

[...]

Here comes a theory. I will cop to this as a theory. If you think about what happens here, there’s only one transmissible agent from one person to another of sickness. Do you know what that is? The whole living person. Not any part of the person, snot, boogers, blood or urine but you can transmit the synchronization of the menses from one woman to the next. You can transmit laughter and fear from one person to the next. We transmit a lot of things, just like all animals and all plants.

We could even transmit the idea through, at this point, an unknown mechanism that chickenpox isn’t a disease. It’s a maturation step. That’s the other problem. We have erroneously called these diseases where if you look at the facts, everybody who has chickenpox is healthier for life. If you do a study that’s been published in Miller’s Review of 400 vaccine trials. Children who’ve had chickenpox, less cancer, heart disease, arthritis, asthma, eczema. You could imagine that one child does communicate to another, “If you have this toxic stuff in you, now it would be a good time to get rid of it.”

If they never isolated the chickenpox virus, what were they injecting into our kids to prevent chickenpox?

Here’s your question. How does a chickenpox vaccine stop children from getting chickenpox? Number one, is that true? It’s very hard to prove that that’s true but let’s say it is true. Here’s the obvious explanation. You take somebody who’s going through a maturation step, which is beneficial for their entire life. They’re getting rid of toxins. They’re cleansing themselves so the child can fit more with their body. By the way, a chickenpox vaccine is this cell culture I described. They take the monkey kidney cells, they poison it, they starve it, it breaks down.

They inject that in you to poison you so that you don’t go through the maturation process. What do you have instead? You have chronic sickness. You cannot go through the normal process called chickenpox. You’re worst for life. That exactly lines up with all the facts around the chickenpox vaccine and the epidemiology of what happened. You get shingles, asthma and eczema, which is worse. You are a misfit in your mind. You’re depressed and have ADD. That is exactly what happens in every case that we prevent childhood disease. We make worse sickness because, in fact, you can poison somebody so they don’t go through the maturation step.
The doctor interviewed, Thomas Cowan, does not believe in contagion at all. That is a... bold... opinion.

Recently I was ill. Three days later, my mom got ill as well with the same disease. The theory of contagion seems so plausible, but I'm curious to hear alternate explanations. If viruses don't exist then what exactly is going on?
 

Mojambo

Sparrow
I think viral contagion is one of those topics that a lot of humanity thinks they have it figured out, but in reality, they have no idea what's really going on.

When I studied relativity theory in physics I felt the same way. We have these notions, and some equations to describe those notions, and the results we derive from them seem plausible. But in reality, there's no real way to validate whether our assumptions are correct or not because it is beyond the physical and measurable realm.

In humanity's typical arrogant fashion, we take what assumptions we have so far as the gospel truth, despite it being an unverifiable science. I honestly think there's a lot more to disease and how it spreads, and I don't think it is as cut and dry as the scammers and drug pushers make it out to be. I think virology in its current form is mostly a scam.

While in your scenario, people under the same household fell to the same disease, in countless other scenarios in my lifetime, I've cohabited with sick people during the worst of cold/flu seasons, and I never got sick. The opposite happens too. I'd be out with a group of a people the night before, get that "itchy throat" feeling and fall sick the next day. But everyone else was fine, and no one was sick leading up to that time either. I know those are just anecdotes, but I think this experience is universal — sometimes the illness simply doesn't spread as predicted.

We simply just don't know, but there are a lot of people that want us to think that they know.
 

Prores

Sparrow
Orthodox
Just a speculation, but I don’t think the powers that be would release a live agent. I makes more sense that perhaps they would use a binary weapon, some sort of toxin that could be externally modulated, say by the GSM network.

If something highly conductive is put into people, they can be remotely targeted and cooked through beam forming. The resulting cellular oxidization might create flu like symptoms, and notably would cause you to lose your sense of taste and smell.


1637203716225.png

I think it’s likely that “covid” is actually many things ( toxicological, biological, energetic ) working together to serve many different purposes. Just speculation obviously.


In Julian Assange's last interview he states that there is “Intelligent evil dust being scattered everywhere like confetti”.
 
Last edited:

kamoz

Kingfisher
Gold Member
I think viral contagion is one of those topics that a lot of humanity thinks they have it figured out, but in reality, they have no idea what's really going on.

When I studied relativity theory in physics I felt the same way. We have these notions, and some equations to describe those notions, and the results we derive from them seem plausible. But in reality, there's no real way to validate whether our assumptions are correct or not because it is beyond the physical and measurable realm.

