74 Comments
author

Good night and thanks everyone for your company, ideas, proofreading and awareness. It's certainly been an exciting weekend Aquarius Ho! Ready about!

Expand full comment

We've got fair winds and following seas, cap'n!

Expand full comment
Jan 23, 2023·edited Jan 23, 2023

Very difficult for someone whose entire life's work is invested in the fantasyland of Biotech and computer modeling/sequencing to come to terms that that world they inhabit is a land of make believe. They fully believe that the shit they play around with in their labs and on their screens is the real world. I believe this brand of "science" is a form of insitutionalized psychosis among other things.

Someone might want to tell all these "sequencers" that "gene theory" is complete crap also.

Expand full comment

Hi Eric,

I tried to listen and read but JJ kept going round and round and seemed very defensive. I hadn't come across his work before and don't think it has anything to tell us.

I looked up Nanopore sequencing. I hadn't heard of it before. It's pretty cool. https://nanoporetech.com/applications/dna-nanopore-sequencing basically the sample is put in a device with 2048 tiny pores through which the DNA or RNA is fed. Disruption in an ionic field tells the device which nucleotide; A, G, T or C is next in the sequence. I assume it's a consensus of the results for the nanopores all together, as is the case with trad 'whole genome' sequencing. The results are seen in real time and are said to be able to detect long reads. However, the DNA or RNA is of necessity already cut into pieces to feed it through the machine, so there is no evidence that the sequences they are detecting are actually joined together, let alone that they form part of a genome, let alone that it's infectious etc etc

The experiments JJ was talking about using cloned RNA added to culture and then hey presto finding the same RNA fragments (!) again would still only be able to find what they know they are looking for, even though they don't use PCR, because of the way they must slice the RNA they want to find to feed it though the machine.

Jo

🐒

Expand full comment

I can appreciate that he wants to defend the field he had to leave. Yes, virologists are looking at something, but this field of study is very difficult as what happens in the lab may not be happening in the body. I would like to know what he bases his view on that viruses exist, but not in the way we are lead to believe. If they are not very contagious and don't replicate well, that pretty much deflates the contagious deadly virus threat.

Expand full comment

Yes, he seems to be finding it hard to admit he's been fooled and to let go. Why try so hard to show viruses exist if they don't affect us or matter at all and people researching them will never again get any grants?

I maintain that intelligence is the ability to accept that everything we have been taught to believe and did believe may be completely wrong.

Expand full comment

There is also a price to pay for leaving the virus tribe. It takes more than logic to leave. Some people want to stay in the majority camp as they are not ready to go against the herd. That takes a certain personal characteristic which many are not comfortable with, so they find a way to go along even in the midst of cognitive dissonance.

It could be as simple as maintaining his relationship with RFK, Jr. who he said he admires. Why would you adopt a viewpoint contrary to those you admire unless you are so committed to forging your own path that it doesn't matter? He would also likely lose his consulting job with RFK if he went full 'no virus', so he keeps just enough of that story intact to keep afloat.

RFK stated the didn't want to risk his credibility capital on the question of the virus, JJ is following his lead.

Expand full comment

yes and again saying that it's not viruses, which there's no evidence for, but cloned and engineered RNA that caused the Covid non-event, he is really hedging his bets

Expand full comment

Yes I think you are absolutely right. He is most defensive when talking about 'Bobby', I think he has got into a position where he can't (because of his professional role/relationship that he enjoys or needs) say exactly what he thinks or he can't allow himself to think freely about the implications of no virus.

Expand full comment

He was not a virologist, he was a neuro-biologist. That's the field he left.

Expand full comment

Yes, but he wants to defend virology as a science, perhaps because he feels threatened in some way if virology is found to be invalid. He seems to be taking it as a swipe at biology while at the same time says there are some major flaws in virology. He wants to get the attention of the academic community, but that will be hard to do, as they tend to listen to the people writing the paycheck/grant rather than scientific critique.

Expand full comment

CHD is invested in virology, and he is invested in CHD, in that his job is for CHD, and if he doesn't defend CHD's position, good bye job.

Expand full comment

Yes, as much as we think it should be about real science and truth, most organizations and the individuals who run them will revert to self preservation rather than seeking truth, even if that is their tagline.

Expand full comment

Keep the funding rolling in.

Expand full comment

A friend of mine searched this out for 5 minutes, nanopore is not all that cool.

