• TUCKER CARLSON: “How can world governments kill more than 10 million people and leave some large undetermined number disabled for life? And not say a word about it. Not apologize. Not work to fix it. Not work to make the families whole. I mean, just leave it by the side of the road like a corpse and keep marching. I don’t understand that. How can that happen?

    STEVE KIRSCH: “Believe me, I’m surprised, as well. You know, I can’t get an audience with anybody in the United States Congress. Except for Senator Ron Johnson. Like, I can’t have a dialogue. They won’t talk to me. Nobody wants to know. They don’t want to know the truth. It’s like autism in this country. You know, autism has been around for a very long time. And we’ve known from the statistics that vaccines cause autism. It’s the leading cause of autism. Now, can we even get a discussion about that?”

    TUCKER CARLSON: “May I? May I ask you to pause that? I mean, the statement you just made is verboten. I mean, no person who wanted to say work at the Atlantic magazine or who takes the New York Times on a daily basis would ever say something like that because you’re not allowed to say that. Tell us why you say that?”

    STEVE KIRSCH: “Because it’s true. I’ve collected my own data just independently, to look at, at the connection between vaccines and autism. And it’s amazing. I had over 10,000 parents, tell me about their kids. And I said, hey, tell me about your kids. Tell me how many vaccines they got, and tell me if they have autism. Tell me if they have ADHD. You know, just tell me about your kids. Tell me about the medical conditions. And tell me about how many shots they get. And it’s a straight line. The more shots you get, the more likely you are to get autism. And it’s the same thing for ADHD. It’s the same thing for PANDAS. It’s the same thing for autoimmune diseases. I mean that it is basically the more shots you get, the less healthy the kids are.”

    https://x.com/vigilantfox/status/1761435501943312491?s=46
    TUCKER CARLSON: “How can world governments kill more than 10 million people and leave some large undetermined number disabled for life? And not say a word about it. Not apologize. Not work to fix it. Not work to make the families whole. I mean, just leave it by the side of the road like a corpse and keep marching. I don’t understand that. How can that happen? STEVE KIRSCH: “Believe me, I’m surprised, as well. You know, I can’t get an audience with anybody in the United States Congress. Except for Senator Ron Johnson. Like, I can’t have a dialogue. They won’t talk to me. Nobody wants to know. They don’t want to know the truth. It’s like autism in this country. You know, autism has been around for a very long time. And we’ve known from the statistics that vaccines cause autism. It’s the leading cause of autism. Now, can we even get a discussion about that?” TUCKER CARLSON: “May I? May I ask you to pause that? I mean, the statement you just made is verboten. I mean, no person who wanted to say work at the Atlantic magazine or who takes the New York Times on a daily basis would ever say something like that because you’re not allowed to say that. Tell us why you say that?” STEVE KIRSCH: “Because it’s true. I’ve collected my own data just independently, to look at, at the connection between vaccines and autism. And it’s amazing. I had over 10,000 parents, tell me about their kids. And I said, hey, tell me about your kids. Tell me how many vaccines they got, and tell me if they have autism. Tell me if they have ADHD. You know, just tell me about your kids. Tell me about the medical conditions. And tell me about how many shots they get. And it’s a straight line. The more shots you get, the more likely you are to get autism. And it’s the same thing for ADHD. It’s the same thing for PANDAS. It’s the same thing for autoimmune diseases. I mean that it is basically the more shots you get, the less healthy the kids are.” https://x.com/vigilantfox/status/1761435501943312491?s=46
    0 Comments 0 Shares 243 Views
  • Anyone But You

    Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht

    After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.

    Genre: Comedy, Romance

    Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis

    Director: Will Gluck

    Country: United States

    #RomanticComedy
    #FakeRelationship
    #DestinationWedding
    #LoveDownUnder
    #UnexpectedReunion
    #SydneySweeney
    #GlenPowell
    #MiaArtemis
    #WillGluck
    #USFilm
    #HilariousRomance
    #ChemistryOnScreen
    #WeddingShenanigans
    #RelationshipGoals
    #FeelGoodMovie
    #AmericanCinema
    #LaughOutLoud
    #Heartwarming
    #SummerRomance
    #LoveIsInTheAir
    Anyone But You Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple. Genre: Comedy, Romance Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis Director: Will Gluck Country: United States #RomanticComedy #FakeRelationship #DestinationWedding #LoveDownUnder #UnexpectedReunion #SydneySweeney #GlenPowell #MiaArtemis #WillGluck #USFilm #HilariousRomance #ChemistryOnScreen #WeddingShenanigans #RelationshipGoals #FeelGoodMovie #AmericanCinema #LaughOutLoud #Heartwarming #SummerRomance #LoveIsInTheAir
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1348 Views
  • Anyone But You

    Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht

    After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.

    Genre: Comedy, Romance

    Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis

    Director: Will Gluck

    Country: United States

    #RomanticComedy
    #FakeRelationship
    #DestinationWedding
    #LoveDownUnder
    #UnexpectedReunion
    #SydneySweeney
    #GlenPowell
    #MiaArtemis
    #WillGluck
    #USFilm
    #HilariousRomance
    #ChemistryOnScreen
    #WeddingShenanigans
    #RelationshipGoals
    #FeelGoodMovie
    #AmericanCinema
    #LaughOutLoud
    #Heartwarming
    #SummerRomance
    #LoveIsInTheAir
    Anyone But You Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple. Genre: Comedy, Romance Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis Director: Will Gluck Country: United States #RomanticComedy #FakeRelationship #DestinationWedding #LoveDownUnder #UnexpectedReunion #SydneySweeney #GlenPowell #MiaArtemis #WillGluck #USFilm #HilariousRomance #ChemistryOnScreen #WeddingShenanigans #RelationshipGoals #FeelGoodMovie #AmericanCinema #LaughOutLoud #Heartwarming #SummerRomance #LoveIsInTheAir
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1328 Views
  • Anyone But You

    Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht

    After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.

    Genre: Comedy, Romance

    Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis

    Director: Will Gluck

    Country: United States

    #RomanticComedy
    #FakeRelationship
    #DestinationWedding
    #LoveDownUnder
    #UnexpectedReunion
    #SydneySweeney
    #GlenPowell
    #MiaArtemis
    #WillGluck
    #USFilm
    #HilariousRomance
    #ChemistryOnScreen
    #WeddingShenanigans
    #RelationshipGoals
    #FeelGoodMovie
    #AmericanCinema
    #LaughOutLoud
    #Heartwarming
    #SummerRomance
    #LoveIsInTheAir
    Anyone But You Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple. Genre: Comedy, Romance Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis Director: Will Gluck Country: United States #RomanticComedy #FakeRelationship #DestinationWedding #LoveDownUnder #UnexpectedReunion #SydneySweeney #GlenPowell #MiaArtemis #WillGluck #USFilm #HilariousRomance #ChemistryOnScreen #WeddingShenanigans #RelationshipGoals #FeelGoodMovie #AmericanCinema #LaughOutLoud #Heartwarming #SummerRomance #LoveIsInTheAir
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1281 Views
  • Anyone But You

    Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht

    After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.

    Genre: Comedy, Romance

    Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis

    Director: Will Gluck

    Country: United States

    #RomanticComedy
    #FakeRelationship
    #DestinationWedding
    #LoveDownUnder
    #UnexpectedReunion
    #SydneySweeney
    #GlenPowell
    #MiaArtemis
    #WillGluck
    #USFilm
    #HilariousRomance
    #ChemistryOnScreen
    #WeddingShenanigans
    #RelationshipGoals
    #FeelGoodMovie
    #AmericanCinema
    #LaughOutLoud
    #Heartwarming
    #SummerRomance
    #LoveIsInTheAir
    Anyone But You Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple. Genre: Comedy, Romance Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis Director: Will Gluck Country: United States #RomanticComedy #FakeRelationship #DestinationWedding #LoveDownUnder #UnexpectedReunion #SydneySweeney #GlenPowell #MiaArtemis #WillGluck #USFilm #HilariousRomance #ChemistryOnScreen #WeddingShenanigans #RelationshipGoals #FeelGoodMovie #AmericanCinema #LaughOutLoud #Heartwarming #SummerRomance #LoveIsInTheAir
    Love
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1273 Views
  • Anyone But You

    Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht

    After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.

    Genre: Comedy, Romance

    Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis

    Director: Will Gluck

    Country: United States
    Anyone But You Full Video:https://shorten.is/XV_Ht After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice cold — until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a destination wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple. Genre: Comedy, Romance Actor: Sydney Sweeney, Glen Powell, Mia Artemis Director: Will Gluck Country: United States
    Love
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 466 Views
  • There are people right now who will pay a premium for the knowledge you have—
    because what makes you different is what makes you valuable.
    Keep reading because I’m addressing all your “What ifs…?” around creating & launching a course. I’ll show you my proven approach.
    https://bit.ly/3OQ1E6w

    It’s your time to create now. Launch now. Get results now. Because you’re ready now.

    I’m inviting you to work with me… so I can help you uncover your unique voice, create your course in record time, and make money in a way that works for you.

    It’s an amazing feeling when you SAY you’re gonna do something and actually DO it. I’m inviting you to enroll in Course From Scratch (CFS) and be the version of yourself who says I DID IT!
    https://bit.ly/3OQ1E6w
    There are people right now who will pay a premium for the knowledge you have— because what makes you different is what makes you valuable. Keep reading because I’m addressing all your “What ifs…?” around creating & launching a course. I’ll show you my proven approach. https://bit.ly/3OQ1E6w It’s your time to create now. Launch now. Get results now. Because you’re ready now. I’m inviting you to work with me… so I can help you uncover your unique voice, create your course in record time, and make money in a way that works for you. It’s an amazing feeling when you SAY you’re gonna do something and actually DO it. I’m inviting you to enroll in Course From Scratch (CFS) and be the version of yourself who says I DID IT! https://bit.ly/3OQ1E6w
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 1180 Views

  • 💰 Want to earn $750 in just minutes? Discover this easy CPA offer now! 💸

    Hey there, Somee fam! 👋 Looking to make some extra cash without breaking a sweat? You're in luck! I've found an incredible CPA offer that lets you earn $750 with just a few simple steps.

    🔥 Here's the scoop:

    Click the link below to get started:
    [https://shorturl.at/vwLMT]

    Complete a quick and easy action, like filling out a short form, signing up for a trial, or completing a survey.

    Get rewarded instantly! Once you finish the action, you'll receive $750 straight into your account.

    It's that simple! No gimmicks, no strings attached. Just cold, hard cash for completing simple tasks. Don't miss out on this amazing opportunity to boost your bank account!

    💡 Pro Tip: Act fast – this offer won't be around forever! Take advantage of it now and start earning today!

    [Crest Offer] 🚀

    #RewardsUS #CashBonus #EarnCash #750Dollars #RewardsProgram #CashIncentive #EasyMoney #GetPaid #EarnRewards #CashRewards #ExtraCash
    💰 Want to earn $750 in just minutes? Discover this easy CPA offer now! 💸 Hey there, Somee fam! 👋 Looking to make some extra cash without breaking a sweat? You're in luck! I've found an incredible CPA offer that lets you earn $750 with just a few simple steps. 🔥 Here's the scoop: Click the link below to get started: [https://shorturl.at/vwLMT] Complete a quick and easy action, like filling out a short form, signing up for a trial, or completing a survey. Get rewarded instantly! Once you finish the action, you'll receive $750 straight into your account. It's that simple! No gimmicks, no strings attached. Just cold, hard cash for completing simple tasks. Don't miss out on this amazing opportunity to boost your bank account! 💡 Pro Tip: Act fast – this offer won't be around forever! Take advantage of it now and start earning today! [Crest Offer] 🚀 #RewardsUS #CashBonus #EarnCash #750Dollars #RewardsProgram #CashIncentive #EasyMoney #GetPaid #EarnRewards #CashRewards #ExtraCash
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2485 Views
  • I am shocked❗️
    1 Cup In Morning…Detox Liver & Colon!

    Subscribe to the "Dr. Alan Mandell" channel. He's an amazing doctor, who's helped thousands of people and has been in practice for more than 25 years.

    Let's keep your healthy! Click on the link below and find out for yourself!

    https://t.me/Dr. Alan Mandell ✅
    I am shocked❗️ 1 Cup In Morning…Detox Liver & Colon! Subscribe to the "Dr. Alan Mandell" channel. He's an amazing doctor, who's helped thousands of people and has been in practice for more than 25 years. Let's keep your healthy! Click on the link below and find out for yourself! https://t.me/Dr. Alan Mandell ✅
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 965 Views 2
  • AMAZING HOLOGRAPHIC PROJECTION TECHNOLOGY!
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ylsmcx8V3AWe/
    AMAZING HOLOGRAPHIC PROJECTION TECHNOLOGY! https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ylsmcx8V3AWe/
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 656 Views
  • Watch any amazing film,series free and Without buffering Just click this link and enjoy your fav movie💯💯💯

    #movie #usa #australia #entertainment #viral #social #hollywoodmovie
    Watch any amazing film,series free and Without buffering Just click this link and enjoy your fav movie💯💯💯 #movie #usa #australia #entertainment #viral #social #hollywoodmovie
    Love
    1
    1 Comments 0 Shares 1656 Views
  • Everything to know about the Health Benefits of Beets
    Some benefits of eating beets may include lower blood pressure and better athletic performance, among others. Eating beets raw or juicing and roasting them may be more beneficial than boiling them.

    Beetroots, commonly known as beets, are a vibrant and versatile type of vegetable. They’re known for their earthy flavor and aroma. Many people call them a superfood because of their rich nutritional profile.

    In addition to bringing a pop of color to your plate, beets are highly nutritious and packed with essential vitamins, minerals, and plant compounds, many of which have medicinal properties.

    What’s more, they’re delicious and easy to add to your diet in dishes like balsamic roasted beets, hummus, fries, and salads, among many others.

    Here are 9 evidence-based benefits of beets, plus some tasty ways to increase your intake.

    Share on Pinterest
    Beets boast an impressive nutritional profile.

    They’re low in calories yet high in valuable vitamins and minerals. In fact, they contain a bit of almost all of the vitamins and minerals your body needs (1Trusted Source).

    Here’s an overview of the nutrients found in a 3.5-ounce (100-gram) serving of boiled beetroot (1Trusted Source):

    Calories: 44
    Protein: 1.7 grams
    Fat: 0.2 grams
    Carbs: 10 grams
    Fiber: 2 grams
    Folate: 20% of the Daily Value (DV)
    Manganese: 14% of the DV
    Copper: 8% of the DV
    Potassium: 7% of the DV
    Magnesium: 6% of the DV
    Vitamin C: 4% of the DV
    Vitamin B6: 4% of the DV
    Iron: 4% of the DV
    Beets are particularly rich in folate, a vitamin that plays a key role in growth, development, and heart health (2Trusted Source).