In humanity's typical arrogant fashion, we take what assumptions we have so far as the gospel truth, despite it being an unverifiable science. I honestly think there's a lot more to disease and how it spreads, and I don't think it is as cut and dry as the scammers and drug pushers make it out to be. I think virology in its current form is mostly a scam.

While in your scenario, people under the same household fell to the same disease, in countless other scenarios in my lifetime, I've cohabited with sick people during the worst of cold/flu seasons, and I never got sick. The opposite happens too. I'd be out with a group of a people the night before, get that "itchy throat" feeling and fall sick the next day. But everyone else was fine, and no one was sick leading up to that time either. I know those are just anecdotes, but I think this experience is universal — sometimes the illness simply doesn't spread as predicted.

We simply just don't know, but there are a lot of people that want us to think that they know.

Well said. We have textbooks telling us, as if it were fact, what the sun’s interior composition is. How can anyone know that? We don’t even know what the earths interior is composed of - I believe the deepest hole in the earth was dug by the Russians and is only several miles deep.

This goes into a number of other subjects including virology. We simply don’t fully understand what’s going on. However, the religion of Science wants to give us the impression that it does.
 

GuitarVH

Kingfisher
Orthodox Inquirer
I have seen comments from a few members stating that viruses don't exist, which usually are connected to terrain theory proponents. I don't currently hold this belief, and think person-to-person contagion is involved in diseases, though not as explicitly and easily like the "experts" state, but I'd like to investigate the matter further.

Here's a transcript of a podcast I recently read...

The doctor interviewed, Thomas Cowan, does not believe in contagion at all. That is a... bold... opinion.

Recently I was ill. Three days later, my mom got ill as well with the same disease. The theory of contagion seems so plausible, but I'm curious to hear alternate explanations. If viruses don't exist then what exactly is going on?

Along with Tom Cowan, here are some other people you can research who espouse this viewpoint.

Dawn Lester/David Parker, authors of the book "What Really Makes You Ill", 770 pages

Dr. Andrew Kaufman, many videos regarding germ theory

Dr. Amandha Vollmer, Naturopathic Medicine

She has many videos and blog postings about this, here is a recent one:

Jon Rappoport, investigative reporter, covered the AIDS scam for 30 years, says they are following the same template for the COVID scam now with Anthony Fauci at the helm of both. Here is a link to some of his articles on germ theory:

 

Truth

Pigeon
Thanks for this thread, Roosh, you obviously pay close attention to what's going on on the forum and you obviously seek the truth regardless of your own preconceptions.

I was directed towards this information on another thread and I have been reading it with interest. Lots of it seems plausible and I have no doubt whatsoever that the ruling classes would perpetuate a myth of this nature in order to strengthen their agenda of control through fear and division (I refer to viruses in general, not the current narrative- the intentions and methods of which must be clear to any critically thinking individual), but the fact remains, transmission/contagion is evident isn't it? It is rare to be able to cite an example with such certainty, but we've all caught a cold from someone we know haven't we? I proffer that this has been demonstrated multiple times in the lives of 100 percent of this forum's participants and the lives of everyone you have ever known.

Undoubtedly, reactions and symptoms differ and the propagation of knowledge that enables us to protect our own health without medicines should definitely be a priority of the human race, and with it should come the revelation that we are frequently lied to about the risks and necessary remedies, but as of yet, I don't see any explanation of how we get sick. In fact, when the question is raised, the predominant doctor in the links above seems to talk her way around it like a politician. That makes me a little suspicious of her agenda and indeed all who promote the theory.
Interesting examples about how viruses may never have been reliably isolated and I'm happy to accept them as valid theories, or should I say, I'm happy to accept that germ theory may not be 100 percent proven, but it still seems somewhat more substantial than the alternatives thus far offered here.
I look forward to more information.

For the record, I absolutely believe that we are all connected and empathetic transmission of certain conditions may occur in certain instances, but I also strongly believe that you can contract an illness and have no awareness of doing so until you wake up feeling rough, so explain that to me, please.
 
I have two small kids and the idea of viruses seems very plausable. A kid on a birthday party had a runny nose and was coughing. After that my kid and all the others caught in with a few days delay. My kid gave to my other kid then to his cousin with whom he was in contact with for an hour or so. Kids spread these viruses like wildfire.
 

Padouk

Kingfisher
Here's a summary of my working theory:

1. The so called viruses are produced internally. They are like solvents (soap) which the cells produce when the intoxication is too much for live bacteria to handle. Some dirt you can wash with water only but for more greasy one you need soap and for the most stubborn one you need a special solvent.