I have literally looked into Nanopore for all of 5 minutes so take this with a grain of salt. There may be there better evidence out there, but just from this first paper I found from December 2020, Nanopore doesn't look as great as Couey made it out to be:

Analytical validity of nanopore sequencing for rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome analysis

"However, adoption of ONT sequencing for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance has been limited due to COMMON CONCERNS AROUND SEQUENCING ACCURACY."

"Although protocols for ONT sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 have been established and applied in both research and public health settings20,21,22, adoption of the technology has been LIMITED DUE TO CONCERNS AROUND ACCURACY. ONT devices exhibit LOWER READ-LEVEL SEQUENCING ACCURACY than short-read platforms23,24,25. This may have a disproportionate impact on SARS-CoV-2 analysis, due to the virus’ low mutation rate (8 × 10−4 substitutions per site per year26), WHICH ENSURES ERRONEOUS (false-positive) OR UNDETECTED (false-negative) GENETIC VARIANTS HAVE A STRONG CONFOUNDING EFFECT."

It looks like they use synthetic RNA references as well as mapping to the original genome to "confirm" accuracy so it seems that they must have a reference first:

"Synthetic DNA or RNA REFERENCE STANDARDS can be used to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of next-generation sequencing assays27. We first sequenced synthetic RNA controls that were generated by in vitro transcription of the SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence. The controls matched the Wuhan-Hu-1 reference strain at all positions, allowing analytical errors to be unambiguously identified. To mimic a real-world viral WGS experiment, synthetic RNA was reverse-transcribed then amplified using multiplexed PCR of 98 × ~400 bp amplicons that enabled evaluation of ~95% of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Eight independent replicates were sequenced on ONT PromethION and Illumina MiSeq instruments (see Methods section).

We ALIGNED THE RESULTING READS TO THE WUHAN-HU-1 REFERENCE GENOME TO ASSESS SEQUENCING ACCURACY and related quality metrics (Supplementary Fig. 1a–i). Illumina and ONT platforms exhibited distinct read-level error profiles, with the latter characterised by an elevated rate of both substitution (23-fold) and insertion-deletion (indel) errors (76-fold; Table 1 and Supplementary Fig. 1d,"

"With ONT sequencing known to exhibit higher read-level sequencing error rates than short-read technologies23,24,25, REASONABLE CONCERNS EXIST ABOUT SUITABILITY OF THE TECHNOLOGY FOR SARS-CoV-2 GENOMICS. Moreover, public databases for SARS-CoV-2 data (e.g., GISAID: https://www.gisaid.org/) already contain consensus genome sequences generated via ONT sequencing, POTENTIALLY CONFOUNDING INVESTIGATIONS THAT RELY ON THESE RESOURCES."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20075-6

The researchers claim that their article resolves the concerns around Nanopore so it would be interesting to investigate if any other teams confirmed this. In any case, if they must rely on synthetic RNA reference standards as well as the fraudulent original genome created from metagenomics in order to create and confirm the accuracy of the Nanopore sequence, it seems Couey's evidence is off to a very bad start.

Expand full comment

I may have responded to you with this before, if so, sorry, lots of duplication the last couple of days.

A friend of mine searched this out for 5 minutes, nanopore is not all that cool.

"I have literally looked into Nanopore for all of 5 minutes so take this with a grain of salt. There may be there better evidence out there, but just from this first paper I found from December 2020, Nanopore doesn't look as great as Couey made it out to be:

Analytical validity of nanopore sequencing for rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome analysis

"However, adoption of ONT sequencing for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance has been limited due to COMMON CONCERNS AROUND SEQUENCING ACCURACY."

"Although protocols for ONT sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 have been established and applied in both research and public health settings20,21,22, adoption of the technology has been LIMITED DUE TO CONCERNS AROUND ACCURACY. ONT devices exhibit LOWER READ-LEVEL SEQUENCING ACCURACY than short-read platforms23,24,25. This may have a disproportionate impact on SARS-CoV-2 analysis, due to the virus’ low mutation rate (8 × 10−4 substitutions per site per year26), WHICH ENSURES ERRONEOUS (false-positive) OR UNDETECTED (false-negative) GENETIC VARIANTS HAVE A STRONG CONFOUNDING EFFECT."

It looks like they use synthetic RNA references as well as mapping to the original genome to "confirm" accuracy so it seems that they must have a reference first:

"Synthetic DNA or RNA REFERENCE STANDARDS can be used to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of next-generation sequencing assays27. We first sequenced synthetic RNA controls that were generated by in vitro transcription of the SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence. The controls matched the Wuhan-Hu-1 reference strain at all positions, allowing analytical errors to be unambiguously identified. To mimic a real-world viral WGS experiment, synthetic RNA was reverse-transcribed then amplified using multiplexed PCR of 98 × ~400 bp amplicons that enabled evaluation of ~95% of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Eight independent replicates were sequenced on ONT PromethION and Illumina MiSeq instruments (see Methods section).

