Two hundred governments and health institutions around the world have admitted they don't have a sample of SARS-CoV-2 from a human patient. Why is a researcher in the Toronto-area taking the heat?
I have a higher standard than that. All the phony "covid truthers" have done some good. But they sound like anti-Vietnam War activists obsessing over the domino theory and the communist threat. Either the threat is real or it is not. The threat determines the response.
I could agree more Eric. I have come to the conclusion that Steve Kirsch is an egotistical, inginatious narcissist with a deep lack of humility. As I have stated elsewhere, I don't beleive he fight this fight against the vax fro anyone other than himself due the bruised ego and pride he feels by falling for the crap in the first place and then getting himself and his kids vaxxed. As they say "Know them by their actions"
You might apprecate a poem I wrote in June last year. I think its probably up your readers' street.
Thank you, Eric, for a very important article explaining the actual facts. And tremendous thanks to Christine Massey for doing the work that needed to be done to understand this part of the covid fraud.
There have been a number of posts recently challenging the existence of the coronavirus because nobody will give a sample of the virus taken directly from a living human who has it.
Now, you can get a perfect sample of SARS-CoV 2 doing its work in some living cells very easily. You can say what strain you want, and contact the BEI lab, who will give it you for free. You need to be a researcher and follow some protocols. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/grows-virus-cell-culture.html sets this out clearly.
Then you can look at it under your expensive microscope, watch it replicating and so on. But only if it’s in a cell culture, because a virus relies for most of its structure and all of its functioning, on its host cells.
Samples have been sent around the world for research since the Time of Wuhan. The first samples came from the first infected person. I assume that original samples of the new strains were taken from individuals too. Then these are cultured in labs. It’s not hard to do, and this stuff has been done for decades, and is the only way it is done. And of course the original samples don’t ‘exist’ any more – and even that concept doesn’t apply. What you have is a strain. Like when you make yogurt, then you make yogurt from that yogurt. Every spoonful is a starter. You don’t go rummaging around underneath a cow in a meadow in Mesopotamia.
So the demand is pretty extraordinary. Instead of being happy with what the scientists work with, i.e. cultured samples, it wants a fresh sample scooped out of Mr Jones or Ms Smith and then packaged up in a spoonful of that individual’s body (because there is no such thing as covid outside of its living cell environment), and for labs and governments to keep these things fresh in thermos flasks. And perhaps replace them successively.. No wonder everyone is saying ‘get real’. Why would anyone do this? The prospect is abhorrent.
And it would be exactly the same if one made this demand around Ebola or HIV or measles or chickenpox. And anyone who works with viruses would know that. For research you don’t go to Africa and dig a trowel into some patient. You study a cultured sample. And this doesn’t invalidate anything at all.
So it’s not an issue about the virus – as said above, you can get a sample any old time. It is the demand for a sample taken directly from a living human who is infected. Nobody is going to dig into a human so that some skeptic can see the virus, or doesn’t believe that viruses replicate themselves or some such. There are tubs of the stuff cultured in labs all over the world.
This isn’t weird, or gobbledegook or a smokescreen: simply that what is demanded is unconscionable.
And sure, I’m not a virologist. And neither is Mike Yeadon.
Firstly, appreciation to you, Eric, and one other for offering courtesy here. Perhaps for les autres, simply to shoot those who don’t see the world as we do, is a societal solution we're not seeing as a good model I think, particularly in the USA. The art of influencing without violence is a great one to cultivate, I think. And also I’m too old and resilient to abandon anything just because I get my hair pulled. However, my life is really too over-committed to spend a lot of time here, and after posting this, I’ll probably unsubscribe.
Eric, yes, I’ve read your chronology, and it would be good to cover the past year. I wonder how the rapid antigen test, which seems to give so many false negatives, is functioning, and how the shift from PCRs doesn’t seem consistently to have reduced reported case numbers. I could probably find out more about RATs. Certainly where I live, PCRs are like hens’ teeth right now. However, daily reported cases in Germany, didn’t rise above about 70k up to the end of 2021, but this March hit about 300,000. Would be interesting to know what tests have been used in the past few months across Europe, say.
There are many details in your work where my observations have been quite different from yours. One is excess deaths, where the charts I saw (probably Our World in Data, but forgive me, I gave up tracking all this some months ago because it was taking up so much time) showed mountains of them. As well as the articles about exhausted med staff, beds in corridors and so forth, in many hospitals, where it seems that you say concentrations of cases did not have this effect. And that lockdowns had no effect, when in small countries these controlled cases as dramatically as turning off the gas on the stove.
Disaster capitalism notwithstanding, the notion of Schwab and the Great Reset being actively sinister is much less compelling to me than Naomi Klein’s analysis https://theintercept.com/2020/12/08/great-reset-conspiracy/. And yes, the sad, narcissistic elite and other rogues will always attempt to make money out of suffering.