    They also contain a good amount of manganese, which is involved in bone formation, nutrient metabolism, brain function, and more (3Trusted Source).

    Plus, they’re high in copper, an important mineral required for energy production and the synthesis of certain neurotransmitters (4Trusted Source).

    Summary
    Beets are loaded with vitamins and minerals yet low in calories and fat. They’re also a good source of several key nutrients, including folate, manganese, and copper.

    Beets have been well studied for their ability to decrease elevated blood pressure levels, which are a major risk factor for heart disease (5Trusted Source).

    In fact, some studies show that beetroot juice could significantly lower levels of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (6Trusted Source, 7Trusted Source).

    The effect appears to be greater for systolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart contracts, rather than diastolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart is relaxed. Also, raw beets may exert a stronger effect than cooked ones (7Trusted Source, 8Trusted Source).

    These blood-pressure-lowering effects are likely due to the high concentration of nitrates in this root vegetable. In your body, dietary nitrates are converted into nitric oxide, a molecule that dilates blood vessels and causes blood pressure levels to drop (9Trusted Source).

    Beets are also a great source of folate. Although research has turned up mixed results, several studies suggest that increasing your intake of folate could significantly lower blood pressure levels (10Trusted Source).

    However, keep in mind that beets’ effect on blood pressure is only temporary. As such, you need to consume them regularly to experience heart-health benefits over the long term (11Trusted Source).

    Summary
    Beets contain a high concentration of nitrates, which can help lower your blood pressure levels. This may lead to a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke.

    Several studies suggest that dietary nitrates like those found in beets may enhance athletic performance.

    Nitrates appear to affect physical performance by improving the efficiency of mitochondria, which are responsible for producing energy in your cells (12Trusted Source).

    According to one review, beetroot juice could enhance endurance by increasing how long it takes to become exhausted, boosting cardiorespiratory performance, and improving efficiency for athletes (13Trusted Source).

    Promisingly, beet juice has also been shown to improve cycling performance and increase oxygen use by up to 20% (14Trusted Source, 15Trusted Source).

    It’s important to note that blood nitrate levels peak within 2–3 hours of consuming beets or their juice. Therefore, it’s best to consume them a couple of hours before training or competing to maximize their potential benefits (16Trusted Source).

    Summary
    Eating beets may enhance athletic performance by improving oxygen use and endurance. To maximize their effects, consume them 2–3 hours prior to training or competing.

    Beets contain pigments called betalains, which possess a number of anti-inflammatory properties (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 18Trusted Source).

    This could benefit several aspects of health, as chronic inflammation has been associated with conditions like obesity, heart disease, liver disease, and cancer (19Trusted Source).

    One study in 24 people with high blood pressure found that consuming 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beet juice for 2 weeks significantly reduced several markers of inflammation, including C-reactive protein (CRP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) (8Trusted Source).

    Plus, an older 2014 study in people with osteoarthritis — a condition that causes inflammation in the joints — showed that betalain capsules made with beetroot extract reduced pain and discomfort (20).

    Beetroot juice and extract have also been shown to reduce kidney inflammation in rats injected with toxic, injury-causing chemicals (17Trusted Source).

    Still, more studies in humans are needed to determine whether enjoying beets in normal amounts as part of a healthy diet may provide the same anti-inflammatory benefits.

    Summary
    Beets may have a number of anti-inflammatory effects, although further research in humans is needed.

    One cup of beetroot contains 3.4 grams of fiber, making beets a good fiber source (1Trusted Source).

    Fiber bypasses digestion and travels to the colon, where it feeds friendly gut bacteria and adds bulk to stools (21Trusted Source).

    This can promote digestive health, keep you regular, and prevent digestive conditions like constipation, inflammatory bowel disease (IBS), and diverticulitis (22Trusted Source, 23Trusted Source).

    Moreover, fiber has been linked to a reduced risk of chronic diseases, including colon cancer, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes (23Trusted Source, 24Trusted Source, 25Trusted Source).

    Summary
    Beets are a good source of fiber, which benefits your digestive health and reduces the risk of several chronic health conditions.

    »MORE:Living with diabetes? Explore our top resources.
    Mental and cognitive functions naturally decline with age, which can increase the risk of neurodegenerative disorders like dementia.

    The nitrates in beets may improve brain function by promoting the dilation of blood vessels and thus increasing blood flow to the brain (26Trusted Source).

    Particularly, beets have been shown to improve blood flow to the frontal lobe of the brain, an area associated with higher level thinking like decision making and working memory (27Trusted Source).

    Furthermore, an older study in people with type 2 diabetes found that reaction time during a cognitive function test was 4% faster in those who consumed 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beetroot juice daily for 2 weeks, compared with a control group (28Trusted Source).

    However, more research is needed to determine whether beets could be used to improve brain function and reduce the risk of dementia among the general population.

    Summary
    Beets contain nitrates, which may increase blood flow to the brain and improve cognitive function. However, more research in this area is needed.

    Beetroot contains several compounds with cancer-fighting properties, including betaine, ferulic acid, rutin, kaempferol, and caffeic acid (29Trusted Source).

    Although more research is needed, test-tube studies have shown that beetroot extract can slow the division and growth of cancer cells (30Trusted SourceTrusted Source, 31Trusted Source, 32Trusted Source).

    Several other studies have found that having higher blood levels of betaine may be associated with a lower risk of developing cancer (33Trusted Source, 34Trusted Source).

    However, it’s important to note that most studies on the topic have used isolated compounds rather than beetroot. Therefore, further research on beetroot consumption as part of a well-rounded diet and cancer risk is needed.

    Summary
    Some studies show that certain compounds found in beets could have cancer-fighting properties. Still, further research is needed to better understand this potential connection.

    Beets have several nutritional properties that could make them a great addition to a balanced diet.

    First, they’re low in fat and calories but high in water, which can help balance your energy intake. Increasing your intake of low calorie foods like this root vegetable has also been associated with weight loss (35Trusted Source).

    Furthermore, despite their low calorie content, they contain moderate amounts of protein and fiber. Both of these nutrients can make it easier to achieve and maintain a moderate weight (36Trusted Source, 37Trusted Source).

    The fiber in beets may also support digestive health, decrease appetite, and promote feelings of fullness, thereby reducing your overall calorie intake (38Trusted Source).

    Additionally, by including them in smoothies or other recipes, you can easily increase your intake of fruits and vegetables to improve the quality of your diet (39Trusted Source).

    Summary
    Beets have are high in water, moderate in fiber and protein, and low in calories. All of these properties can balance your energy intake and improve your diet quality.

    Beets are not only nutritious but also incredibly delicious and easy to incorporate into your diet.

    You can juice, roast, steam, or pickle them. For a convenient option, you can purchase them precooked and canned. You can even enjoy them raw, either sliced thinly or grated.

    Choose beets that feel heavy for their size with fresh, unwilted green leafy tops still attached, if possible.

    Because dietary nitrates are water-soluble, it’s best to avoid boiling beets if you’d like to maximize their nitrate content.

    Are beets good for people with diabetes?

    Here are some delicious and interesting ways to add more beets to your diet:

    Salad. Grated beets make a flavorful and colorful addition to coleslaw or other salads. Try this recipe for Amazing Dressed Beets or a Beetroot, Orange, and Carrot Salad.
    Dip. Beets blended with Greek yogurt and fresh garlic make a delicious, healthy, and colorful dip. Have a go at this Beetroot and Honey Lemon Houmous.
    Juice. Fresh beetroot juice is typically better than store-bought versions, which can be high in added sugar and contain only a small amount of beets. Try this beetroot juice recipe, which uses carrot, apple, ginger, celery, and lemon for flavor
    Soup: Borscht is a popular soup in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia. Try this classic recipe or this beetroot and tomato variation.
    Leaves. You can cook and enjoy fresh beet leaves similarly to how you’d use spinach. Get some ideas for cooking beet greens here.
    Roasted. Wedge beetroots and toss them with a little olive oil, salt, pepper, and herbs or spices of your choice. Then, roast them in a 400°F (205°C) oven for 15–20 minutes until they’re tender. Or try these Balsamic Roasted Beets.
    Summary
    Beetroot is a delicious and versatile vegetable that’s easy to add to your diet. If possible, choose beets that feel heavy for their size with green tops still attached.

    Can you eat beets everyday?

    It’s always best to follow a varied diet.

    Eating a small amount of beetroot every day is unlikely to do any harm, but a high intake could lead to low blood pressure, red or black urine and feces, and digestive problems for anyone with a sensitivity to the nutrients. A high daily beet consumption may also mean you are not getting nutrients from other foods, however, so try to vary your diet.

    Always speak with a doctor before making significant dietary changes.

    Are beets a superfood?

    Some people call beets a superfood because they are rich in essential nutrients.

    Are beets anti-inflammatory?

    Beets contain betalains, a natural coloring agent with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Some research suggests belatains may help reduce both symptoms and biological markers in the body related to inflammation (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 20).

    Can beets boost your sexual health?

    Beets contain nitrates and there is some evidence they may improve the body’s nitric oxide production (40Trusted Source).

    The body needs nitric oxide to open the blood vessels that are necessary for getting and maintaining an erection. This may make them suitable for people with erectile dysfunction, although there is no scientific evidence to confirm this.

    Can beets help with sexual function?

    Beets are highly nutritious and loaded with health-promoting properties.

    They can support the health of your brain, heart, and digestive system, are a great addition to a balanced diet, boost athletic performance, help alleviate inflammation, and possibly slow the growth of cancer cells.

    Best of all, beets are delicious and easy to include in your diet. For example, they’re a great addition to salads, side dishes, smoothies, dips, and juices.