2. Why do people living within close proximity seem to develop similar symptoms? There are a number of factors:

2 a) Seasonality. Temperature changes, humidity, solar radiation and so on
2 b) Environmental factor - Electromagnetic radiation, chemical pollution, etc
2 c) Diet and water consumption. People living within the same household tend to eat and drink similar products.
2 d) Psychological or Psychosomatic. When one person is exhibiting certain symptom the other one could develop them in a psychosomatic way. Placebo works in a psychosomatic way. It's been proven again and again.
2 e) Light and electro-communication between cells. Cells "speak" to one another which is why they can form tissues together and perform similar functions. Cancer cells are the ones that loose that ability or shut off and start behaving "selfishly". So there's a constant exchange between the cells and some cell perform detoxification of which "flu" is one and others around them might undertake the same action if it's necessary for them. The synchronization of menstrual period among women who live together and are of similar age is a well known fact.

3. There is no such thing a perfect health or even health per se. The body is in constant state of flux and if left alone it is quite capable of dealing with all sorts of bumps along the way. But ... it does not really try to live as long as possible as our egos desire. The living organism is in fact very reasonable when it comes to its life span. The survival instinct is energy dependent and energy always decreases with time but that's OK.

Contagion does exist but not in a manner described by virology. You can not take a virus and infect random people with it. It's never been demonstrated and never will be. That's why even in a closed household some people develop a potentially contagious disease and some are perfectly.

The contagious disease is what medicine describes as acute and lead towards chronic ones. In a sense they are both "contagious" but the latter takes longer to develop so it is not so obvious. When cancer becomes widespread we might also call it a pandemic.

Modern medicine has adopted a form of military mentality when tries to explain natural phenomenon, using words such as "attack", "killer cells", "defense", "protection", "detection" and so on. But there is no conflict or war inside or outside of the living organisms. Everything happens for a reason and every reaction is rational, proactive and calculated.

Disease do not come for no reason, we create them.

From a philosophical point of view, disease are something which is necessary part of life in a sense that life is in a constant state of decay despite its ability to renew itself with every passing generation the decay exacerbates. That's why species come and go.

When we fight against disease, we fight against life.
 

Mojambo

Sparrow
Here is a simple thought experiment: can a man in the middle of nowhere, living in the woods with no one around him, "catch" and exhibit symptoms of a cold?

Is so, who gave him that virus? A bird that flew from the city to him? Or some other chain reaction of animals? Was it exposure to other elements, not dressing warmly, poor nutrition, etc. or other possible causes?

If the woodsman exhibits cold symptoms but it's not caused by a virus, what exactly has happened when the woodsman got sick?

Or does the woodsman simply never gets colds or cold symptoms being isolated from everyone else, and thus has a much smaller subset of illnesses to worry about?
 

Valentine

Kingfisher
Gold Member
One flaw with this idea is that it is very difficult to suppress a theory to the point that there are no academic papers available for it, whereas even with propaganda-full topics such as climate change, healthy nutrition and racial differences there's still a multitude of scientific evidence available that can be found for the willing researcher. Are there any papers that actually test this theory in a falsifiable way?
 

Truth

Pigeon
Here is a simple thought experiment: can a man in the middle of nowhere, living in the woods with no one around him, "catch" and exhibit symptoms of a cold?

Is so, who gave him that virus? A bird that flew from the city to him? Or some other chain reaction of animals? Was it exposure to other elements, not dressing warmly, poor nutrition, etc. or other possible causes?

If the woodsman exhibits cold symptoms but it's not caused by a virus, what exactly has happened when the woodsman got sick?

Or does the woodsman simply never gets colds or cold symptoms being isolated from everyone else, and thus has a much smaller subset of illnesses to worry about?
I was thinking about that earlier, like one sure for why for me get a stinking cold, which has happened like twice in the last couple of months is going on a long bike ride, like 30km+ and getting caught in the rain, then I come down with the most brutal cold- coughing, phlegm, the works- so, that is definitely something inside me reacting, right? But as I understand a cold and influenza are not the same thing. I don't know, i'm not an expert.
There is some interesting stuff around this idea but to say there are no viruses is suggesting that every case ever recorded of measles, mumps, HIV, herpes, polio, influenza etc didn't happen/all resulted from some kind of neurosis/nocebo effect/was misdiagnosed... whatever...
It's a pretty bold claim. Boldest I've heard today. Keep the evidence coming.
(and yes, I fully accept that the above mentioned ailments may have been exaggerated in terms of danger/transmission rates for commercial/other purposes but it doesn't mean to say they've never existed)
And before anyone says, 'most polio cases arose as a result of the vaccine', alright, was was that they were injected with then?
 

lskdfjldsf

Pelican
Orthodox Catechumen
Gold Member
I have two small kids and the idea of viruses seems very plausable. A kid on a birthday party had a runny nose and was coughing. After that my kid and all the others caught in with a few days delay. My kid gave to my other kid then to his cousin with whom he was in contact with for an hour or so. Kids spread these viruses like wildfire.