We ALIGNED THE RESULTING READS TO THE WUHAN-HU-1 REFERENCE GENOME TO ASSESS SEQUENCING ACCURACY and related quality metrics (Supplementary Fig. 1a–i). Illumina and ONT platforms exhibited distinct read-level error profiles, with the latter characterised by an elevated rate of both substitution (23-fold) and insertion-deletion (indel) errors (76-fold; Table 1 and Supplementary Fig. 1d,"

"With ONT sequencing known to exhibit higher read-level sequencing error rates than short-read technologies23,24,25, REASONABLE CONCERNS EXIST ABOUT SUITABILITY OF THE TECHNOLOGY FOR SARS-CoV-2 GENOMICS. Moreover, public databases for SARS-CoV-2 data (e.g., GISAID: https://www.gisaid.org/) already contain consensus genome sequences generated via ONT sequencing, POTENTIALLY CONFOUNDING INVESTIGATIONS THAT RELY ON THESE RESOURCES."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20075-6

The researchers claim that their article resolves the concerns around Nanopore so it would be interesting to investigate if any other teams confirmed this. In any case, if they must rely on synthetic RNA reference standards as well as the fraudulent original genome created from metagenomics in order to create and confirm the accuracy of the Nanopore sequence, it seems Couey's evidence is off to a very bad start.

Expand full comment

the video in the link I posted is very cool.

as I said there are is no evidence that chains of base pairs from Nanopore, whole genome or Sanger sequencing relates to any entity or means anything at all.

Expand full comment
RemovedJan 23, 2023·edited Jan 23, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Hiya,

yes the self-confidence grated on me. Science is not about confidence it's always (or should be) about doubt and discussion.

thank you for the correction. I don't know why I put D or what I thought it stood for. Maybe because I am used to writing G & D in my post title.

Interesting what you say about Spanish pronunciation, sometimes people put a 'th' sound for a d - on the end of eg Hispanidad- is it a hard D as we would say Dad?

🙏🏽

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

teehee thank you, I will carry on spreading the joy!!

🐒

Expand full comment

We Americans come from many backgrounds, many of us are foreign born, there are regional accents within the US, there are even zones where English is not dominant (lots of Spanish speakers) or hasn't always been dominant., e.g. areas of the Northeast heavily populated by French Canadians, southern Louisiana, most of the people (aside from African Americans) have French or related ancestry.

Expand full comment

Nice work, Eric.

The interview didn't reveal any surprises, but I find it very valuable to listen in detail to the indoctrinated ones, as that's the reality that we must continue facing and engaging. It was encouraging to me that Jay does see many of the 'problems' with virology. Maybe he's halfway to the big truth.

Regarding the 'lab leak' theory, in my view it was the FBI that spearheaded that narrative in the US with their Jan 28, 2020 press conference announcing charges against Harvard Professor Leiber and calling attention to the Wuhan lab and 'bio-warfare' research. It was obvious to me from that moment the direction the public was being led, probably because it would maximize fear.

I very much appreciate the work of the Baileys and Kaufman & Cowan, and I also think the list is about 20% complete in the absence of Stefan Lanka, who's been carrying the torch for almost 30 years. Had it not been for the tireless efforts of Lanka (and for a while the Perth Group), there might've been not one voice of reason anywhere come 2020. When I was at that point of my journey, Lanka was the only source of truth.

Expand full comment

I love how you ended up backing into this. Reiner Füllmich has had some very good interviews on the issue recently as well. We're getting there.

To me however, the question of existence of the virus, or isolation if you will, is kind of the booby prize... Is it the cause, is it even a contributing factor, Is it a symptom? Backwards and forwards, the terrain is everything. What caused me to be susceptible to this... etc. Vitamin D and saline nasal flushes could have mooted the whole thing.

Expand full comment
author

roger, it is THE prize, because if there is no virus then we don't need a vaccine passport that controls where you can spend your new, improved digital dollars, or determines what country, county or state you can get into.

Expand full comment

The problem with that Eric is that they will invent another reason why you can't do X. They are already doing so and they will do so without a vaxx passport and without the "viral story" as the driving force.

In the end we aren't dealing with a "viral problem" or a "vaxx problem" we are dealing with a tyranny problem.