I’ve still to fathom the numerics around the over-inclusive sensitivity of the PCR, though will get there. Certainly it’s commonly known that the thing is massively reactive, and whether this is good or bad depends on one’s situation completely. And if one does not believe in excess mortality or hospitalisations then certainly it could be seen that the PCR was a con that created a myth of a pandemic. However, if one does consider these as incontrovertible, then the question has to be, what have all these people died of?
Regarding Christine’s view that researchers should be require to work with the contents of swabs and kleenex I think is impractical, and rather than simple, would be extremely onerous. Her tireless work around OIAs and the resulting lack of proof as defined: yes, this is all about Koch’s postulates. Personally I’m quite happy with Siouxsie Wiles’ response https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2020/11/16/kochs-postulates-covid-and-misinformation-rabbit-holes.html and how even Koch recognised, at a time when viruses had not been identified at all, that these postulates didn’t work fully for the microbes he was studying. And viruses are not microbes, they are not finite organisms, so to require the production of a self-existing thing that has life as we know it, when by nature it isn’t a self-existing thing with life as we know it, will of course elicit the same response every time. It sets conditions that aren’t actual tests of validity, then claims proof of invalidity.
Actually it reminds me a bit of the kinds of proof demanded in relationships, e.g. ‘a real husband would go and put up a set of shelves for my dad’.
I’m intrigued by the thought that viruses don’t exist at all, and that the illnesses they appear to cause are mass psychosis. Perhaps rabies arises as a response by canines to foxhunting or wolf persecution. Smallpox as an indigenous response to colonial invasions. I recall a great piece years ago on how polio beset the US when Americans were depressed about themselves (diminished hegemony or some such), and then went away spontaneously when they cheered up (not about the vax). I’m a Buddhist, so can happily accept that whatever arises is simply the play of the mind.
Thank you for this brief experience of engagement, it’s been an interesting window. Though it does amplify one regret I’ve had ever since QAnon showed up, which is how tragic it is that so many who would otherwise be engaged as our cultural creatives, or skilful activists in a time when this world is so close to the edge, are focusing so narrowly to prove that this specific set of betrayals has taken place. I truly wonder about the cost-benefit calculation here.
In any event - may the dark ignorance of sentient beings be dispelled.
I have a higher standard than that. All the phony "covid truthers" have done some good. But they sound like anti-Vietnam War activists obsessing over the domino theory and the communist threat. Either the threat is real or it is not. The threat determines the response.
Love it!
I could agree more Eric. I have come to the conclusion that Steve Kirsch is an egotistical, inginatious narcissist with a deep lack of humility. As I have stated elsewhere, I don't beleive he fight this fight against the vax fro anyone other than himself due the bruised ego and pride he feels by falling for the crap in the first place and then getting himself and his kids vaxxed. As they say "Know them by their actions"
You might apprecate a poem I wrote in June last year. I think its probably up your readers' street.
https://robdubya.substack.com/p/it-was-the-germs-wot-done-it-sir
Thank you, Eric, for a very important article explaining the actual facts. And tremendous thanks to Christine Massey for doing the work that needed to be done to understand this part of the covid fraud.
Great to see Yeadon keeping an open mind. What a journey all this must have been for him.
Dear Eric and all,
There have been a number of posts recently challenging the existence of the coronavirus because nobody will give a sample of the virus taken directly from a living human who has it.
Now, you can get a perfect sample of SARS-CoV 2 doing its work in some living cells very easily. You can say what strain you want, and contact the BEI lab, who will give it you for free. You need to be a researcher and follow some protocols. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/grows-virus-cell-culture.html sets this out clearly.
Then you can look at it under your expensive microscope, watch it replicating and so on. But only if it’s in a cell culture, because a virus relies for most of its structure and all of its functioning, on its host cells.
Samples have been sent around the world for research since the Time of Wuhan. The first samples came from the first infected person. I assume that original samples of the new strains were taken from individuals too. Then these are cultured in labs. It’s not hard to do, and this stuff has been done for decades, and is the only way it is done. And of course the original samples don’t ‘exist’ any more – and even that concept doesn’t apply. What you have is a strain. Like when you make yogurt, then you make yogurt from that yogurt. Every spoonful is a starter. You don’t go rummaging around underneath a cow in a meadow in Mesopotamia.
So the demand is pretty extraordinary. Instead of being happy with what the scientists work with, i.e. cultured samples, it wants a fresh sample scooped out of Mr Jones or Ms Smith and then packaged up in a spoonful of that individual’s body (because there is no such thing as covid outside of its living cell environment), and for labs and governments to keep these things fresh in thermos flasks. And perhaps replace them successively.. No wonder everyone is saying ‘get real’. Why would anyone do this? The prospect is abhorrent.
