“Trust The Science” Really Means –> Listen To Doctors & Scientists Pushed By Politicians, And Ignore The Doctors & Scientists That Disagree
Flaws in Coronavirus Pandemic Theory by David Crowe
(David passed away on July 12th, 2020.)
Preamble
There is considerable scientific evidence that these diseases do not just have non-infectious co-factors, but that they are environmental in nature, not infectious.
In fact, with viruses, it is possible to question their very existence.
The book “The Infectious Myth” will investigate provide the scientific evidence that the normally accepted infectious cause is not, in fact, valid and, in will identify more plausible environmental causes.
From: https://theinfectiousmyth.com/index2.php
Specifics
The COVID-19 scare that emanated from Wuhan, China in December of 2019 is an epidemic of testing, as the graph below with test statistics from Austria shows.
There is no proof that a virus is being detected by the test and, while there should be, there is absolutely no concern about whether there are a significant number of false positives on the test. What is being published in medical journals is not science, every paper has the goal of enhancing the panic by interpreting the data only in ways that benefit the viral theory, even when the data is confusing or contradictory.
In other words, the medical papers are propaganda.
- Virus Existence
Scientists are detecting novel RNA in multiple patients with influenza or pneumonia-like conditions, and are assuming that the detection of RNA (which is believed to be wrapped in proteins to form an RNA virus, as coronaviruses are believed to be) is equivalent to isolation of the virus. It is not, and one of the groups of scientists was honest enough to admit this:
“we did not perform tests for detecting infectious virus in blood”
But, despite this admission, earlier in the paper they repeatedly referred to the 41 cases (out of 59 similar cases) that tested positive for this RNA as, “41 patients… confirmed to be infected with 2019-nCoV.”
Another paper quietly admitted that:
“our study does not fulfill Koch’s postulates”
Koch’s postulates, first stated by the great German bacteriologist Robert Koch in the late 1800s, are simple logic, and can be stated as:
• Purify the pathogen (e.g. virus) from many cases with a particular illness.
• Expose susceptible animals (obviously not humans) to the pathogen.
• Verify that the same illness is produced.
• Some add that you should also re-purify the pathogen, just to be sure that it really is creating the illness.
Famous virologist Thomas Rivers stated in a 1936 speech, “It is obvious that Koch’s postulates have not been satisfied in viral diseases”.
That was a long time ago, but the problem continues. And Rivers’ guidance was considered important enough to be cited by papers claiming (falsely) that Koch’s Postulates had been met during the SARS era (2003). None of the papers referenced in this article have even attempted to purify the virus. And the word ‘isolation’ has been so debased by virologists it
means nothing (e.g. adding impure materials to a cell culture and seeing cell death is ‘isolation’).
There is lots of evidence that the virus is not as transmissible as is being implied. You can read the examples and more at:
Coffee Can Cause or Contribute To
I am sometimes asked for my thoughts on coffee. Since I have never drunk it I do not have valid first-hand experience but this comes from a personal trainer who loves the stuff!
One commenter added: Too much caffeine is bad for the nervous system and those trying to heal a leaking gut need to avoid it totally until their gut is healed! Caffeine can irritate a “leaky gut” or inflamed gut!
Eat The Rainbow
Lockdown Questions
I fully endorse the strategy of allowing the vulnerable to protect themselves and the able to be free to live their lives without suppression.
Sweet Advice from Maria Sabina
Sweet advice from Maria Sabina, Mexican curandera (medicine woman) and poet.
“Cure yourself with the light of the sun and the rays of the moon. With the sound of the river and the waterfall.
With the swaying of the sea and the fluttering of birds.
Heal yourself with mint, with neem and eucalyptus.
Sweeten yourself with lavender, rosemary, and chamomile.
Hug yourself with the cocoa bean and a touch of cinnamon.
Put love in tea instead of sugar, and take it looking at the stars.
Heal yourself with the kisses that the wind gives you and the hugs of the rain.
Get strong with bare feet on the ground and with everything that is born from it.
Get smarter every day by listening to your intuition, looking at the world with the eye of your forehead.
Jump, dance, sing, so that you live happier.
Heal yourself, with beautiful love, and always remember… YOU are the medicine.”
Truth to Power – Could COVID-19 Have Escaped from a Lab?
(Tom: This is a great read about a scientist-turned-detective with a level of ethics that matches her competence in biology. Well worth the read! Executive summary: The seafood-market theory, which Chinese health officials and the World Health Organization espoused in the early days of the pandemic, was wrong. The virus was lab engineered.)
“There’s long been a sense that if the public and politicians really knew about the dangerous pathogen research being conducted in many laboratories, they’d be outraged. Denying the possibility of a catastrophic incident like this, then, could be seen as a form of career preservation [for scientists]. ‘For the substantial subset of virologists who perform gain-of-function research,’ Richard Ebright, a Rutgers microbiologist and another founding member of the Cambridge Working Group, told me, ‘avoiding restrictions on research funding, avoiding implementation of appropriate biosafety standards, and avoiding implementation of appropriate research oversight are powerful motivators. Antonio Regalado, biomedicine editor of MIT Technology Review, put it more bluntly. If it turned out COVID-19 came from a lab, he tweeted, ‘it would shatter the scientific edifice top to bottom.’”
Finish reading:
Create!