    https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-beets#nutrients-and-calories
    Everything to know about the Health Benefits of Beets Some benefits of eating beets may include lower blood pressure and better athletic performance, among others. Eating beets raw or juicing and roasting them may be more beneficial than boiling them. Beetroots, commonly known as beets, are a vibrant and versatile type of vegetable. They’re known for their earthy flavor and aroma. Many people call them a superfood because of their rich nutritional profile. In addition to bringing a pop of color to your plate, beets are highly nutritious and packed with essential vitamins, minerals, and plant compounds, many of which have medicinal properties. What’s more, they’re delicious and easy to add to your diet in dishes like balsamic roasted beets, hummus, fries, and salads, among many others. Here are 9 evidence-based benefits of beets, plus some tasty ways to increase your intake. Share on Pinterest Beets boast an impressive nutritional profile. They’re low in calories yet high in valuable vitamins and minerals. In fact, they contain a bit of almost all of the vitamins and minerals your body needs (1Trusted Source). Here’s an overview of the nutrients found in a 3.5-ounce (100-gram) serving of boiled beetroot (1Trusted Source): Calories: 44 Protein: 1.7 grams Fat: 0.2 grams Carbs: 10 grams Fiber: 2 grams Folate: 20% of the Daily Value (DV) Manganese: 14% of the DV Copper: 8% of the DV Potassium: 7% of the DV Magnesium: 6% of the DV Vitamin C: 4% of the DV Vitamin B6: 4% of the DV Iron: 4% of the DV Beets are particularly rich in folate, a vitamin that plays a key role in growth, development, and heart health (2Trusted Source). They also contain a good amount of manganese, which is involved in bone formation, nutrient metabolism, brain function, and more (3Trusted Source). Plus, they’re high in copper, an important mineral required for energy production and the synthesis of certain neurotransmitters (4Trusted Source). Summary Beets are loaded with vitamins and minerals yet low in calories and fat. They’re also a good source of several key nutrients, including folate, manganese, and copper. Beets have been well studied for their ability to decrease elevated blood pressure levels, which are a major risk factor for heart disease (5Trusted Source). In fact, some studies show that beetroot juice could significantly lower levels of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (6Trusted Source, 7Trusted Source). The effect appears to be greater for systolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart contracts, rather than diastolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart is relaxed. Also, raw beets may exert a stronger effect than cooked ones (7Trusted Source, 8Trusted Source). These blood-pressure-lowering effects are likely due to the high concentration of nitrates in this root vegetable. In your body, dietary nitrates are converted into nitric oxide, a molecule that dilates blood vessels and causes blood pressure levels to drop (9Trusted Source). Beets are also a great source of folate. Although research has turned up mixed results, several studies suggest that increasing your intake of folate could significantly lower blood pressure levels (10Trusted Source). However, keep in mind that beets’ effect on blood pressure is only temporary. As such, you need to consume them regularly to experience heart-health benefits over the long term (11Trusted Source). Summary Beets contain a high concentration of nitrates, which can help lower your blood pressure levels. This may lead to a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke. Several studies suggest that dietary nitrates like those found in beets may enhance athletic performance. Nitrates appear to affect physical performance by improving the efficiency of mitochondria, which are responsible for producing energy in your cells (12Trusted Source). According to one review, beetroot juice could enhance endurance by increasing how long it takes to become exhausted, boosting cardiorespiratory performance, and improving efficiency for athletes (13Trusted Source). Promisingly, beet juice has also been shown to improve cycling performance and increase oxygen use by up to 20% (14Trusted Source, 15Trusted Source). It’s important to note that blood nitrate levels peak within 2–3 hours of consuming beets or their juice. Therefore, it’s best to consume them a couple of hours before training or competing to maximize their potential benefits (16Trusted Source). Summary Eating beets may enhance athletic performance by improving oxygen use and endurance. To maximize their effects, consume them 2–3 hours prior to training or competing. Beets contain pigments called betalains, which possess a number of anti-inflammatory properties (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 18Trusted Source). This could benefit several aspects of health, as chronic inflammation has been associated with conditions like obesity, heart disease, liver disease, and cancer (19Trusted Source). One study in 24 people with high blood pressure found that consuming 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beet juice for 2 weeks significantly reduced several markers of inflammation, including C-reactive protein (CRP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) (8Trusted Source). Plus, an older 2014 study in people with osteoarthritis — a condition that causes inflammation in the joints — showed that betalain capsules made with beetroot extract reduced pain and discomfort (20). Beetroot juice and extract have also been shown to reduce kidney inflammation in rats injected with toxic, injury-causing chemicals (17Trusted Source). Still, more studies in humans are needed to determine whether enjoying beets in normal amounts as part of a healthy diet may provide the same anti-inflammatory benefits. Summary Beets may have a number of anti-inflammatory effects, although further research in humans is needed. One cup of beetroot contains 3.4 grams of fiber, making beets a good fiber source (1Trusted Source). Fiber bypasses digestion and travels to the colon, where it feeds friendly gut bacteria and adds bulk to stools (21Trusted Source). This can promote digestive health, keep you regular, and prevent digestive conditions like constipation, inflammatory bowel disease (IBS), and diverticulitis (22Trusted Source, 23Trusted Source). Moreover, fiber has been linked to a reduced risk of chronic diseases, including colon cancer, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes (23Trusted Source, 24Trusted Source, 25Trusted Source). Summary Beets are a good source of fiber, which benefits your digestive health and reduces the risk of several chronic health conditions. »MORE:Living with diabetes? Explore our top resources. Mental and cognitive functions naturally decline with age, which can increase the risk of neurodegenerative disorders like dementia. The nitrates in beets may improve brain function by promoting the dilation of blood vessels and thus increasing blood flow to the brain (26Trusted Source). Particularly, beets have been shown to improve blood flow to the frontal lobe of the brain, an area associated with higher level thinking like decision making and working memory (27Trusted Source). Furthermore, an older study in people with type 2 diabetes found that reaction time during a cognitive function test was 4% faster in those who consumed 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beetroot juice daily for 2 weeks, compared with a control group (28Trusted Source). However, more research is needed to determine whether beets could be used to improve brain function and reduce the risk of dementia among the general population. Summary Beets contain nitrates, which may increase blood flow to the brain and improve cognitive function. However, more research in this area is needed. Beetroot contains several compounds with cancer-fighting properties, including betaine, ferulic acid, rutin, kaempferol, and caffeic acid (29Trusted Source). Although more research is needed, test-tube studies have shown that beetroot extract can slow the division and growth of cancer cells (30Trusted SourceTrusted Source, 31Trusted Source, 32Trusted Source). Several other studies have found that having higher blood levels of betaine may be associated with a lower risk of developing cancer (33Trusted Source, 34Trusted Source). However, it’s important to note that most studies on the topic have used isolated compounds rather than beetroot. Therefore, further research on beetroot consumption as part of a well-rounded diet and cancer risk is needed. Summary Some studies show that certain compounds found in beets could have cancer-fighting properties. Still, further research is needed to better understand this potential connection. Beets have several nutritional properties that could make them a great addition to a balanced diet. First, they’re low in fat and calories but high in water, which can help balance your energy intake. Increasing your intake of low calorie foods like this root vegetable has also been associated with weight loss (35Trusted Source). Furthermore, despite their low calorie content, they contain moderate amounts of protein and fiber. Both of these nutrients can make it easier to achieve and maintain a moderate weight (36Trusted Source, 37Trusted Source). The fiber in beets may also support digestive health, decrease appetite, and promote feelings of fullness, thereby reducing your overall calorie intake (38Trusted Source). Additionally, by including them in smoothies or other recipes, you can easily increase your intake of fruits and vegetables to improve the quality of your diet (39Trusted Source). Summary Beets have are high in water, moderate in fiber and protein, and low in calories. All of these properties can balance your energy intake and improve your diet quality. Beets are not only nutritious but also incredibly delicious and easy to incorporate into your diet. You can juice, roast, steam, or pickle them. For a convenient option, you can purchase them precooked and canned. You can even enjoy them raw, either sliced thinly or grated. Choose beets that feel heavy for their size with fresh, unwilted green leafy tops still attached, if possible. Because dietary nitrates are water-soluble, it’s best to avoid boiling beets if you’d like to maximize their nitrate content. Are beets good for people with diabetes? Here are some delicious and interesting ways to add more beets to your diet: Salad. Grated beets make a flavorful and colorful addition to coleslaw or other salads. Try this recipe for Amazing Dressed Beets or a Beetroot, Orange, and Carrot Salad. Dip. Beets blended with Greek yogurt and fresh garlic make a delicious, healthy, and colorful dip. Have a go at this Beetroot and Honey Lemon Houmous. Juice. Fresh beetroot juice is typically better than store-bought versions, which can be high in added sugar and contain only a small amount of beets. Try this beetroot juice recipe, which uses carrot, apple, ginger, celery, and lemon for flavor Soup: Borscht is a popular soup in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia. Try this classic recipe or this beetroot and tomato variation. Leaves. You can cook and enjoy fresh beet leaves similarly to how you’d use spinach. Get some ideas for cooking beet greens here. Roasted. Wedge beetroots and toss them with a little olive oil, salt, pepper, and herbs or spices of your choice. Then, roast them in a 400°F (205°C) oven for 15–20 minutes until they’re tender. Or try these Balsamic Roasted Beets. Summary Beetroot is a delicious and versatile vegetable that’s easy to add to your diet. If possible, choose beets that feel heavy for their size with green tops still attached. Can you eat beets everyday? It’s always best to follow a varied diet. Eating a small amount of beetroot every day is unlikely to do any harm, but a high intake could lead to low blood pressure, red or black urine and feces, and digestive problems for anyone with a sensitivity to the nutrients. A high daily beet consumption may also mean you are not getting nutrients from other foods, however, so try to vary your diet. Always speak with a doctor before making significant dietary changes. Are beets a superfood? Some people call beets a superfood because they are rich in essential nutrients. Are beets anti-inflammatory? Beets contain betalains, a natural coloring agent with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Some research suggests belatains may help reduce both symptoms and biological markers in the body related to inflammation (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 20). Can beets boost your sexual health? Beets contain nitrates and there is some evidence they may improve the body’s nitric oxide production (40Trusted Source). The body needs nitric oxide to open the blood vessels that are necessary for getting and maintaining an erection. This may make them suitable for people with erectile dysfunction, although there is no scientific evidence to confirm this. Can beets help with sexual function? Beets are highly nutritious and loaded with health-promoting properties. They can support the health of your brain, heart, and digestive system, are a great addition to a balanced diet, boost athletic performance, help alleviate inflammation, and possibly slow the growth of cancer cells. Best of all, beets are delicious and easy to include in your diet. For example, they’re a great addition to salads, side dishes, smoothies, dips, and juices. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-beets#nutrients-and-calories
    WWW.HEALTHLINE.COM
    9 Impressive Health Benefits of Beets
    Beetroots are a vibrantly colored, delicious, and nutritious vegetable with many health benefits. Here are 9 beet benefits, backed by science.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 9468 Views
  • Virology - The Damning Evidence
    The Stake In The Heart For This Pseudoscientific Profession

    dpl
    Introduction

    One never realize how big the task of writing on a subject is until you start. One thing you can be assured of is how much you learn by writing about your findings or thoughts. My stance on virology has been clarified in two previous posts as follows:

    The Gatekeepers Club.

    Virus Lie - The Result of 4 Years of Study.

    Another thing you quickly realize on this journey is how easy it is to censor someone, especially if you start hitting a nerve. I have documented some of it underneath the conclusion of the The Gatekeepers Club article. It is very important to make copies of your work, as shadow banning is one thing, but if these platforms decide to terminate your channel and all the work you have done is on it, you will obviously lose it all. We were in that same position about a year ago when Discord decided to terminate our channel. Twenty of the smartest people you would ever know had been working on it for close to two years, and it was gone overnight. Therefore, this post will serve as safekeeping for some of the best information that I have come across in the last few weeks proving that virology is pseudoscience.


    Update - 18 September 2023

    The order of the sections of this article has been rearranged to introduce the most important information first. As mentioned in my most recent article titled: Hacking at the Root of the Virus Issue it was explained that for the longest time I thought that failure to “isolate” viruses was the most important evidence to focus on. This is however not the case as explained in detail in the “Hacking at the Root of the Virus Issue” article.

    Transmission is the fundamental assumption on which virology rest. Without proof of transmission, nothing downstream matters. Even though understanding these downstream concepts will never be a waste of time one must consider that the normal man on the street will not be interested in complicated terminology and processes.

    It is of crucial importance for the no virus community to find easier ways to explain the fallacy that is virology. Seeing as no one need a laboratory to assess whether transmission is possible and because we can observe this phenomena ourselves (Inductive reasoning) this is the linchpin for virology. A twitter space where we discussed this can be viewed here (*Note: Jamie was cut off during his talk and his section was not included).

    As discussed during the twitter space, we have reviewed the available transmission studies and a summary of these studies can be seen below.

    Transmission / Infection

    One of the funniest things you will see while debating the trolls on Twitter is that they will provide studies conducted to prove the efficacy of vaccines. The people that undertake these studies assume that transmission or infection has already been proven, but nothing could be further from the truth. That is why it is important for us to list the peer-reviewed studies that disprove transmission or infection to further demonstrate that virology is a pseudoscience. The list of studies was compiled with the help of Jamie, georgie&donny, and Aldhissla (also see Aldhissla’s list on polio here).

    (*Please note that this section is open to comments at the moment and anyone that want to add notes or studies are free to leave a comment).

    The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Mar. 1, 1905):
    - Chapman, 1801: Tried to transmit measles using the blood, tears, the mucus of the nostrils and bronchia, and the eruptive matter in the cuticle without any success.
    - Willan, 1809: Inoculated three children with vesicle fluids of measles but without success.
    - Albers, 1834: Attempted to infect four children with measles without success. He quoted Alexander Monro, Bourgois, and Spray as also having made unsuccessful inoculations with saliva, tears, and cutaneous scales.
    - Themmen, 1817: Tried to infect 5 children with measles. 0/5 children became sick.

    Charles Creighton, 1837 (A history of epidemics in Britain). "No proof of the existence of any contagious principles by which it was propagated from one individual to another."

    EH Ackernecht, writing about Anticontagionism between 1821 and 1867 - “That the anticontagionists were usually honest men and in deadly earnest is shown, among other things, by the numerous self-experiments to which they submitted themselves to prove their contentions.” also see “Famous are the plague self-experiments of Clot-Bey, the offers for plague self-experiment by Chervin, Lassis, Costa, Lapis, and Lasserre, and the cholera self-experiments of Fay, Scipio Pinel, Wayrot, and J.L. Guyon. The amazing thing is that almost all of these experiments failed to produce the disease.”

    Note on Hospitals by Florence Nightingale, 1858 - "Suffice it to say, that in the ordinary sense of the word, there is no proof, such as would be admitted in any scientific inquiry, that there is any such thing as 'contagion." also see "Just as there is no such thing as 'contagion,' there is no such thing as inevitable 'infection."

    Andreas Christian Bull, 1868 - “It does not seem apparent in this small [polio] epidemic that contagion played any role, because the disease occurred here and there in the different places of the district without the possibility of establishing any relation between the various cases or the families of the same.”

    Karl-Oskar Medin, 1887 - A Swedish pediatrician who was the first to examine a polio outbreak, concluded that it was an infectious, but not contagious, disease.

    Charles Caverly, 1894 - Investigated the first US polio epidemic: ”it is very certain that it was non-contagious.”

    Journal of American Medical Association, Volume 72, Number 3, 1919 (or additional link here):

    - Warschawsky, 1895 - Injected small pigs and rabbits with blood taken in the eruptive stage. All results were negative.
    - Belila, 1896 - Placed warm nasal mucus and saliva from measles patients on the nasal and oral mucous membrane of rabbits, guinea-pigs, cats, mice, dogs and lambs, but without any positive results.
    - Josias, 1898 - Rubbed measles secretions over the throat, nose and eyes of several young pigs, but without any effects.
    - Geissler, 1903 - Inoculated sheep, swine, goats, dogs and cats in various ways with the bodily fluids from patients with measles; including smearing, spraying, rubbing. All results were negative.
    - Pomjalowsky, 1914 - Injected measles blood into guineapigs, rabbits and small pigs. All results were negative.
    - Jurgelunas, 1914 - Inoculated blood from patients with measles into suckling pigs and rabbits, but without effect.

    Leegaard, 1899 - Was not able to prove a single case of patient-to-patient contagion in a polio outbreak in Norway. "Infantile paralysis is of an infectious, but not of a contagious nature. As a matter of fact no indisputable instance of contagion could be proved."

    Dr. Rodermund, 1901 - From his diary of SmallPox experiments. For 15 years he smeared the pus of smallpox patients on his face and used to go home with his family, play cards at the gentleman’s club and treat other patients and never got sick or saw a single other person get sick.

    Walter Reed, 1902 - “Without entering into details, I may say that, in the first place, the Commission saw, with some surprise, what had so often been noted in the literature, that patients in all stages of yellow fever could be cared for by non-immune nurses without danger of contracting the disease. The non-contagious character of yellow fever was, therefore, hardly to be questioned.”

    Landsteiner & Popper, 1909 - "Attempts to transmit the disease [polio] to the usual laboratory animals, such as rabbits, guinea pigs, or mice, failed."

    F.E. Batten, (1909) - “Against the infectivity of the disease may be urged, first, the absence of spread of infection in hospital. The cases of poliomyelitis admitted to hospital freely mixed with other cases in the ward without any isolation or disinfection, some 70 children came in contact, but no infection took place. (p. 208, last paragraph)”

    The Boston medical and surgical journal, 1909 - An inquiry a 1908 polio outbreak found the following: “A large number of children were in intimate contact with those that were sick, and of these children an insignificant minority developed the disease.” 244 children were in intimate contact with those who were afflicted with polio. Of those 244 children, an "insignificant minority" developed the disease.

    Massachusetts State board of health, 1909 - "Poliomyelitis prevailed in epidemic form in Kansas during the summer of 1909 … No method of contagion could be found, and the author does not consider the disease contagious."

    Flexner & Lewis, 1910 - Multiple unsuccessful polio transmission attempts. "Many guinea-pigs and rabbits, one horse, two calves, three goats, three pigs, three sheep, six rats, six mice, six dogs, and four cats have had active virus introduced in the brain but without causing any appreciable effect whatever. These animals have been under observation for many weeks."

    A Washinton, 1911 - “I have not seen any cases of Polio contagion. We put the patients on one side and typhoid cases on the other, and no nurse or mother was infected. If the disease was so contagious, I don't see why the nurses and mothers would not have been infected.”

    J.J. Moren, 1912 - "Monkeys suffering from polio in the same cage with healthy monkeys, do not infect others."

    P. H. Römer, 1913 - "No proofs of the contagiousness of the disease [polio] could be obtained in the great epidemic in New York in 1907, nor in the epidemic in the Steiermark (Furntratt, Potpeschnigg) nor in Pomerania (Peiper).

    H. W. Frauenthal, 1914 - "Advocates of the contagion theory were at a loss to account for the fact that spontaneous [polio] transmission among laboratory monkeys was never known to occur ... There is no proof that spontaneous transmission of acute poliomyelitis, without an inoculation wound, can take place. There is no proof that contact contagion takes place. Spontaneous development of the disease among laboratory animals is unknown."

    W.H. Frost, 1916 - "The disease [polio] develops in a such a small proportion of people known to have been intimately associated with acute cases of polio." ... "The majority of cases of poliomyelitis can not be traced to known contact, either direct or indirect, with any previous case."