We had our son in daycare for a few months once our second child was born. I don't think it's possible to look at kids/schools and reach any other conclusion. One goes in with a runny nose, and a week later, every kid there AND the parents have the same thing.
 

Enoch

Hummingbird
Science noob here.

When I was in school we learned that bacteria and stuff like that was transmissible through saliva, sweat, etc.

Viruses on the other hand could not live outside the host and could only be transmitted intravenously or sexually.

C-19 as its described does not fall into the latter box. Everything is upside down.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Ostrich
Orthodox Inquirer
Whether virusus exist in general, I have no reason to doubt that personally.

With the coronavirus in particular a comparison with the flu is essential. Corona has the same death rate as a severe flu wave (for example there are 17.000 corona deaths in the Netherlands, where in a severe flu season there can be 10.000+ casualties) and furthermore the same age group that is targeted. But what is the smoking gun? The flu was gone last winter (now they claim a comeback).

So it is very clear that they have counted all flu cases/deaths as corona cases/deaths and if you extrapolate that there's not much more going on then normal, especially if you take into account that they do everything to make something count as a corona death or to get a positive test. With a control obsessed, long term planning elite this could very well mean (and I think it does) that coronavirus is just the flu, but rebranded under a different name and with the biggest psychological trauma based mind control operation from all institutions possible on top of it. How could it be something ''real'' or ''deadly'' anyway, as that would mean the elite would lose the control over it and that's the last thing they want.

 

Truth

Pigeon
Whether virusus exist in general, I have no reason to doubt that personally.

With the coronavirus in particular a comparison with the flu is essential. Corona has the same death rate as a severe flu wave (for example there are 17.000 corona deaths in the Netherlands, where in a severe flu season there can be 10.000+ casualties) and furthermore the same age group that is targeted. But what is the smoking gun? The flu was gone last winter (now they claim a comeback).

So it is very clear that they have counted all flu cases/deaths as corona cases/deaths and if you extrapolate that there's not much more going on then normal, especially if you take into account that they do everything to make something count as a corona death or to get a positive test. With a control obsessed, long term planning elite this could very well mean (and I think it does) that coronavirus is just the flu, but rebranded under a different name and with the biggest psychological trauma based mind control operation from all institutions possible on top of it. How could it be something ''real'' or ''deadly'' anyway, as that would mean the elite would lose the control over it and that's the last thing they want.

I'd 'like' that if i was allowed to.
 

Mojambo

Sparrow
We had our son in daycare for a few months once our second child was born. I don't think it's possible to look at kids/schools and reach any other conclusion. One goes in with a runny nose, and a week later, every kid there AND the parents have the same thing.

Yes, I think everyone has universally experienced this as well. But attributing the cause to viral spread could be considered confirmation bias.

Do any other factors come into play, particularly quantifiable, measurable ones? Bacteria? Environmental factors?

How about nocebo effects and psychology? Yawning and laughing are contagious, but a person yawning isn't releasing a virus.

I think a whole section of unknown contagion causes have been offloaded into virology, and I posit that the causes are simply still very poorly understood.

Viral spread is as probable of being accurate as other theories such as the Big Bang Theory. While it may be the current prevailing "scientific" opinion (and thus arrogantly held as undeniable fact), in reality the probability of it being completely accurate is incredibly low.

Kary Mullis put it best when he said that these grifting scientists like Fauci will say that you can stick a virus under an electron microscope and observe it. Mullis knew that virology has a lot of theoretical problems and thus is a rapidly evolving subject, and that there are people out there trying to convince you they have it all figured out.
 

lskdfjldsf

Pelican
Orthodox Catechumen
Gold Member
How do you explain HIV? It's literally photographed and proven to spread through direct transmission. If I had a syringe of blood from someone with AIDS, would you be willing to inject it?

I think "bold" is an incredibly generous word to describe the theory.
 
Last edited:
Top