(Tom: Golly gee gosh I love this advice! It is so good I am sharing it again. If you get a fraction as much from it as I got your day will be immeasurably enhanced.
Take joy in some creation today!)
The point is not to Win, but to do, to experience, to become.
With thanks to Vera Risdon and Kurt Vonnegut.
In 2006 a high school English teacher asked students to write a famous author and ask for advice. Kurt Vonnegut was the only one to respond – and his response is magnificent:
“Dear Xavier High School, and Ms. Lockwood, and Messrs Perin, McFeely, Batten, Maurer and Congiusta:
I thank you for your friendly letters. You sure know how to cheer up a really old geezer (84) in his sunset years. I don’t make public appearances any more because I now resemble nothing so much as an iguana.
What I had to say to you, moreover, would not take long, to wit: Practice any art, music, singing, dancing, acting, drawing, painting, sculpting, poetry, fiction, essays, reportage, no matter how well or badly, not to get money and fame, but to experience becoming, to find out what’s inside you, to make your soul grow.
Seriously! I mean starting right now, do art and do it for the rest of your lives. Draw a funny or nice picture of Ms. Lockwood, and give it to her. Dance home after school, and sing in the shower and on and on. Make a face in your mashed potatoes. Pretend you’re Count Dracula.
Here’s an assignment for tonight, and I hope Ms. Lockwood will flunk you if you don’t do it: Write a six line poem, about anything, but rhymed. No fair tennis without a net. Make it as good as you possibly can. But don’t tell anybody what you’re doing. Don’t show it or recite it to anybody, not even your girlfriend or parents or whatever, or Ms. Lockwood. OK?
Tear it up into teeny-weeny pieces, and discard them into widely separated trash recepticals. You will find that you have already been gloriously rewarded for your poem. You have experienced becoming, learned a lot more about what’s inside you, and you have made your soul grow.
God bless you all!
Kurt Vonnegut”
Nuremberg code turns 60
Bioethics experts Paul Weindling and Volker Roelcke suggest that current bioethical thinking may use an incomplete picture of the historical context of the Nuremberg code. Volker Roelcke writes: “rather than being the result of a coercive state, Nazi medicine illustrates how medical researchers and their representative bodies […] co-operated with and even manipulated a totalitarian state and political system relying on expert opinion, in order to gain resources for the conduct of research without any moral and legal regulation.” He states that Nazi doctors “followed the intrinsic logic of their scientific disciplines and used the legally and ethically unrestricted access to human beings created by the context of the political system and the conditions of war.”4 By centring exclusively on the war crimes and not on their broader context, the judges at Nuremberg issued the code in order solely to set the boundaries for “permissible experiments” and tackle the difficult question of the biomedical research conducted on human subjects outside Germany during the war. The court thus failed to produce a broader legal doctrine protecting individuals against harm induced by scientific practices at large, including not only human beings as subjects of medical experiments but also as consumers and beneficiaries of science’s outcomes.
Government Mandated Trail Mix
Government: Your child needs to eat this trail mix. It is very healthy. If they don’t eat it, we have the right to deny them basic government services.Moms: Oh! Ok. What’s in it?Government: You don’t need to know that. It is very healthy. It will make them healthy. The entire scientific community agrees.Moms: (looks up nutritional facts label online) WHOA. There’s aluminum, formaldehyde, known carcinogens and aborted fetal stem cells in that trail mix. How can that be safe?Government: Don’t look at that. Trust us. It’s very safe. Trail mix makes your kids healthy AND as a result, the whole world healthy.Moms: Oh! So there’s been safety studies?Government: …………Moms: Like, studies that show that each ingredient is safe? That maybe compare children long term who have and have not eaten the trail mix? That have made sure that children with compromised immune systems or common genetical differences won’t have any short or long term issues as a result of eating this trail mix?Government: ………Moms: Ok, so if my kid DOES have a reaction to this trail mix, can I sue the manufacturer for liability?Government: No. We have exempted them from all liability.Moms: Wait…who IS the manufacturer of this trail mix?Government: Just the top four snack manufacturers. They make all snacks.Moms: Don’t those guys get sued all the time? Haven’t they been convicted of falsifying research? Bribing government officials? And now you have exempted them from all liability on this trail mix?!?Government: Yes. But this product is healthy and very safe.Moms: But what if my kid DOES have a reaction? The nutritional label lists all sorts of horrible possible side effects.Government: They won’t. Or if they do, we’ll try our best to convince you it was just a coincidence. If you’re REALLY persistent, we might award you some money.Moms: How much money have you given so far to parents of children who had reactions?Government: Eh…4 billion or so.Moms: 4 BILLION?!? What percentage of reactions do you think are reported?Government: About 1%, we figure.Moms: Wait, wait, wait. So kids ARE having reactions….there have been NO unbiased, double blind placebo tested safety studies, the manufacturers have been exempted from all liability, those same manufacturers have been convicted of bribing officials & falsifying research, the ingredients (once I found them on my own since you wouldn’t provide me the nutritional label) are concerning, and you STILL WANT MY KID TO EAT THIS TRAIL MIX?Government: Yes. It is very healthy.#justasking#believemothers#trueinformedconsent#somethingsmellsfishy#educatebeforeyouvaccinate#learntheriskscopy and pasteSpread the word Everyone needs to know