    W. L. Holt, 1916 - Investigated an epidemic of polio and found that he was "surprised that I could trace hardly any cases to personal contact with others, there rarely being successive cases."

    Dr. I. D. Rawlings, 1916 - "Any one who has had much experience with poliomyelitis is struck by the infrequency, relatively, of the secondary cases among direct contacts ... there were approximately 1,500 direct contacts, and yet but one possible case occurred among them. Also among the large number of people that came from New York and other infected areas not a single case occurred.”

    H. L. Abramson, 1917 - Attempts to induce polio in a monkey by injecting the spinal fluid of 40 polio patients (rather than the ground cord) into the brain failed.

    Dold et al. 1917 (Original paper in German from Muenchener Medizinische Wochenschrift 64 ( 1917), bottom of p 143) - Injected healthy people with the nasal secretions taken from one ill person, 1/40 healthy people became ill.

    A review of the investigations concerning the etiology of measels, A. W. Sellards
    harvard Medical School. Boston, Massachusetts as seen below:
    - Jurgelunas, 1914: Tried to produce measles in monkeys using inoculations of the blood and mucus secretions from measles patients as well as by exposing the animals to patients in measles wards. All results were negative.
    - Sellards, 1918: Tried to transmit measles to 8 healthy volunteers without a prior history of measles exposure. 0/8 men became sick after multiple failed attempts.
    - Sellards and Wenworth, 1918: Inoculated 3 monkeys in various ways, including intensive injections of blood from measles patients. The animals remained well.
    - Sellards and Wenworth, 1918: Blood from measles patients was injected simultaneously into 2 men and 2 monkeys. Both men remained symptom-free. One of the two monkeys developed symptoms that were not suggestive of measles.

    Milton Rosenau, 1918 - Professor of preventive medicine and hygiene at Harvard, notes that "monkeys have so far never been known to contract the disease [polio] spontaneously, even though they are kept in intimate association with infected monkeys." Page 341.

    Hess & Unger, 1918 - "In three instances the nasal secretion of varicella patients was applied to the nostrils; in three others the tonsillar secretion to the tonsils, and in six, the tonsillar and pharyngeal secretions were transferred to the nose, the pharynx, and the tonsils. In none of these twelve cases was there any reaction whatsoever, either local or systemic."

    Hess & Unger, 1918 - The vesicle fluids from people with chickenpox was injected intravenously into 38 children. 0/38 became sick.

    Published in the Journal - American Medical Association, 1919 - Need Of Further Research On The Transmissibility Of Measles And Varicella. “Evidently in our experiments we do not, as we believe, pursue nature's mode of transmission; either we fail to carry over the virus, or the path of infection is quite different from what it is commonly thought to be.”

    Milton J. Rosenau, March 1919 - Conducted 9 separate experiments in a group of 49 healthy men, to prove contagion. In all 9 experiments, 0/49 men became sick after being exposed to sick people or the bodily fluids of sick people.

    More information on the Rosenau studies here.

    Wahl et al, 1919 - Conducted 3 separate trials on six men attempting to infect them with different strains of Influenza. Not a single person got sick.

    Schmidt et al, 1920 (Original paper in German here) - Conducted two controlled experiments, exposing healthy people to the bodily fluids of sick people. Of 196 people exposed to the mucous secretions of sick people, 21 (10.7%) developed colds and three developed grippe (1.5%). In the second group, of the 84 healthy people exposed to mucous secretions of sick people, five developed grippe (5.9%) and four colds (4.7%). Of forty-three controls who had been inoculated with sterile physiological salt solutions eight (18.6%) developed colds. A higher percentage of people got sick after being exposed to saline compared to those being exposed to the “virus”.

    Williams et al, 1921 - Tried to experimentally infect 45 healthy men with the common cold and influenza, by exposing them to mucous secretions from sick people. 0/45 became ill.

    Mahatma Gandhi, 1921 - "and the poison that accumulates in the system is expelled in the form of small-pox. If this view is correct, then there is absolutely no need to be afraid of small-pox" also see "This has given rise to the superstition that it is a contagious disease, and hence to the attempt to mislead the people into the belief that vaccination is an effective means of preventing it."

    Blanc and Caminopetros, 1922 (original paper in French here) - Material from nine cases of shingles was inoculated into the eyes, cornea, conjunctiva, skin, brain, and spinal cord of a series of animals, including rabbits, mice, sheep, pigeons, monkeys, and a dog. All results were negative.

    Robertson & Groves, 1924 - Exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. 0 people of 100 whom they deliberately tried to infect with Influenza got sick That is because Viruses don't cause disease.

    Bauguess, 1924 - "A careful search of the literature does not reveal a case in which the blood from a patient having measles was injected into the blood stream of another person and produced measles."

    The problem of the etiology of herpes zoster, 1925 - "Many other authors report entirely negative results following the inoculation of herpes zoster material into the sacrified corneas of rabbits: Kraupa (18); Baum (19); LSwenstein (8), Teissier, Gastinel, and Reilly (20) ; Kooy (21) ; Netter and Urbain (22); Bloch and Terris (23); Simon and Scott (24); and Doerr (25). It is evident, therefore, that the results of attempts to inoculate animals with material from cases of herpes zoster must be considered at present to be inconclusive."

    Volney S and Chney M.D., 1928 - A study where it is clearly stated that cold is not infectious.

    Dochez et al, 1930 - Attempted to infect 11 men with intranasal influenza. Not a single person got sick. Most strikingly one person got very sick when he accidently found out that is what they were trying to do. His symptoms disappeared when they told him he was misinformed.

    L. L. Lumsden, 1935 - “Painstaking efforts were made throughout the studies to obtain all traces of transmission of the disease through personal contact, but it appears that in this outbreak in Louisville evidence of personal association between the cases of poliomyelitis, suggestive of cause and effect, was no more common than that which might have been found if histories had been taken of personal association between cases of broken bones occurring in the city in the same period.”

    Thomas Francis Jr et al, 1936 - Gave 23 people influenza via 3 different methods. 0 people got sick.. They gave 2 people already "suffering from colds" the influenza who also did not get sick

    Burnet and Lush, 1937 - 200 people given "Melbourne type" Influenza . 0 people showed any symptoms of disease. 200/0.

    Lumsden, 1938 - "It is quite usual in small [polio] outbreaks in rural counties for individual cases to develop in separate homes three or for miles apart without there being any evidence of direct or indirect personal contact having operated between persons afflicted."

    L. L Lumsden, 1938 - ”The general and usual epidemiological features of the disease [polio] all appear opposed to the hypothesis that poliomyelitis is a contagious disease spread among human beings by nose-to-nose or any other direct personal contact.”

    Burnet and Foley, 1940 - Attempted to experimentally infect 15 university students with influenza. The authors concluded their experiment was a failure.

    Thomas Francis Jr, 1940 - Gave 11 people "Epidemic Influenza" 0 people got sick. That is because viruses don't cause disease.

    John Toomey, 1941 - A veteran polio researcher: "no animal gets the disease from another, no matter how intimately exposed."

    A. R. Kendall, 1945 - “The epidemiological facts of poliomyelitis are these: … (2) A majority of cases of clinically diagnosable poliomyelitis (polioparalysis) occur sporadically, with no history of contact with previous cases. (3) Two cases of polioparalysis in one family are unusual, even though no precautions are taken to prevent cross infection. (4) Clinically diagnosable cases of poliomyelitis (polioparalysis) show little tendency to spread, even in schools or other places of public gathering. (5) Incidence of polioparalysis is no greater among doctors and nurses, in intimate contact with acute cases than it is among the civil population, even though the former are exposed freely to infection.” […] “Polioparalysis is not contagious.”

    E. B. Shaw & H. E. Thelander, 1949 - “The epidemiology of the disease [polio] remains obscure. There has been a tendency to depart from an early theory that the disease spreads by means of direct contact.”

    Albert Sabin, 1951 (inventor of the polio vaccine). "There is no evidence for the transmission of poliomyelitis by droplet nuclei."

    Archibald L. Hoyne, 1951 (alternative link here) - “However, in the Cook County Contagious Disease Hospital where the latter procedure has not been used there has never been a doctor, intern, nurse or any other member of the personnel who contracted poliomyelitis within a period of at least thirty-five years, nor has any patient ever developed poliomyelitis after admission to the hospital.”

    Ralph R. Scobey, 1951 - ”Although poliomyelitis is legally a contagious disease, which implies that it is caused by a germ or virus, every attempt has failed conclusively to prove this mandatory requirement of the public health law.” Professor of clinical pediatrics and president of the Poliomyelitis Research Institute, Syracuse, N.Y.

    Ralph R. Scobey, 1952 - "In addition to the failure to prove contagiousness of human poliomyelitis, it has likewise been impossible to prove contagiousness of poliomyelitis in experimental animals."

    Douglas Gordon et al, 1975 - This study gave 10 people English type Influenza and 10 people a placebo. The study was negative. Most telling is they admit that mild symptoms were seen in the placebo group, proving that the inoculation methods cause them.

    Beare et al 1980 (refer to reference 6 in the linked paper). Quote from John J Cannell, 2008 as follows - “An eighth conundrum – one not addressed by Hope-Simpson – is the surprising percentage of seronegative volunteers who either escape infection or develop only minor illness after being experimentally inoculated with a novel influenza virus.”

    Nancy Padian, 1996 - A study which followed 176 discordant couples (1 HIV positive and the other negative) for 10 years. These couples regularly slept together and had unprotected sex. There were no HIV transmissions from the positive partner to the negative partner during the entirety of the study.

    John Treanor et al, 1999 - Gave 108 people Influenza A. Only 35% recorded mild symptoms such as stuffy nose. Unfortunately 35% of the placebo control group also developed mild symptoms proving the methods of inoculation are causing them.

    Bridges et al, 2003 - "Our review found no human experimental studies published in the English-language literature delineating person-to-person transmission of influenza... Thus, most information on human-to-human transmission of influenza comes from studies of human inoculation with influenza virus and observational studies."

    The Virology Journal, 2008 - ”There were five attempts to demonstrate sick-to-well influenza transmission in the desperate days following the pandemic [1918 flu] and all were ’singularly fruitless’ … all five studies failed to support sick-to-well transmission, in spite of having numerous acutely ill influenza patients, in various stages of their illness, carefully cough, spit, and breathe on a combined total of >150 well patients.”

    Public Health Reports, 2010 - ”It seemed that what was acknowledged to be one of the most contagious of communicable diseases [1918 flu] could not be transferred under experimental conditions.”

    Jasmin S Kutter, 2018, - Our observations underscore the urgent need for new knowledge on respiratory virus transmission routes and the implementation of this knowledge in infection control guidelines to advance intervention strategies for currently circulating and newly emerging viruses and to improve public health.
    - There is a substantial lack of (experimental) evidence on the transmission routes of PIV (types 1–4) and HMPV.
    - Extensive human rhinovirus transmission experiments have not led to a widely accepted view on the transmission route [35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40].
    - However, until today, results on the relative importance of droplet and aerosol transmission of influenza viruses stay inconclusive and hence, there are many reviews intensively discussing this issue [10, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50].
    - Despite this, the relative importance of transmission routes of respiratory viruses is still unclear, depending on the heterogeneity of many factors like the environment (e.g. temperature and humidity), pathogen and host [5, 19].

    Jonathan Van Tam, 2020 - Conducted these human trials of Flu A in 2013. 52 people were intentionally given "Flu A" and made to live in controlled conditions with 75 people. 0 people sick. 0 PCR positive.

    J.S. Kutter, 2021 - “Besides nasal discharge, no other signs of illness were observed in the A/H1N1 virus-positive donor and indirect recipient animals.” The animals were subsequently euthanized after the animals experienced what the scientist describe as having breathing difficulties (no further details were given to describe their condition). *Refer to Note 1.

    Ben Killingley, 2022 - Gave 36 people what he considered to be purified Covid Virus Intranasally. The Results: Nobody got sick. *Refer to Note 2.

    Notes

    *Note 1 - Jasmin Kutter, 2021:

    From the Results section: “Throat and nasal swabs were collected from the donor and indirect recipient animals on alternating days.” This on its own can lead to nasal discharge which is the only “sign of illness” that was noted in this study.

    *Note 2 - Ben Killingley, 2022:

    See the video explanation by Jamie here.

    Ben Killingley also conducted a study in the early 2010's in which he had inoculated people in a room with 75 others some wearing masks others as a control. Not a single person even tested PCR positive. Some links to his previous studies include a 2011, 2019 and a 2020 study.

    It is assumed that his latest, 2022 study, is a follow up to cover the findings of his previous findings. Some additional notes on the study referenced include:

    - They gave 10 people the potent nephrotoxin Remdisivir.

    - They measure sickness by means of a PCR test which isn't indicative of disease because it can tests positive with “asymptomatic” cases as well.

    - Even if you say that a runny nose after swabbing is Covid. A 50% outcome to a direct challenge of something is a negative result. It doesn't suggest causation which would need to be at least 90%.

    - The very methods of inoculation used during the study could cause the nasal congestion/discharge (which is their measure of whether someone is sick or not). This has been shown in previous studies.

    - Lastly nobody was given "regeneron" because nobody got "sick".

    *Note 3 - Dr Robert Willner, 1994:

    December 7th 1994 Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, Greensboro, N.C., Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax. In front of a gathering of about 30 alternative-medicine practitioners and several journalists, Willner stuck a needle in the finger of Andres, 27, a Fort Lauderdale student who says he has tested positive for HIV. Then, wincing, the 65-year-old doctor stuck himself. In 1993, Dr. Willner stunned Spain by inoculating himself with the blood of Pedro Tocino, an HIV positive hemophiliac. This demonstration of devotion to the truth and the Hippocratic Oath he took, nearly 40 years before, was reported on the front page of every major newspaper in Spain. His appearance on Spain’s most popular television show envoked a 4 to 1 response by the viewing audience in favor of his position against the “AIDS hypothesis.” When asked why he would put his life on the line to make a point, Dr. Willner replied: “I do this to put a stop to the greatest murderous fraud in medical history. By injecting myself with HIV positive blood, I am proving the point as Dr. Walter Reed did to prove the truth about yellow fever. In this way it is my hope to expose the truth about HIV in the interest of all mankind.” He tested negative multiple times. He died of a Heart attack 4 months later 15th April 1995 (yeh right, funny how these naysayers all die suddenly. Link to the presentation here.

    Ludicrous “Transmission” Studies

    The picture of virology’s ludicrousy won’t be complete without a list of studies showing the insanity of what virologists claim to be transmission of disease. This include the injection of fluids into the brains and lungs of animals and we may just include some epidemiological studies to show how these are also not proof of anything. Joe Hendry mostly put it together and the papers we have are as follows (*Please note that this section is open to comments at the moment and anyone that want to add notes or studies are free to leave a comment):

    Louis Pasteur, 1881 - For rabies, tried to demonstrate transmission by injecting diseased brain tissue "directly onto the surface of the brain of a healthy dog through a hole drilled into its skull."