The Spiky Ball is yet another prop in a theatrical performance, none of it has to be real and it isn't.

The manufactured perception that there was a global medical emergency, beginning in March 2020, was an artifact of mass media manipulation, behavioral conditioning techniques and social engineering.

Fake photos of people falling dead- fake images of coffins piling up- fake doctors claiming hospitals were overflowing- fake tests to produce a fake disease- fake scenes outside hospitals staged by PR firms- fake media parrots lying through their teeth every night- fake trials of a toxic bioweapon- fake everything.

"The Virus™ is superfluous, just like the Swine Flu scamdemic of 2009. All they needed to do was create the perception of a pandemic/mass panic with staged Hollywood productions, doomsday models, and the fraudulent PCR test to manufacture the cases/falsely attributed as “Covid deaths.”

Expand full comment

OTOH, de legitimating the virus narrative would severely damage the overall dominant narrative. Just like the war in Vietnam caused massive legitimating problems, took a while, in fact a major cultural counterrevolution, to overcome them.

Expand full comment

Yep, exposing the virology fraud is the only thing that will stop the insanity. Short of that, the poison injection nazis will never stop.

Expand full comment

The insanity goes far beyond poisonous injections and will continue and worsen until the tyranny problem is solved.

Germ theory could be thrown out the window tomorrow, and should be, and the march towards fascism wouldn't halt one bit.

While germ theory is a tool for the psychotic technocrats, and one of the preferred ones at the moment, it is only one.

Expand full comment

Yes, but the march toward tyranny is a race against the people waking up, paying attention and thinking and reading again, and understanding the ramifications and impending tyranny in the plan, that alas, is actually not a conspiracy theory. So exposing the virology fraud and the contagion fraud is an excellent tool -- as the basic science is very straight-forward and so much excellent work has been done now to help everyday folk see the truth of it and be able to wrap their brains around it. No doubt this takes time, but it is incredibly powerful and rips the blinders off.

There is already momentum this way. We just need to keep pursuing it, and demanding folks look. The masses with blinders removed -- especially as faith in institutions and experts crumbles -- will generate even greater information sharing and awakening, and the credibility needed for those who are mostly followers to follow. It is the keystone to winning this fight against tyranny and the ever-important exposition of the incredibly well-documented global plan to eliminate much of- and control the rest of the population.

There are undoubtedly other endgames the tyrants are striving for, and I would presume different factions want different things, but the need to control the sheep is common among the factions, so that is the necessary step they are working to achieve now. We can't let them have that control, because clearly with technology today -- through social and mind control systems primarily -- enslavement is a real possibility.

Expand full comment

Excellent.

Expand full comment

Well, yes and no. Evidently, it would be conclusive. But the same applies if there were something there, but no one could prove if tt was THE cause, a contributing factor, or a symptom. We are already there. It is all BS.

Expand full comment
author

contributing factor to what? Cause of what?

Expand full comment

That is the point isn't it? It's turtles all the way down, for what the hell is even Covid-19 except a story.

Expand full comment

It is the story used to justify the actions taken. Whether that be depopulation, pHARMa profits, wealth transfer, gaining acceptance of mRNA as many other meds go off patent, quackcine passports as a step towards digital economic control, centralization of power or all of the above, without it, it is more difficult to make the case for what they are aiming for.

If people realize there is no threat other than from their 'leaders' they are much more likely to resist what they can see is leading towards control and away from freedom.

Expand full comment

Fuellmich wants to investigate the virus matter using.. Dr Judy Mikovits? Really? :-)

Expand full comment

I was convinced two years ago that Fuellmich is running interference, and at this point it's blatantly obvious.

Expand full comment

"Fuel me"! Or is it "Fool me"?

Expand full comment

If I presented one of the official papers...the methodology specifically...as a root cause proof at work I would be laughed out of the room. Well done.

Expand full comment

Thanx Eric, for the New Writing{s} & Newer Video.

I'll watch it & continue to read, this new stuff.

Thank You also both, for the long-standing & far-reaching, Work{s}.

Again.

& Again...

---

Also thanx so much for explaining, in drawn detail, all the technical words, concepts, & analyses, you both used during This Important Opening Discussion & Debate.

It helps to refine, the initial ore.

~ I Love Your Colours too !

24K solid.

Expand full comment

Besides the Lu paper, the following MSM news convinced me in March (2020) that the lock down was a shit show.

* SCMP (2020-03-13) also 'confirmed' the earliest 'case' traced back to November 17th, 2019.