And it would be exactly the same if one made this demand around Ebola or HIV or measles or chickenpox. And anyone who works with viruses would know that. For research you don’t go to Africa and dig a trowel into some patient. You study a cultured sample. And this doesn’t invalidate anything at all.
So it’s not an issue about the virus – as said above, you can get a sample any old time. It is the demand for a sample taken directly from a living human who is infected. Nobody is going to dig into a human so that some skeptic can see the virus, or doesn’t believe that viruses replicate themselves or some such. There are tubs of the stuff cultured in labs all over the world.
This isn’t weird, or gobbledegook or a smokescreen: simply that what is demanded is unconscionable.
And sure, I’m not a virologist. And neither is Mike Yeadon.
Hi Eric and all,
Firstly, appreciation to you, Eric, and one other for offering courtesy here. Perhaps for les autres, simply to shoot those who don’t see the world as we do, is a societal solution we're not seeing as a good model I think, particularly in the USA. The art of influencing without violence is a great one to cultivate, I think. And also I’m too old and resilient to abandon anything just because I get my hair pulled. However, my life is really too over-committed to spend a lot of time here, and after posting this, I’ll probably unsubscribe.
Eric, yes, I’ve read your chronology, and it would be good to cover the past year. I wonder how the rapid antigen test, which seems to give so many false negatives, is functioning, and how the shift from PCRs doesn’t seem consistently to have reduced reported case numbers. I could probably find out more about RATs. Certainly where I live, PCRs are like hens’ teeth right now. However, daily reported cases in Germany, didn’t rise above about 70k up to the end of 2021, but this March hit about 300,000. Would be interesting to know what tests have been used in the past few months across Europe, say.
There are many details in your work where my observations have been quite different from yours. One is excess deaths, where the charts I saw (probably Our World in Data, but forgive me, I gave up tracking all this some months ago because it was taking up so much time) showed mountains of them. As well as the articles about exhausted med staff, beds in corridors and so forth, in many hospitals, where it seems that you say concentrations of cases did not have this effect. And that lockdowns had no effect, when in small countries these controlled cases as dramatically as turning off the gas on the stove.
Disaster capitalism notwithstanding, the notion of Schwab and the Great Reset being actively sinister is much less compelling to me than Naomi Klein’s analysis https://theintercept.com/2020/12/08/great-reset-conspiracy/. And yes, the sad, narcissistic elite and other rogues will always attempt to make money out of suffering.
I’ve still to fathom the numerics around the over-inclusive sensitivity of the PCR, though will get there. Certainly it’s commonly known that the thing is massively reactive, and whether this is good or bad depends on one’s situation completely. And if one does not believe in excess mortality or hospitalisations then certainly it could be seen that the PCR was a con that created a myth of a pandemic. However, if one does consider these as incontrovertible, then the question has to be, what have all these people died of?
Regarding Christine’s view that researchers should be require to work with the contents of swabs and kleenex I think is impractical, and rather than simple, would be extremely onerous. Her tireless work around OIAs and the resulting lack of proof as defined: yes, this is all about Koch’s postulates. Personally I’m quite happy with Siouxsie Wiles’ response https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2020/11/16/kochs-postulates-covid-and-misinformation-rabbit-holes.html and how even Koch recognised, at a time when viruses had not been identified at all, that these postulates didn’t work fully for the microbes he was studying. And viruses are not microbes, they are not finite organisms, so to require the production of a self-existing thing that has life as we know it, when by nature it isn’t a self-existing thing with life as we know it, will of course elicit the same response every time. It sets conditions that aren’t actual tests of validity, then claims proof of invalidity.
Actually it reminds me a bit of the kinds of proof demanded in relationships, e.g. ‘a real husband would go and put up a set of shelves for my dad’.
I’m intrigued by the thought that viruses don’t exist at all, and that the illnesses they appear to cause are mass psychosis. Perhaps rabies arises as a response by canines to foxhunting or wolf persecution. Smallpox as an indigenous response to colonial invasions. I recall a great piece years ago on how polio beset the US when Americans were depressed about themselves (diminished hegemony or some such), and then went away spontaneously when they cheered up (not about the vax). I’m a Buddhist, so can happily accept that whatever arises is simply the play of the mind.
Thank you for this brief experience of engagement, it’s been an interesting window. Though it does amplify one regret I’ve had ever since QAnon showed up, which is how tragic it is that so many who would otherwise be engaged as our cultural creatives, or skilful activists in a time when this world is so close to the edge, are focusing so narrowly to prove that this specific set of betrayals has taken place. I truly wonder about the cost-benefit calculation here.
In any event - may the dark ignorance of sentient beings be dispelled.
Susie
So what is the question?!
~Is it whether the alleged SARS-COV-2 exists? I thought that was what Massey’s foi requests were to question…
~Or is it whether ALL viruses in general exist?
The waters seem a bit muddied…