    Simon Flexner and Paul A. Lewis, 1910 - Spinal cords from deceased children were ground up and emulsified to be injected into the brains of monkeys. Study explained in detail here.

    John F. Anderson and Joseph Goldberger, 1911 - Injected blood from a measles patient directly into the heart and brains of monkeys.

    Carl Tenbroeck, 1918 - A mixture of ground up rat's livers, spleens, kidneys,
    testicles, lungs, hearts, and brains was injected into the brains of other rats.

    Claus W. Jungeblut, 1931 - Ground up monkey spinal cord was injected into the brains of other monkeys.

    Wilson Smith, 1933 - “The infected animal is killed when showing symptoms, often at the beginning of the second temperature rise. The turbinates are scraped out, ground up with sand, and emulsified in about 20 c.cm. of equal parts of broth and saline. The emulsion is lightly centrifuged, and about 1 c.cm. of the supernatant fluid is dropped into the nostrils of another ferret.”

    Thomas Francis and Jr, T. P. Magill, 1935 - Ground up ferret lung tissue was injected into the brains of rabbits.

    Ann G. Kuttner and T'sun T'ung, 1935 - Ground up kidney and brain of a guinea pig was injected into the brain of another guinea pig.

    Erich Traub. April 01 1936 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of guinea pigs.

    Albert B. Sabin and Peter K. Olitsky, 1937 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of other mice.

    G. John Buddingh, 1938 - Ground up chick embryo was injected into the brains 2 or 3 day old chicks.

    Gilbert Dalldorf, 1939 - Ground up ferret spleens was injected into the brains of mice.

    Claus W. Jungeblut et al, 1942 - Ground up brain or spinal cord of paralyzed mice was injected into the brains of 13 monkeys.

    Henry Pinkerton and Vicente Moragues, 1942 - Ground up brain tissue from dying mice was injected into the brains of pigeons.

    C. Kling et al, 1942 - Injected sewage sludge into the brains and abdomen of monkeys. This convinced him that he had isolated a virus and proven that the sewer is a vehicle for polio transmission.

    D.M. Horstmann, 1944 - Allegedly "proved" that the feces of polio patients contained "poliovirus" by injecting fecal samples into monkeys' brains and spines.

    Joseph E. Smadel et al, 1945 - Ground up pigeon spleen was injected into the brains of mice.

    F. Sargent Cheever et al, 1949 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of rats and hamsters.

    Isolation

    Isolation has been well defined in Virus Lie - The Result of 4 Years of Study and to this day there has not been a single paper presented that could show the isolation of a virus without first contaminating the sample. This is shown in detail in the virus lie article and will not be repeated here again. One interesting point that can be captured here is all the studies showing a control test proving that the isolation method used for viruses is flawed. They can be listed as follows:

    John F Enders, 1954 - Under other agents isolated during the study. "A second agent was obtained from an uninoculated culture of monkey kidney cells. The cytopathic changes it induced in the unstained preparations could not be distinguished with confidence from the viruses isolated from measles." It is highlighted here. Refer to the video explanation here.

    Image
    It is further discussed in the paper that "While there is no ground for concluding that the factors in vivo (in the body) are the same as those which underlie the formation of giant cells and the nuclear disturbances in vitro (outside a living organism), the appearance of these phenomena in cultured cells is consistent with the properties that a priori might be associated with the virus of measles.”

    Image
    Rustigian et al, 1955 - This paper is described in an article by Viroliegy here (look under Rustigain in the article).

    Cohen et al, 1955 - This paper is also described in the same article by Viroliegy here (look under Cohen in the article).

    Bech and von Magnus, 1959 - This paper is also described in the same article by Viroliegy here (look under Von Magnus in the article).

    F Rapp et al, 1959 - This paper is described in a video by Spacebusters here. Most noteworthy is “Monkey kidney cells, however, are unsuitable for the investigations of the type reported here; Peebles et al. and Ruckle showed that monkeys, and cell cultures derived from them, are often infected with an agent serologically indistinguishable from human measles virus, which causes cytopathic changes in monkey kidney cell cultures almost identical with those caused by human measles virus.”

    Image
    Carl J. O’Hara et al, 1988 - The study demonstrated "HIV" particles in 18 out of 20 (90% of) AIDS-related lymph node enlargements but also in 13 out of 15 (88% of) non-AIDS-related enlargements. Which means that particles claimed to be HIV virions are non-specific since identical particles can be found in the majority of patients with enlarged lymph nodes not attributed to AIDS, and at no risk for developing AIDS. Refer to @Aldhissla45’s tweet here.

    P Gluschankof et al, 1997 - This paper described in a video here with additional notes by Jamie here.

    Julian W. Bess Jr., 1997 - This paper described in a video here with additional notes by Jamie here.

    C.A. Cassol, 2020 - This paper is described by Andrew Kaufman here as well as by Thomas Cowan here.

    “Unofficially” we can also add the Lanka 3 phase control experiment that can be seen here or searched for it here.

    A further indication of the isolation procedure fallacy is shown in a study during which the CPE becomes more well defined with the addition of specific substances. The study is as follows:

    Leon Caly et al, 2020 - “Following several failures to recover virions with the characteristic fringes of surface spike proteins, it was found that adding trypsin to the cell culture medium immediately improved virion morphology.” See a video explanation here.

    Recent Requests and Statements

    Further and more recent requests and statements that were sent to me by my good friend Courtenay are as follows:

    May 5, 2022:
    U.S. CDC and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry confirmed that a search of their records failed to find any that describe anyone on Earth finding an alleged “avian influenza virus” in the bodily fluids of any diseased diseased host (animal or human) and purifying “it”… which is necessary so that “it” could be sequenced, characterized and studied with controlled experiments. This can be viewed here.

    May 20, 2022:
    Public Health Agency of Canada confirmed that they have no record of any alleged “avian influenza virus” having been found and purified from the bodily fluid/tissue/excrement of any diseased “host” on the planet (in order for “it” to be sequenced, characterized and studied with controlled experiments) by anyone, anywhere, ever.
    Insanely, they insist that:

    “Viruses” are in hosts despite their utter inability to find them there,.

    It’s necessary to “grow them” in non-host cells (as if “they” would grow better there than they allegedly grew in the diseased host lol).

    They pretend that mixing complex substances together results in purification.

    This can be viewed here.

    December 20, 2021:
    Public Health Agency of Canada confirmed that they have no record of any alleged “virus” having been purified from a sample taken from any diseased human on Earth, by anyone, ever, period. To be viewed here.

    March 11, 2022:
    U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry respond to a FOIA request for all studies / reports in their possession, custody or control describing the purification of any “virus” addressed by any “vaccine” on either their childhood or adult U.S. “immunization” schedule, directly from a sample taken from any diseased "host" on Earth where the sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material. CDC/ATSDR provided 5 studies on “rotavirus” (thereby admitting they have no records for any other alleged viruses). None of these 5 studies actually describe isolation/purification of a “rotavirus” from a human.
    Request, response, studies to be viewed here.

    March 8, 2023:
    Italy 2020: Inside Covid’s “Ground zero” in Europe - Three years ago the Western World came to a standstill. The official Covid-19 narrative depicted a strange suddenly-super-spreading, deadlier-than-flu virus hailing from China that landed in Northern Italy.

    On February 20, 2020 the first alleged case of Covid-19 was discovered in the West in the Lombardy town of Codogno, Italy. Later that day the Italian government reported their first “Covid-19 death.”

    Dramatic media reports emerging from Northern Italy were hammered into and onto the Western psyche giving the impression there was a mysterious “super spreading” and “super lethal” novel virus galloping across the region infecting and killing scores of people.

    Read the rest of the report here.

    Conclusion

    The above list will be worked on over the coming years. If you think that any corrections need to be made or if you want to add additional studies, please leave a comment.