* 'Spanish sewage sample from March 2019 tested positive' news

1. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3074991/coronavirus-chinas-first-confirmed-covid-19-case-traced-back

2. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-spain-science-idUSKBN23X2HQ

Expand full comment

Nice summary of the history of the story--I have already begun to forget some the details. However, control of the narrative was always part of the plan including the destruction of anyone who dared question it.. I think there was a shared piece of info by someone present at an advisory committee meeting in 2015 where this was discussed as a needed part of the plandemic process they were developing. That little fact was enough to demonstrate there was nothing natural about this mess.I

I also recall a 2 hour interview/presentation by these 2 Calif doctors--Anderson and ??? which occurred at the beginning of this mess. They were already critiquing the false nature of the claims. Quite a few others at the beginning who observed a different picture of the illness than what we were being sold in the mass media.

As for the PCR test: When the very inventor of it, Carey Mullis who won a Nobel Prize for it states that is can never be used for diagnosis that was enough for me to reject anything said about it. Of course it was a bogus test that required upwards of 40 cycles before anything could be seen in a lab test and at that level any 'scraps' found were meaningless. What they did, as I recall, is take those fragments and claim they could get a DNA id for sequencing and thereby claim they have identified the virus and the person was sick.

But the worst of it, regarding the public, was the total confounding of an illness with symptoms with a test that claimed to register a virus in the body. We all have microbes in our body, all the time, and we are not sick. Our immune system clears them out and we continue on our merry way. Fauci changed definitions more than once which absolutely kept the public on edge and confused.

What I wonder is the outcome of the case brought before the ICC by Reiner Fullmich (never get his name quite right) and his group. You would think people on the Libertarian side would be broadcasting this.

Expand full comment

They couldnt have pulled it off if most of us didnt have a Fear of Contagion, of Contamination, of Germs...They exploited our Fear of Contagion, and will continue to do so 'til they've herded us into the Total Surveillance & Control Prison They are building for us...And even then they'll keep exploiting Our Fear...What is it that's done to the young that sets them up for a lifetime of Fear, even of their own shadows ? What is it that's done to them that their life is one long search for Security ? ("Security" is the sole product on offer from The State, its sole justification)...

Expand full comment

On the one hand there is the fear: when society discards/hides old and ill people and death, the children are not exposed to them.

And you fear (consciously or unconsciously) the unknown, you fear what you don't see, you fear the state that is perceived to be needed to be hidden away in care homes, hospices etc.

On the other is convenience. Society is groomed into convenience.

The tragedy is that *we* are building our own prison. Those in academia, in science, the engineers. They are paid to do so and incentivised by institutions set up and/or financed by the the predatory class.

Expand full comment

Just say (Rose)nau! :-)

Expand full comment

Do you think there was something that jumped from some people to some others at the end of 2019/ early 2020, just to get this scamdemic going? A toxic pathogen of some sort? I suffered some strange symptoms at that time , before the 24/7 Covid 19 story hit the headlines. It wasn't a cold or the flu, more of a circulatory thing.

Expand full comment
author

Not at all; it was not necessary. All they needed was a "test," press reports, and recategorization of existing illness.

Expand full comment
Apr 28·edited Apr 28

OK. You may be right or you may be wrong to be so adamant. I can only go by reality and the symptoms that I (and others suffered), around from at the end of 2019/early 2020.

It may well be that Covid 19 as a virus is complete make believe but that doesn't mean that something toxic was not around in various places at that time to generate some ill health. I only know that I don't know but I wouldn't put it past military intelligence to have released something to get the ball rolling.

Perhaps we should be discussing the 4th Industrial Revolution that is going on as we speak. That is after all, why the "pandemic" was arranged. While we stay playing roles in the global game that they control, we will be driven into web3 social impact finance.

Expand full comment
author
Apr 28·edited Apr 28Author

I'm not being adamant. I've lived with this set of issues for more than four years every single day, conducting dozens of interviews over the years and writing the only chronology that spans the entire crisis. I've asked and sought answers to these questions from many angles. I see no evidence that something such as a pathogen or poison was applied to the population. This is a nearly 18 month old article. We are discussing 4IR, especially in a separate newsletter by one of my editors Jeff Strahl called Lockdown Times, on Substack. I also discuss the issue many weeks on my program.

Expand full comment

Your work is to be commended but I am open to admitting to not knowing everything. If there was a pathogen or something released, it would have been in certain places and maybe not even the same thing. Off the top of my head I know of athletes who went to Wuhan in October 2019 and who became sick, myself and an acquaintance in England in Dec 2019 and senior Iranian officials back in early 2020.