    Share

    Leave a comment

    https://open.substack.com/pub/dpl003/p/virology-the-damning-evidence?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    Virology - The Damning Evidence The Stake In The Heart For This Pseudoscientific Profession dpl Introduction One never realize how big the task of writing on a subject is until you start. One thing you can be assured of is how much you learn by writing about your findings or thoughts. My stance on virology has been clarified in two previous posts as follows: The Gatekeepers Club. Virus Lie - The Result of 4 Years of Study. Another thing you quickly realize on this journey is how easy it is to censor someone, especially if you start hitting a nerve. I have documented some of it underneath the conclusion of the The Gatekeepers Club article. It is very important to make copies of your work, as shadow banning is one thing, but if these platforms decide to terminate your channel and all the work you have done is on it, you will obviously lose it all. We were in that same position about a year ago when Discord decided to terminate our channel. Twenty of the smartest people you would ever know had been working on it for close to two years, and it was gone overnight. Therefore, this post will serve as safekeeping for some of the best information that I have come across in the last few weeks proving that virology is pseudoscience. Update - 18 September 2023 The order of the sections of this article has been rearranged to introduce the most important information first. As mentioned in my most recent article titled: Hacking at the Root of the Virus Issue it was explained that for the longest time I thought that failure to “isolate” viruses was the most important evidence to focus on. This is however not the case as explained in detail in the “Hacking at the Root of the Virus Issue” article. Transmission is the fundamental assumption on which virology rest. Without proof of transmission, nothing downstream matters. Even though understanding these downstream concepts will never be a waste of time one must consider that the normal man on the street will not be interested in complicated terminology and processes. It is of crucial importance for the no virus community to find easier ways to explain the fallacy that is virology. Seeing as no one need a laboratory to assess whether transmission is possible and because we can observe this phenomena ourselves (Inductive reasoning) this is the linchpin for virology. A twitter space where we discussed this can be viewed here (*Note: Jamie was cut off during his talk and his section was not included). As discussed during the twitter space, we have reviewed the available transmission studies and a summary of these studies can be seen below. Transmission / Infection One of the funniest things you will see while debating the trolls on Twitter is that they will provide studies conducted to prove the efficacy of vaccines. The people that undertake these studies assume that transmission or infection has already been proven, but nothing could be further from the truth. That is why it is important for us to list the peer-reviewed studies that disprove transmission or infection to further demonstrate that virology is a pseudoscience. The list of studies was compiled with the help of Jamie, georgie&donny, and Aldhissla (also see Aldhissla’s list on polio here). (*Please note that this section is open to comments at the moment and anyone that want to add notes or studies are free to leave a comment). The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Mar. 1, 1905): - Chapman, 1801: Tried to transmit measles using the blood, tears, the mucus of the nostrils and bronchia, and the eruptive matter in the cuticle without any success. - Willan, 1809: Inoculated three children with vesicle fluids of measles but without success. - Albers, 1834: Attempted to infect four children with measles without success. He quoted Alexander Monro, Bourgois, and Spray as also having made unsuccessful inoculations with saliva, tears, and cutaneous scales. - Themmen, 1817: Tried to infect 5 children with measles. 0/5 children became sick. Charles Creighton, 1837 (A history of epidemics in Britain). "No proof of the existence of any contagious principles by which it was propagated from one individual to another." EH Ackernecht, writing about Anticontagionism between 1821 and 1867 - “That the anticontagionists were usually honest men and in deadly earnest is shown, among other things, by the numerous self-experiments to which they submitted themselves to prove their contentions.” also see “Famous are the plague self-experiments of Clot-Bey, the offers for plague self-experiment by Chervin, Lassis, Costa, Lapis, and Lasserre, and the cholera self-experiments of Fay, Scipio Pinel, Wayrot, and J.L. Guyon. The amazing thing is that almost all of these experiments failed to produce the disease.” Note on Hospitals by Florence Nightingale, 1858 - "Suffice it to say, that in the ordinary sense of the word, there is no proof, such as would be admitted in any scientific inquiry, that there is any such thing as 'contagion." also see "Just as there is no such thing as 'contagion,' there is no such thing as inevitable 'infection." Andreas Christian Bull, 1868 - “It does not seem apparent in this small [polio] epidemic that contagion played any role, because the disease occurred here and there in the different places of the district without the possibility of establishing any relation between the various cases or the families of the same.” Karl-Oskar Medin, 1887 - A Swedish pediatrician who was the first to examine a polio outbreak, concluded that it was an infectious, but not contagious, disease. Charles Caverly, 1894 - Investigated the first US polio epidemic: ”it is very certain that it was non-contagious.” Journal of American Medical Association, Volume 72, Number 3, 1919 (or additional link here): - Warschawsky, 1895 - Injected small pigs and rabbits with blood taken in the eruptive stage. All results were negative. - Belila, 1896 - Placed warm nasal mucus and saliva from measles patients on the nasal and oral mucous membrane of rabbits, guinea-pigs, cats, mice, dogs and lambs, but without any positive results. - Josias, 1898 - Rubbed measles secretions over the throat, nose and eyes of several young pigs, but without any effects. - Geissler, 1903 - Inoculated sheep, swine, goats, dogs and cats in various ways with the bodily fluids from patients with measles; including smearing, spraying, rubbing. All results were negative. - Pomjalowsky, 1914 - Injected measles blood into guineapigs, rabbits and small pigs. All results were negative. - Jurgelunas, 1914 - Inoculated blood from patients with measles into suckling pigs and rabbits, but without effect. Leegaard, 1899 - Was not able to prove a single case of patient-to-patient contagion in a polio outbreak in Norway. "Infantile paralysis is of an infectious, but not of a contagious nature. As a matter of fact no indisputable instance of contagion could be proved." Dr. Rodermund, 1901 - From his diary of SmallPox experiments. For 15 years he smeared the pus of smallpox patients on his face and used to go home with his family, play cards at the gentleman’s club and treat other patients and never got sick or saw a single other person get sick. Walter Reed, 1902 - “Without entering into details, I may say that, in the first place, the Commission saw, with some surprise, what had so often been noted in the literature, that patients in all stages of yellow fever could be cared for by non-immune nurses without danger of contracting the disease. The non-contagious character of yellow fever was, therefore, hardly to be questioned.” Landsteiner & Popper, 1909 - "Attempts to transmit the disease [polio] to the usual laboratory animals, such as rabbits, guinea pigs, or mice, failed." F.E. Batten, (1909) - “Against the infectivity of the disease may be urged, first, the absence of spread of infection in hospital. The cases of poliomyelitis admitted to hospital freely mixed with other cases in the ward without any isolation or disinfection, some 70 children came in contact, but no infection took place. (p. 208, last paragraph)” The Boston medical and surgical journal, 1909 - An inquiry a 1908 polio outbreak found the following: “A large number of children were in intimate contact with those that were sick, and of these children an insignificant minority developed the disease.” 244 children were in intimate contact with those who were afflicted with polio. Of those 244 children, an "insignificant minority" developed the disease. Massachusetts State board of health, 1909 - "Poliomyelitis prevailed in epidemic form in Kansas during the summer of 1909 … No method of contagion could be found, and the author does not consider the disease contagious." Flexner & Lewis, 1910 - Multiple unsuccessful polio transmission attempts. "Many guinea-pigs and rabbits, one horse, two calves, three goats, three pigs, three sheep, six rats, six mice, six dogs, and four cats have had active virus introduced in the brain but without causing any appreciable effect whatever. These animals have been under observation for many weeks." A Washinton, 1911 - “I have not seen any cases of Polio contagion. We put the patients on one side and typhoid cases on the other, and no nurse or mother was infected. If the disease was so contagious, I don't see why the nurses and mothers would not have been infected.” J.J. Moren, 1912 - "Monkeys suffering from polio in the same cage with healthy monkeys, do not infect others." P. H. Römer, 1913 - "No proofs of the contagiousness of the disease [polio] could be obtained in the great epidemic in New York in 1907, nor in the epidemic in the Steiermark (Furntratt, Potpeschnigg) nor in Pomerania (Peiper). H. W. Frauenthal, 1914 - "Advocates of the contagion theory were at a loss to account for the fact that spontaneous [polio] transmission among laboratory monkeys was never known to occur ... There is no proof that spontaneous transmission of acute poliomyelitis, without an inoculation wound, can take place. There is no proof that contact contagion takes place. Spontaneous development of the disease among laboratory animals is unknown." W.H. Frost, 1916 - "The disease [polio] develops in a such a small proportion of people known to have been intimately associated with acute cases of polio." ... "The majority of cases of poliomyelitis can not be traced to known contact, either direct or indirect, with any previous case." W. L. Holt, 1916 - Investigated an epidemic of polio and found that he was "surprised that I could trace hardly any cases to personal contact with others, there rarely being successive cases." Dr. I. D. Rawlings, 1916 - "Any one who has had much experience with poliomyelitis is struck by the infrequency, relatively, of the secondary cases among direct contacts ... there were approximately 1,500 direct contacts, and yet but one possible case occurred among them. Also among the large number of people that came from New York and other infected areas not a single case occurred.” H. L. Abramson, 1917 - Attempts to induce polio in a monkey by injecting the spinal fluid of 40 polio patients (rather than the ground cord) into the brain failed. Dold et al. 1917 (Original paper in German from Muenchener Medizinische Wochenschrift 64 ( 1917), bottom of p 143) - Injected healthy people with the nasal secretions taken from one ill person, 1/40 healthy people became ill. A review of the investigations concerning the etiology of measels, A. W. Sellards harvard Medical School. Boston, Massachusetts as seen below: - Jurgelunas, 1914: Tried to produce measles in monkeys using inoculations of the blood and mucus secretions from measles patients as well as by exposing the animals to patients in measles wards. All results were negative. - Sellards, 1918: Tried to transmit measles to 8 healthy volunteers without a prior history of measles exposure. 0/8 men became sick after multiple failed attempts. - Sellards and Wenworth, 1918: Inoculated 3 monkeys in various ways, including intensive injections of blood from measles patients. The animals remained well. - Sellards and Wenworth, 1918: Blood from measles patients was injected simultaneously into 2 men and 2 monkeys. Both men remained symptom-free. One of the two monkeys developed symptoms that were not suggestive of measles. Milton Rosenau, 1918 - Professor of preventive medicine and hygiene at Harvard, notes that "monkeys have so far never been known to contract the disease [polio] spontaneously, even though they are kept in intimate association with infected monkeys." Page 341. Hess & Unger, 1918 - "In three instances the nasal secretion of varicella patients was applied to the nostrils; in three others the tonsillar secretion to the tonsils, and in six, the tonsillar and pharyngeal secretions were transferred to the nose, the pharynx, and the tonsils. In none of these twelve cases was there any reaction whatsoever, either local or systemic." Hess & Unger, 1918 - The vesicle fluids from people with chickenpox was injected intravenously into 38 children. 0/38 became sick. Published in the Journal - American Medical Association, 1919 - Need Of Further Research On The Transmissibility Of Measles And Varicella. “Evidently in our experiments we do not, as we believe, pursue nature's mode of transmission; either we fail to carry over the virus, or the path of infection is quite different from what it is commonly thought to be.” Milton J. Rosenau, March 1919 - Conducted 9 separate experiments in a group of 49 healthy men, to prove contagion. In all 9 experiments, 0/49 men became sick after being exposed to sick people or the bodily fluids of sick people. More information on the Rosenau studies here. Wahl et al, 1919 - Conducted 3 separate trials on six men attempting to infect them with different strains of Influenza. Not a single person got sick. Schmidt et al, 1920 (Original paper in German here) - Conducted two controlled experiments, exposing healthy people to the bodily fluids of sick people. Of 196 people exposed to the mucous secretions of sick people, 21 (10.7%) developed colds and three developed grippe (1.5%). In the second group, of the 84 healthy people exposed to mucous secretions of sick people, five developed grippe (5.9%) and four colds (4.7%). Of forty-three controls who had been inoculated with sterile physiological salt solutions eight (18.6%) developed colds. A higher percentage of people got sick after being exposed to saline compared to those being exposed to the “virus”. Williams et al, 1921 - Tried to experimentally infect 45 healthy men with the common cold and influenza, by exposing them to mucous secretions from sick people. 0/45 became ill. Mahatma Gandhi, 1921 - "and the poison that accumulates in the system is expelled in the form of small-pox. If this view is correct, then there is absolutely no need to be afraid of small-pox" also see "This has given rise to the superstition that it is a contagious disease, and hence to the attempt to mislead the people into the belief that vaccination is an effective means of preventing it." Blanc and Caminopetros, 1922 (original paper in French here) - Material from nine cases of shingles was inoculated into the eyes, cornea, conjunctiva, skin, brain, and spinal cord of a series of animals, including rabbits, mice, sheep, pigeons, monkeys, and a dog. All results were negative. Robertson & Groves, 1924 - Exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. 0 people of 100 whom they deliberately tried to infect with Influenza got sick That is because Viruses don't cause disease. Bauguess, 1924 - "A careful search of the literature does not reveal a case in which the blood from a patient having measles was injected into the blood stream of another person and produced measles." The problem of the etiology of herpes zoster, 1925 - "Many other authors report entirely negative results following the inoculation of herpes zoster material into the sacrified corneas of rabbits: Kraupa (18); Baum (19); LSwenstein (8), Teissier, Gastinel, and Reilly (20) ; Kooy (21) ; Netter and Urbain (22); Bloch and Terris (23); Simon and Scott (24); and Doerr (25). It is evident, therefore, that the results of attempts to inoculate animals with material from cases of herpes zoster must be considered at present to be inconclusive." Volney S and Chney M.D., 1928 - A study where it is clearly stated that cold is not infectious. Dochez et al, 1930 - Attempted to infect 11 men with intranasal influenza. Not a single person got sick. Most strikingly one person got very sick when he accidently found out that is what they were trying to do. His symptoms disappeared when they told him he was misinformed. L. L. Lumsden, 1935 - “Painstaking efforts were made throughout the studies to obtain all traces of transmission of the disease through personal contact, but it appears that in this outbreak in Louisville evidence of personal association between the cases of poliomyelitis, suggestive of cause and effect, was no more common than that which might have been found if histories had been taken of personal association between cases of broken bones occurring in the city in the same period.” Thomas Francis Jr et al, 1936 - Gave 23 people influenza via 3 different methods. 0 people got sick.. They gave 2 people already "suffering from colds" the influenza who also did not get sick Burnet and Lush, 1937 - 200 people given "Melbourne type" Influenza . 0 people showed any symptoms of disease. 200/0. Lumsden, 1938 - "It is quite usual in small [polio] outbreaks in rural counties for individual cases to develop in separate homes three or for miles apart without there being any evidence of direct or indirect personal contact having operated between persons afflicted." L. L Lumsden, 1938 - ”The general and usual epidemiological features of the disease [polio] all appear opposed to the hypothesis that poliomyelitis is a contagious disease spread among human beings by nose-to-nose or any other direct personal contact.” Burnet and Foley, 1940 - Attempted to experimentally infect 15 university students with influenza. The authors concluded their experiment was a failure. Thomas Francis Jr, 1940 - Gave 11 people "Epidemic Influenza" 0 people got sick. That is because viruses don't cause disease. John Toomey, 1941 - A veteran polio researcher: "no animal gets the disease from another, no matter how intimately exposed." A. R. Kendall, 1945 - “The epidemiological facts of poliomyelitis are these: … (2) A majority of cases of clinically diagnosable poliomyelitis (polioparalysis) occur sporadically, with no history of contact with previous cases. (3) Two cases of polioparalysis in one family are unusual, even though no precautions are taken to prevent cross infection. (4) Clinically diagnosable cases of poliomyelitis (polioparalysis) show little tendency to spread, even in schools or other places of public gathering. (5) Incidence of polioparalysis is no greater among doctors and nurses, in intimate contact with acute cases than it is among the civil population, even though the former are exposed freely to infection.” […] “Polioparalysis is not contagious.” E. B. Shaw & H. E. Thelander, 1949 - “The epidemiology of the disease [polio] remains obscure. There has been a tendency to depart from an early theory that the disease spreads by means of direct contact.” Albert Sabin, 1951 (inventor of the polio vaccine). "There is no evidence for the transmission of poliomyelitis by droplet nuclei." Archibald L. Hoyne, 1951 (alternative link here) - “However, in the Cook County Contagious Disease Hospital where the latter procedure has not been used there has never been a doctor, intern, nurse or any other member of the personnel who contracted poliomyelitis within a period of at least thirty-five years, nor has any patient ever developed poliomyelitis after admission to the hospital.” Ralph R. Scobey, 1951 - ”Although poliomyelitis is legally a contagious disease, which implies that it is caused by a germ or virus, every attempt has failed conclusively to prove this mandatory requirement of the public health law.” Professor of clinical pediatrics and president of the Poliomyelitis Research Institute, Syracuse, N.Y. Ralph R. Scobey, 1952 - "In addition to the failure to prove contagiousness of human poliomyelitis, it has likewise been impossible to prove contagiousness of poliomyelitis in experimental animals." Douglas Gordon et al, 1975 - This study gave 10 people English type Influenza and 10 people a placebo. The study was negative. Most telling is they admit that mild symptoms were seen in the placebo group, proving that the inoculation methods cause them. Beare et al 1980 (refer to reference 6 in the linked paper). Quote from John J Cannell, 2008 as follows - “An eighth conundrum – one not addressed by Hope-Simpson – is the surprising percentage of seronegative volunteers who either escape infection or develop only minor illness after being experimentally inoculated with a novel influenza virus.” Nancy Padian, 1996 - A study which followed 176 discordant couples (1 HIV positive and the other negative) for 10 years. These couples regularly slept together and had unprotected sex. There were no HIV transmissions from the positive partner to the negative partner during the entirety of the study. John Treanor et al, 1999 - Gave 108 people Influenza A. Only 35% recorded mild symptoms such as stuffy nose. Unfortunately 35% of the placebo control group also developed mild symptoms proving the methods of inoculation are causing them. Bridges et al, 2003 - "Our review found no human experimental studies published in the English-language literature delineating person-to-person transmission of influenza... Thus, most information on human-to-human transmission of influenza comes from studies of human inoculation with influenza virus and observational studies." The Virology Journal, 2008 - ”There were five attempts to demonstrate sick-to-well influenza transmission in the desperate days following the pandemic [1918 flu] and all were ’singularly fruitless’ … all five studies failed to support sick-to-well transmission, in spite of having numerous acutely ill influenza patients, in various stages of their illness, carefully cough, spit, and breathe on a combined total of >150 well patients.” Public Health Reports, 2010 - ”It seemed that what was acknowledged to be one of the most contagious of communicable diseases [1918 flu] could not be transferred under experimental conditions.” Jasmin S Kutter, 2018, - Our observations underscore the urgent need for new knowledge on respiratory virus transmission routes and the implementation of this knowledge in infection control guidelines to advance intervention strategies for currently circulating and newly emerging viruses and to improve public health. - There is a substantial lack of (experimental) evidence on the transmission routes of PIV (types 1–4) and HMPV. - Extensive human rhinovirus transmission experiments have not led to a widely accepted view on the transmission route [35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40]. - However, until today, results on the relative importance of droplet and aerosol transmission of influenza viruses stay inconclusive and hence, there are many reviews intensively discussing this issue [10, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50]. - Despite this, the relative importance of transmission routes of respiratory viruses is still unclear, depending on the heterogeneity of many factors like the environment (e.g. temperature and humidity), pathogen and host [5, 19]. Jonathan Van Tam, 2020 - Conducted these human trials of Flu A in 2013. 52 people were intentionally given "Flu A" and made to live in controlled conditions with 75 people. 0 people sick. 0 PCR positive. J.S. Kutter, 2021 - “Besides nasal discharge, no other signs of illness were observed in the A/H1N1 virus-positive donor and indirect recipient animals.” The animals were subsequently euthanized after the animals experienced what the scientist describe as having breathing difficulties (no further details were given to describe their condition). *Refer to Note 1. Ben Killingley, 2022 - Gave 36 people what he considered to be purified Covid Virus Intranasally. The Results: Nobody got sick. *Refer to Note 2. Notes *Note 1 - Jasmin Kutter, 2021: From the Results section: “Throat and nasal swabs were collected from the donor and indirect recipient animals on alternating days.” This on its own can lead to nasal discharge which is the only “sign of illness” that was noted in this study. *Note 2 - Ben Killingley, 2022: See the video explanation by Jamie here. Ben Killingley also conducted a study in the early 2010's in which he had inoculated people in a room with 75 others some wearing masks others as a control. Not a single person even tested PCR positive. Some links to his previous studies include a 2011, 2019 and a 2020 study. It is assumed that his latest, 2022 study, is a follow up to cover the findings of his previous findings. Some additional notes on the study referenced include: - They gave 10 people the potent nephrotoxin Remdisivir. - They measure sickness by means of a PCR test which isn't indicative of disease because it can tests positive with “asymptomatic” cases as well. - Even if you say that a runny nose after swabbing is Covid. A 50% outcome to a direct challenge of something is a negative result. It doesn't suggest causation which would need to be at least 90%. - The very methods of inoculation used during the study could cause the nasal congestion/discharge (which is their measure of whether someone is sick or not). This has been shown in previous studies. - Lastly nobody was given "regeneron" because nobody got "sick". *Note 3 - Dr Robert Willner, 1994: December 7th 1994 Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, Greensboro, N.C., Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax. In front of a gathering of about 30 alternative-medicine practitioners and several journalists, Willner stuck a needle in the finger of Andres, 27, a Fort Lauderdale student who says he has tested positive for HIV. Then, wincing, the 65-year-old doctor stuck himself. In 1993, Dr. Willner stunned Spain by inoculating himself with the blood of Pedro Tocino, an HIV positive hemophiliac. This demonstration of devotion to the truth and the Hippocratic Oath he took, nearly 40 years before, was reported on the front page of every major newspaper in Spain. His appearance on Spain’s most popular television show envoked a 4 to 1 response by the viewing audience in favor of his position against the “AIDS hypothesis.” When asked why he would put his life on the line to make a point, Dr. Willner replied: “I do this to put a stop to the greatest murderous fraud in medical history. By injecting myself with HIV positive blood, I am proving the point as Dr. Walter Reed did to prove the truth about yellow fever. In this way it is my hope to expose the truth about HIV in the interest of all mankind.” He tested negative multiple times. He died of a Heart attack 4 months later 15th April 1995 (yeh right, funny how these naysayers all die suddenly. Link to the presentation here. Ludicrous “Transmission” Studies The picture of virology’s ludicrousy won’t be complete without a list of studies showing the insanity of what virologists claim to be transmission of disease. This include the injection of fluids into the brains and lungs of animals and we may just include some epidemiological studies to show how these are also not proof of anything. Joe Hendry mostly put it together and the papers we have are as follows (*Please note that this section is open to comments at the moment and anyone that want to add notes or studies are free to leave a comment): Louis Pasteur, 1881 - For rabies, tried to demonstrate transmission by injecting diseased brain tissue "directly onto the surface of the brain of a healthy dog through a hole drilled into its skull." Simon Flexner and Paul A. Lewis, 1910 - Spinal cords from deceased children were ground up and emulsified to be injected into the brains of monkeys. Study explained in detail here. John F. Anderson and Joseph Goldberger, 1911 - Injected blood from a measles patient directly into the heart and brains of monkeys. Carl Tenbroeck, 1918 - A mixture of ground up rat's livers, spleens, kidneys, testicles, lungs, hearts, and brains was injected into the brains of other rats. Claus W. Jungeblut, 1931 - Ground up monkey spinal cord was injected into the brains of other monkeys. Wilson Smith, 1933 - “The infected animal is killed when showing symptoms, often at the beginning of the second temperature rise. The turbinates are scraped out, ground up with sand, and emulsified in about 20 c.cm. of equal parts of broth and saline. The emulsion is lightly centrifuged, and about 1 c.cm. of the supernatant fluid is dropped into the nostrils of another ferret.” Thomas Francis and Jr, T. P. Magill, 1935 - Ground up ferret lung tissue was injected into the brains of rabbits. Ann G. Kuttner and T'sun T'ung, 1935 - Ground up kidney and brain of a guinea pig was injected into the brain of another guinea pig. Erich Traub. April 01 1936 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of guinea pigs. Albert B. Sabin and Peter K. Olitsky, 1937 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of other mice. G. John Buddingh, 1938 - Ground up chick embryo was injected into the brains 2 or 3 day old chicks. Gilbert Dalldorf, 1939 - Ground up ferret spleens was injected into the brains of mice. Claus W. Jungeblut et al, 1942 - Ground up brain or spinal cord of paralyzed mice was injected into the brains of 13 monkeys. Henry Pinkerton and Vicente Moragues, 1942 - Ground up brain tissue from dying mice was injected into the brains of pigeons. C. Kling et al, 1942 - Injected sewage sludge into the brains and abdomen of monkeys. This convinced him that he had isolated a virus and proven that the sewer is a vehicle for polio transmission. D.M. Horstmann, 1944 - Allegedly "proved" that the feces of polio patients contained "poliovirus" by injecting fecal samples into monkeys' brains and spines. Joseph E. Smadel et al, 1945 - Ground up pigeon spleen was injected into the brains of mice. F. Sargent Cheever et al, 1949 - Ground up mouse brain was injected into the brains of rats and hamsters. Isolation Isolation has been well defined in Virus Lie - The Result of 4 Years of Study and to this day there has not been a single paper presented that could show the isolation of a virus without first contaminating the sample. This is shown in detail in the virus lie article and will not be repeated here again. One interesting point that can be captured here is all the studies showing a control test proving that the isolation method used for viruses is flawed. They can be listed as follows: John F Enders, 1954 - Under other agents isolated during the study. "A second agent was obtained from an uninoculated culture of monkey kidney cells. The cytopathic changes it induced in the unstained preparations could not be distinguished with confidence from the viruses isolated from measles." It is highlighted here. Refer to the video explanation here. Image It is further discussed in the paper that "While there is no ground for concluding that the factors in vivo (in the body) are the same as those which underlie the formation of giant cells and the nuclear disturbances in vitro (outside a living organism), the appearance of these phenomena in cultured cells is consistent with the properties that a priori might be associated with the virus of measles.” Image Rustigian et al, 1955 - This paper is described in an article by Viroliegy here (look under Rustigain in the article). Cohen et al, 1955 - This paper is also described in the same article by Viroliegy here (look under Cohen in the article). Bech and von Magnus, 1959 - This paper is also described in the same article by Viroliegy here (look under Von Magnus in the article). F Rapp et al, 1959 - This paper is described in a video by Spacebusters here. Most noteworthy is “Monkey kidney cells, however, are unsuitable for the investigations of the type reported here; Peebles et al. and Ruckle showed that monkeys, and cell cultures derived from them, are often infected with an agent serologically indistinguishable from human measles virus, which causes cytopathic changes in monkey kidney cell cultures almost identical with those caused by human measles virus.” Image Carl J. O’Hara et al, 1988 - The study demonstrated "HIV" particles in 18 out of 20 (90% of) AIDS-related lymph node enlargements but also in 13 out of 15 (88% of) non-AIDS-related enlargements. Which means that particles claimed to be HIV virions are non-specific since identical particles can be found in the majority of patients with enlarged lymph nodes not attributed to AIDS, and at no risk for developing AIDS. Refer to @Aldhissla45’s tweet here. P Gluschankof et al, 1997 - This paper described in a video here with additional notes by Jamie here. Julian W. Bess Jr., 1997 - This paper described in a video here with additional notes by Jamie here. C.A. Cassol, 2020 - This paper is described by Andrew Kaufman here as well as by Thomas Cowan here. “Unofficially” we can also add the Lanka 3 phase control experiment that can be seen here or searched for it here. A further indication of the isolation procedure fallacy is shown in a study during which the CPE becomes more well defined with the addition of specific substances. The study is as follows: Leon Caly et al, 2020 - “Following several failures to recover virions with the characteristic fringes of surface spike proteins, it was found that adding trypsin to the cell culture medium immediately improved virion morphology.” See a video explanation here. Recent Requests and Statements Further and more recent requests and statements that were sent to me by my good friend Courtenay are as follows: May 5, 2022: U.S. CDC and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry confirmed that a search of their records failed to find any that describe anyone on Earth finding an alleged “avian influenza virus” in the bodily fluids of any diseased diseased host (animal or human) and purifying “it”… which is necessary so that “it” could be sequenced, characterized and studied with controlled experiments. This can be viewed here. May 20, 2022: Public Health Agency of Canada confirmed that they have no record of any alleged “avian influenza virus” having been found and purified from the bodily fluid/tissue/excrement of any diseased “host” on the planet (in order for “it” to be sequenced, characterized and studied with controlled experiments) by anyone, anywhere, ever. Insanely, they insist that: “Viruses” are in hosts despite their utter inability to find them there,. It’s necessary to “grow them” in non-host cells (as if “they” would grow better there than they allegedly grew in the diseased host lol). They pretend that mixing complex substances together results in purification. This can be viewed here. December 20, 2021: Public Health Agency of Canada confirmed that they have no record of any alleged “virus” having been purified from a sample taken from any diseased human on Earth, by anyone, ever, period. To be viewed here. March 11, 2022: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry respond to a FOIA request for all studies / reports in their possession, custody or control describing the purification of any “virus” addressed by any “vaccine” on either their childhood or adult U.S. “immunization” schedule, directly from a sample taken from any diseased "host" on Earth where the sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material. CDC/ATSDR provided 5 studies on “rotavirus” (thereby admitting they have no records for any other alleged viruses). None of these 5 studies actually describe isolation/purification of a “rotavirus” from a human. Request, response, studies to be viewed here. March 8, 2023: Italy 2020: Inside Covid’s “Ground zero” in Europe - Three years ago the Western World came to a standstill. The official Covid-19 narrative depicted a strange suddenly-super-spreading, deadlier-than-flu virus hailing from China that landed in Northern Italy. On February 20, 2020 the first alleged case of Covid-19 was discovered in the West in the Lombardy town of Codogno, Italy. Later that day the Italian government reported their first “Covid-19 death.” Dramatic media reports emerging from Northern Italy were hammered into and onto the Western psyche giving the impression there was a mysterious “super spreading” and “super lethal” novel virus galloping across the region infecting and killing scores of people. Read the rest of the report here. Conclusion The above list will be worked on over the coming years. If you think that any corrections need to be made or if you want to add additional studies, please leave a comment. Share Leave a comment https://open.substack.com/pub/dpl003/p/virology-the-damning-evidence?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    OPEN.SUBSTACK.COM
    Virology - The Damning Evidence
    The Stake In The Heart For This Pseudoscientific Profession
    Like
    1
    1 Comments 0 Shares 24801 Views
  • Greetings 🤗

    Here is the famous street food of Pakistan which is known as Egg Tikki (انڈا ٹکی). Which includes Egg, Onion, Tomato, green and red chilli , salt ،Turmeric and some other things which make the taste amazing 🤩.

    I love to eat this food everytime.

    Cross post via Actifit, Liketu.
    Greetings 🤗 Here is the famous street food of Pakistan which is known as Egg Tikki (انڈا ٹکی). Which includes Egg, Onion, Tomato, green and red chilli , salt ،Turmeric and some other things which make the taste amazing 🤩. I love to eat this food everytime. Cross post via Actifit, Liketu.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2526 Views
  • The Year that Expertise Collapsed
    Jeffrey A. Tucker
    Getting sick and getting well is part of the human experience at all times in all places. As with other phenomena of human existence, that suggests there is a great deal of embedded knowledge on the topic woven into the fabric of our lives. We aren’t born knowing but we come to know: from our moms and dads, experience of siblings and others, from our own experience, and from medical professionals who deal with the problem daily.

    In a healthy and functioning society, the path toward maintaining personal and public health becomes embedded in the cultural firmament, just like manners, belief systems, and value preferences. It’s not necessary that we think about it constantly; instead it becomes a habit, with much of the knowledge tacit; that is, deployed daily but rarely with full cognizance.

    We could know for certain that there had been a change in the matrix in March 2020 because, seemingly out of nowhere, all of this knowledge was deemed wrong. A new gaggle of experts was in charge, one day to the next. Suddenly, they were everywhere. They were on TV, quoted by all the newspapers, amplified on social media, and on the phone constantly with local officials instructing them on how they must shut down the schools, businesses, playgrounds, churches, and civic gatherings.

    The message was always the same. This time is completely different from anything in our experience or in any previous experience. This time we must adopt a totally new and completely untested paradigm. It comes from models that high-level scientists have deemed correct. It comes from labs. It comes from “germ games” of which none of us are part. If we dare to reject the new teachings for the old, we are doing it wrong. We are the malicious ones. We deserve ridicule, cancellation, silencing, exclusion, and worse.

    It felt like a coup d’etat of sorts. It certainly was an intellectual coup. All wisdom of the past, even that known by public health only months earlier, was deleted from public spaces. Dissent was silenced. Corporate media was absolutely united in celebrating the greatness of people like Fauci, who spoke in strangely circuitous ways that contradicted everything we thought we knew.

    It was exceedingly strange because the people we thought might have stood up to the flash imposition of tyranny somehow vanished. We could hardly meet with others at all, if only to share intuitions that something was wrong. “Social distancing” was more than a method to “slow the spread;” it amounted to comprehensive control of the public mind too.

    The experts instructing us spoke with astonishing certainty about precisely how society should be managed in a pandemic. There were scientific papers, tens of thousands of them, and the storm of credentials was everywhere and out of control. Unless you had a university or lab affiliation and unless you had multiple high-level degrees attached to your name, you could not get a hearing. Folk wisdom was out of the question, even basic things like “sun and outdoors are good for respiratory infections.” Even popular understanding of natural immunity came in for hard ridicule.

    Later it turned out that even top credentialed experts would not be taken seriously if they had the wrong views. This is when the racket became incredibly obvious. It was never really about genuine knowledge. It was about compliance and echoing the approved line. It’s astonishing how many people went along, even with the stupidest of the mandates, such as the distancing stickers everywhere, the ubiquity of Plexiglas, and the dirty masks on every face which were somehow believed to keep people healthy.

    Once the contrary studies started coming out, we would share them and get shouted down. The comment sections of the studies started to be raided by partisan experts who would hone in on small issues and problems and demand and obtain takedowns. Then the contrarian expert would get doxxed, his dean notified, and the faculty turned against the person, lest the department risk funding from Big Pharma or Fauci in the future.

    All the while, we kept thinking that there must be some rationale behind all this madness. It never emerged. It was all intimidation and belligerence and nothing more – arbitrary diktat by big shots who were pretending the entire time.

    The lockdowners and shot mandators were never intellectually serious people. They never much thought about the implications or ramifications of what they were doing. They were just wrecking things mostly for pecuniary gain, job protection, and career advancement, plus it was fun to be in charge. It’s not much more complicated than that.

    In other words, we’ve gradually come to realize that our worst fears were true. All these experts were and are fakes. There have been some hints along the way, such as when North Carolina Health Director Mandy Cohen (now head of the CDC) reported that she and her colleagues were burning up the phone lines to decide whether people should be allowed to participate in sports.

    “She was like, are you gonna let them have professional football?” she said. “And I was like, no. And she’s like, OK neither are we.”

    Another candid moment came five months ago, only recently unearthed by X, when NIH head Francis Collins admitted that he and his colleagues attached “zero value” to whether and to what extent they were disrupting lives, wrecking the economy, and destroying education for kids. He actually said this.

    As it turns out, these experts who ruled our lives, and still do to a great extent, were never what they claimed to be, and never actually possessed knowledge that was superior to what existed within the cultural firmament of society. Instead, all they really had was power and a grand opportunity to play dictator.

    It’s astonishing, truly, and worthy of deep study, when you consider the extent to which and for how long this class of people were able to maintain the illusion of consensus within their ranks. They bamboozled the media all over the world. They tricked vast swaths of the population. They bent all social media algorithms to reflect their views and priorities.