Weird stuff. Not the flu. DRY cough for some, temperature, skin rash, loss of sense of taste and smell, gut ache, sore throat, head ache, gut ache, fatigue...just for 7/10 days then I recovered. I never went to bed with it as I was too busy but boy, was it mysterious and draining!

Just because you have not spoken to someone who had symptoms (or maybe you discounted any stories you have heard) does not mean that it didn't happen. Hardly anybody was sick compared to the what the propaganda said but if I was organising a scamdemic, I might have conjured up something to kick things off.

Never say never otherwise we are playing their divide and distract game.

Expand full comment

I have not discounted stories. In fact I have been the person associated with Team No Virus who has pushed for paying attention to them, somewhat relentlessly. However, there is nothing that I can find that ties any of these reports (most of which come from the city) together, and no credible reports of anything chemical or biological, and no consistency to the issues, therefore no potential documented cause — except for matters associated with 5G. And we all know about that.

Expand full comment

Well, I didn't live in a city when I was affected and I feel we should be open minded and not guided by team this or that. Going into teams is exactly what the system wants. That is what happens in games when actually we are all in this together. Game theory is behind a lot of the nudging going on via the internet and the media.

Expand full comment

The smoke and mirrors aspect of this “virus” have dominated my thinking in regards to it since early 2000 or before. Someone sent me a 2005 peer reviewed journal article which claimed to have the viral sequence. So convenient. The World Economic Forum and partners held an epidemic. An deadly epidemic with no test, with many so sick they displayed mild cold symptoms, many who died from the medical intensive care, and with many dead from gunshots and accidents who died with Covid. Now many dead from the vaccines. Strange fruit indeed.

Expand full comment

I felt it was necessary to dig through my emails and find the Massey link where she provides the email back and forth between her and Couey. At the heart of this is something to do with tone. Couey likes Eric’s tone better than Christine’s. And while Couey said nothing that made sense with regards to why the in silico RNA sequences actually represent something real and why the real thing can never be isolated, I have to admit that Christine Massey’s email is not a example of how you build a conversation with anyone, especially around a topic as volatile as this. I can see how he felt her email tone to be hostile. I’m actually rather disappointed with how she went about trying to extract information from him. In fact, on email, he wins the “kind and respectful” contest by a hair. While I can respect her ability to “stick to her guns” her tone was a bit “machine gun”.

Eric, I admire your restraint and razor sharp questions and New York grit which helped me to keep calm as I clawed my way through this interview. Thanks for doing the hard interviews that no one else seems to be getting.

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/RFK-Jr-Holland-Dec-2022-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment

In 1996 my doctor ordered an "epstein-barr virus test" for me. When she read me the results she said: "You don't have the virus because you don't have the antibodies associated with it. The virus can't be seen on a test." I asked her why the virus couldn't be detected (seen). "Because it's invisible," she replied. "If it's invisible, then how do you know it exists?" I asked. "I don't know," she replied. "We just know it's there." I think these tests and sequencing methods are science gone mad to preserve its existence. CHD like ICAN would not have a reason to exist if the world knew there were no viruses or viral diseases because the vaccine industry would disintegrate and there would be no need for these "Health Freedom" organizations to fight for "safe schedules" of childhood vaccines. The fallout would be massive, hard to comprehend even. The day is coming though and I expect it won't take the 50 years that Dr Tom Cowan estimates -- with a bit of a crooked smile on his face. Awesome work, Eric, and the researchers at Chiron Return.

Expand full comment

I guess this whole "virus" thing comes from the experience they made in WWI with the mustard gas which was working great in the first place but after the guys used gas masks was not working anymore. So the goal is and was to find a posion (and virus means posion) that is selfreplicating and can jump from person to person. I guess what they find in nature are poisons, like this "virus" is found in batshit (and all of us know that batshit is very poisonous for us), actually something that was cast out of the body as waste.

What he says about viruses in Tabacco might be true, because even Dr. Stephan Lanka confirms that the only viruses he found where in alges. So plants may have something like this.

Expand full comment

Grammar fix suggestion, Eric: using reverse transcriptase, so add several honorary bonus PCR cycles), they call that a “confirmed case of infection.” It’s not. It’s all nose (noise), no signal.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks Brian that may be in the email -- do you see it here?

https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/made-for-hulu-open-letter-to-jay

Expand full comment

You got it. You're the best.

Expand full comment