    One explanation comes down to the money trail. That’s a powerful explanation. But it is not the whole of it. Behind the illusion was a terrifying intellectual isolation in which all these people found themselves. They never really encountered people who disagreed. Indeed, part of the way these people had come to conceive of their jobs was to master the art of knowing what to think and when and how. It’s part of the job training to enter the class of experts: mastering the skill of echoing the opinions of others.

    Discovering this to be true is alarming for anyone who holds to older ideals of how intellectual society should conduct itself. We like to imagine that there is a constant clash of ideas, a burning desire to get to the truth, a love of knowledge and data, a passion for gaining a better understanding. That requires, above all else, an openness of mind and a willingness to listen. All of this was overtly and explicitly shut down in March 2020 but it was made easier because all the mechanisms were already in place.

    One of the best books of our time is Tom Harrington’s The Treason of the Experts, published by Brownstone. There is simply not in the present era a more insightful investigation and deconstruction of the sociological sickness of the expert class. Every page is on fire with insight and observation about the intellectual juntas that attempt to rule the public mind in today’s world. It’s a terrifying look at how wildly wrong everything has gone in the world of ideas. A great followup volume is Ramesh Thakur’s Our Enemy, the Government, which reveals all the ways in which the new scientists who were ruling the world weren’t scientific at all.

    Brownstone was born in the midst of the worst of this world. We set out to create something different, not a bubble of ideological/partisan attachment or an enforcement organ of the proper way to think about all issues. Instead, we sought to become a genuine society of thinkers united in a principled attachment to freedom but hugely diverse in specialization and philosophical outlook. It’s one of the few centers where there is genuine interdisciplinary engagement and openness to new perspectives and outlook. All of this is essential to the life of the mind and yet nearly absent in academia, media, and government today.

    We’ve put together a fascinating model for retreats. We choose a comfortable venue where the food and drink are provided and the living quarters are excellent, and bring together 40 or so top experts to present a set of ideas to the whole group. Each speaker gets 15 minutes and that is followed by 15 minutes of engagement from everyone present. Then we go to the next speaker. This goes on all day and the evenings are spent in casual conversation. As the organizer, Brownstone does not pick topics or speakers but rather allows the flow of ideas to emerge organically. This goes on for two and a half days. There is no set agenda, no mandated takeaways, no required action items. There is only unconstrained idea generation and sharing.

    There is a reason why there is such a clamor to attend. It’s the creation of something that all these wonderful people – each person a dissident in his own field – had hoped to encounter in professional life but the reality was always elusive. It’s only three days so hardly Ancient Greece or Vienna in the interwar years but it is an excellent start, and hugely productive and uplifting. It’s amazing what can happen when you combine intelligence, erudition, open minds, and sincere sharing of ideas. From the point of view of government, huge corporations, academia, and all the architects of today’s world of ideas, this is precisely what they do not want.

    The difference between 2023 and, say, five years ago, is that the expertise racket is now out in the open. Vast swaths of society decided to trust the experts for a time. They deployed every power of the state, along with all affiliated institutions in the pseudo-private sector, to browbeat and manipulate the people into panicked compliance with preposterous antics that never had any hope of mitigating disease.

    Look where that got us. The experts have been fully discredited. Is it any wonder that ever more people are skeptical of the same gang’s claims about climate change, diversity, immigration, inflation, education, gender transitions, or anything else pushed today by elite minds? Mass compliance has been replaced by mass incredulity. Trust will not likely return in our lifetimes.

    There is, further, a reason why hardly anyone is surprised that the president of Harvard stands accused of rampant plagiarism or that election officials are deploying sneaky forms of lawfare to keep political renegades off the ballot or that money launderers for the administrative state are getting away with rampant fraud. Graft, kickbacks, bribery, misappropriation, nepotism, favoritism, and outright corruption rule the day in all elite circles.

    In a few weeks, we are going to hear from Anthony Fauci, who will be grilled by a House of Representatives committee on exactly how he claimed to be so sure that there was no lab leak stemming from gain-of-function research being done at a US-baked lab in Wuhan. We’ll see how much attention this testimony gets but, truly, does anyone really believe that he is going to be honest and forthcoming? It is pretty much a consensus these days that he has been up to no good. If he is “the science,” science itself is in grave trouble.

    What a contrast to just a few years ago when Fauci-themed shirts and coffee mugs were big-selling items. He claimed to be the science, and science did rally behind him as if he had all the answers, even though what he advocated contradicted every bit of common wisdom that has always been practiced in every civilized society.

    Three years ago, the expert class went out on the farthest limb one can imagine, daring to replace all social knowledge and embedded cultural experience with their off-the-cuff rationalism and scientistic razzmatazz that ended up serving the industrial interests of large-scale exploiters in tech, media, and pharma. We live in the midst of the rubble they created. It’s no wonder they have been completely discredited.

    To replace them – and this is a long-term strategy and one that unfolds gradually with bold efforts such as that undertaken by Brownstone Institute – we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated.

    Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
    For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

    Author

    Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

    View all posts
    Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

    https://brownstone.org/articles/the-year-that-expertise-collapsed/
    The Year that Expertise Collapsed Jeffrey A. Tucker Getting sick and getting well is part of the human experience at all times in all places. As with other phenomena of human existence, that suggests there is a great deal of embedded knowledge on the topic woven into the fabric of our lives. We aren’t born knowing but we come to know: from our moms and dads, experience of siblings and others, from our own experience, and from medical professionals who deal with the problem daily. In a healthy and functioning society, the path toward maintaining personal and public health becomes embedded in the cultural firmament, just like manners, belief systems, and value preferences. It’s not necessary that we think about it constantly; instead it becomes a habit, with much of the knowledge tacit; that is, deployed daily but rarely with full cognizance. We could know for certain that there had been a change in the matrix in March 2020 because, seemingly out of nowhere, all of this knowledge was deemed wrong. A new gaggle of experts was in charge, one day to the next. Suddenly, they were everywhere. They were on TV, quoted by all the newspapers, amplified on social media, and on the phone constantly with local officials instructing them on how they must shut down the schools, businesses, playgrounds, churches, and civic gatherings. The message was always the same. This time is completely different from anything in our experience or in any previous experience. This time we must adopt a totally new and completely untested paradigm. It comes from models that high-level scientists have deemed correct. It comes from labs. It comes from “germ games” of which none of us are part. If we dare to reject the new teachings for the old, we are doing it wrong. We are the malicious ones. We deserve ridicule, cancellation, silencing, exclusion, and worse. It felt like a coup d’etat of sorts. It certainly was an intellectual coup. All wisdom of the past, even that known by public health only months earlier, was deleted from public spaces. Dissent was silenced. Corporate media was absolutely united in celebrating the greatness of people like Fauci, who spoke in strangely circuitous ways that contradicted everything we thought we knew. It was exceedingly strange because the people we thought might have stood up to the flash imposition of tyranny somehow vanished. We could hardly meet with others at all, if only to share intuitions that something was wrong. “Social distancing” was more than a method to “slow the spread;” it amounted to comprehensive control of the public mind too. The experts instructing us spoke with astonishing certainty about precisely how society should be managed in a pandemic. There were scientific papers, tens of thousands of them, and the storm of credentials was everywhere and out of control. Unless you had a university or lab affiliation and unless you had multiple high-level degrees attached to your name, you could not get a hearing. Folk wisdom was out of the question, even basic things like “sun and outdoors are good for respiratory infections.” Even popular understanding of natural immunity came in for hard ridicule. Later it turned out that even top credentialed experts would not be taken seriously if they had the wrong views. This is when the racket became incredibly obvious. It was never really about genuine knowledge. It was about compliance and echoing the approved line. It’s astonishing how many people went along, even with the stupidest of the mandates, such as the distancing stickers everywhere, the ubiquity of Plexiglas, and the dirty masks on every face which were somehow believed to keep people healthy. Once the contrary studies started coming out, we would share them and get shouted down. The comment sections of the studies started to be raided by partisan experts who would hone in on small issues and problems and demand and obtain takedowns. Then the contrarian expert would get doxxed, his dean notified, and the faculty turned against the person, lest the department risk funding from Big Pharma or Fauci in the future. All the while, we kept thinking that there must be some rationale behind all this madness. It never emerged. It was all intimidation and belligerence and nothing more – arbitrary diktat by big shots who were pretending the entire time. The lockdowners and shot mandators were never intellectually serious people. They never much thought about the implications or ramifications of what they were doing. They were just wrecking things mostly for pecuniary gain, job protection, and career advancement, plus it was fun to be in charge. It’s not much more complicated than that. In other words, we’ve gradually come to realize that our worst fears were true. All these experts were and are fakes. There have been some hints along the way, such as when North Carolina Health Director Mandy Cohen (now head of the CDC) reported that she and her colleagues were burning up the phone lines to decide whether people should be allowed to participate in sports. “She was like, are you gonna let them have professional football?” she said. “And I was like, no. And she’s like, OK neither are we.” Another candid moment came five months ago, only recently unearthed by X, when NIH head Francis Collins admitted that he and his colleagues attached “zero value” to whether and to what extent they were disrupting lives, wrecking the economy, and destroying education for kids. He actually said this. As it turns out, these experts who ruled our lives, and still do to a great extent, were never what they claimed to be, and never actually possessed knowledge that was superior to what existed within the cultural firmament of society. Instead, all they really had was power and a grand opportunity to play dictator. It’s astonishing, truly, and worthy of deep study, when you consider the extent to which and for how long this class of people were able to maintain the illusion of consensus within their ranks. They bamboozled the media all over the world. They tricked vast swaths of the population. They bent all social media algorithms to reflect their views and priorities. One explanation comes down to the money trail. That’s a powerful explanation. But it is not the whole of it. Behind the illusion was a terrifying intellectual isolation in which all these people found themselves. They never really encountered people who disagreed. Indeed, part of the way these people had come to conceive of their jobs was to master the art of knowing what to think and when and how. It’s part of the job training to enter the class of experts: mastering the skill of echoing the opinions of others. Discovering this to be true is alarming for anyone who holds to older ideals of how intellectual society should conduct itself. We like to imagine that there is a constant clash of ideas, a burning desire to get to the truth, a love of knowledge and data, a passion for gaining a better understanding. That requires, above all else, an openness of mind and a willingness to listen. All of this was overtly and explicitly shut down in March 2020 but it was made easier because all the mechanisms were already in place. One of the best books of our time is Tom Harrington’s The Treason of the Experts, published by Brownstone. There is simply not in the present era a more insightful investigation and deconstruction of the sociological sickness of the expert class. Every page is on fire with insight and observation about the intellectual juntas that attempt to rule the public mind in today’s world. It’s a terrifying look at how wildly wrong everything has gone in the world of ideas. A great followup volume is Ramesh Thakur’s Our Enemy, the Government, which reveals all the ways in which the new scientists who were ruling the world weren’t scientific at all. Brownstone was born in the midst of the worst of this world. We set out to create something different, not a bubble of ideological/partisan attachment or an enforcement organ of the proper way to think about all issues. Instead, we sought to become a genuine society of thinkers united in a principled attachment to freedom but hugely diverse in specialization and philosophical outlook. It’s one of the few centers where there is genuine interdisciplinary engagement and openness to new perspectives and outlook. All of this is essential to the life of the mind and yet nearly absent in academia, media, and government today. We’ve put together a fascinating model for retreats. We choose a comfortable venue where the food and drink are provided and the living quarters are excellent, and bring together 40 or so top experts to present a set of ideas to the whole group. Each speaker gets 15 minutes and that is followed by 15 minutes of engagement from everyone present. Then we go to the next speaker. This goes on all day and the evenings are spent in casual conversation. As the organizer, Brownstone does not pick topics or speakers but rather allows the flow of ideas to emerge organically. This goes on for two and a half days. There is no set agenda, no mandated takeaways, no required action items. There is only unconstrained idea generation and sharing. There is a reason why there is such a clamor to attend. It’s the creation of something that all these wonderful people – each person a dissident in his own field – had hoped to encounter in professional life but the reality was always elusive. It’s only three days so hardly Ancient Greece or Vienna in the interwar years but it is an excellent start, and hugely productive and uplifting. It’s amazing what can happen when you combine intelligence, erudition, open minds, and sincere sharing of ideas. From the point of view of government, huge corporations, academia, and all the architects of today’s world of ideas, this is precisely what they do not want. The difference between 2023 and, say, five years ago, is that the expertise racket is now out in the open. Vast swaths of society decided to trust the experts for a time. They deployed every power of the state, along with all affiliated institutions in the pseudo-private sector, to browbeat and manipulate the people into panicked compliance with preposterous antics that never had any hope of mitigating disease. Look where that got us. The experts have been fully discredited. Is it any wonder that ever more people are skeptical of the same gang’s claims about climate change, diversity, immigration, inflation, education, gender transitions, or anything else pushed today by elite minds? Mass compliance has been replaced by mass incredulity. Trust will not likely return in our lifetimes. There is, further, a reason why hardly anyone is surprised that the president of Harvard stands accused of rampant plagiarism or that election officials are deploying sneaky forms of lawfare to keep political renegades off the ballot or that money launderers for the administrative state are getting away with rampant fraud. Graft, kickbacks, bribery, misappropriation, nepotism, favoritism, and outright corruption rule the day in all elite circles. In a few weeks, we are going to hear from Anthony Fauci, who will be grilled by a House of Representatives committee on exactly how he claimed to be so sure that there was no lab leak stemming from gain-of-function research being done at a US-baked lab in Wuhan. We’ll see how much attention this testimony gets but, truly, does anyone really believe that he is going to be honest and forthcoming? It is pretty much a consensus these days that he has been up to no good. If he is “the science,” science itself is in grave trouble. What a contrast to just a few years ago when Fauci-themed shirts and coffee mugs were big-selling items. He claimed to be the science, and science did rally behind him as if he had all the answers, even though what he advocated contradicted every bit of common wisdom that has always been practiced in every civilized society. Three years ago, the expert class went out on the farthest limb one can imagine, daring to replace all social knowledge and embedded cultural experience with their off-the-cuff rationalism and scientistic razzmatazz that ended up serving the industrial interests of large-scale exploiters in tech, media, and pharma. We live in the midst of the rubble they created. It’s no wonder they have been completely discredited. To replace them – and this is a long-term strategy and one that unfolds gradually with bold efforts such as that undertaken by Brownstone Institute – we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-year-that-expertise-collapsed/
    BROWNSTONE.ORG
    The Year that Expertise Collapsed ⋆ Brownstone Institute
    To replace the expert class, we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated.
    1 Comments 0 Shares 20782 Views
More Results