A brilliant article, Mike, well-written, rational and reasonable.
Let's hope those who need to read this will do so and change their approach so that the 'no virus' position does not lose its credibility.
Yes, no one is perfect and no one knows everything, and so questions must continue to be raised of anyone and everyone, but this needs to occur in a spirit of curiosity and with respect.
I am only a bystander and commenter. I don't participate in private email lists and I'm not in contact with any of the leaders of the movement, neither with people at the base. I am only on substack. Yet, I have felt the burn of these people a couple times, maybe more.
I made quite a few mistakes back in April. I stirred the pot and attracted the attention of trolls. I tried to have a rational exchange, and it was not possible. The conversation went off rails and it was a sad and somewhat fun show. Thus, my days of trying to reason with deeply hurt and unreasonable individuals ended. I apologized to the hosts of a few substacks for my wrong behavior in feeding the trolls.
I don't understand why some are so obsessed about ivermectin. Is it wrong that people take it because it perpetuates the myth of the non-existent disease they called COVID? Probably, but there are people who need placebos to keep functioning. It would be better to use harmless placebos, but it would be even better that people try to overcome their obsessions, all of which seem to stem from disinformation. We all have been hit with an incredible amount of very harmful lies for a long time. I understand it takes a lot of time, personal effort and support to undo the damage. Some people seem to be able to reason their way out of a con in a short span of time. Some take years, and need crutches. In my opinion, it is morally wrong to insult people, and shame them so as to stimulate them to overcome their obsessions. So I don't do it. I would prefer for others to be more humane and not do that either, but it's not in my power to control the behavior of these zealots.
Kevin Corbett is a treasure of all humanity. He has proven he is a real caregiver. He knows both academic work and empirical clinical practice. The health of all patients would vastly improve if there were many Corbetts in the world. It seems to me one important job of a nurse is to make sure the Doctor does not kill the patient during an experiment disguised as treatment. Patient advocacy is a very serious occupation. So thanks to Kevin for all his hard work for so many years, and for sticking to his values. All people in the no-virus community should show more gratitude to him, and others like him.
It is very important this business of convincing people that there are no viral diseases, and also the more general case of germ theory being wrong, and a source of all kinds abuse. Most people believe it is true and take wrong decisions because of that wrong belief, which is constantly reinforced through common propaganda techniques. The behavior of certain people does not help the cause of dispelling this humongous myth. I wish they would rethink their position and understand their error.
Part of this problem comes from the perennial show of political elections. People tend to get sidetracked with the bells and whistles of all that. It's better to focus on understanding better the scientific work and methods related to all this. That's time well spent.
Thanks again for this post and for all the things you have taught on your website and here on substack.
An excellent article, Mike, and I concur with all the points you've raised. However, I find myself willing to go even further in defending diverse viewpoints. I sense that within the no-virus camp, there's a tendency to categorize anyone endorsing germ theory as the antagonist, equating them with vaccine advocates—even those diligently educating the public about vaccine risks. It's reasonable for one to hold a pro-virus belief without endorsing the safety and efficacy of any and all vaccines. Drawing from my personal journey, my current stance on disavowing germ theory is an ongoing process, shaped by continuous learning. My perspectives have evolved thanks to individuals like Suzanne Humphries and her outstanding book, "Dissolving Illusions." I have noticed her being demonized here along with others who still cling to a belief in virus theory.
Even if practitioners such as Dr. Humphries still adhere to germ theory, they should be acknowledged as valuable contributors in awakening people to the potential brainwashing within contemporary medical practices. Engaging in constructive dialogue is essential, avoiding the dismissal of our own messengers of truth, even when their beliefs may not align entirely with our own understanding of truth.
I was one of those people fortunate enough to have stumbled into the work of both Duesberg and the Perth Group 20 years ago. It's been a kind of lone journey. I've been aware of these 2 camps in this space during that time. But to me they felt complementary to each other despite the obvious virus-no-virus core stance of each side. I'm glad you're writing about this because there's never going to be Borg like unification in thoughts, ideas and interpretations of data. Frankly this is kind of the fun of this process, allowing ourselves to entertain new ideas we hadn't considered before.
I knew the HIV theory of AIDS was wrong for 20 years, but for some reason didn't stop to consider that all viruses were crapola. I suspect that Eleni knew this too, but she was smart and kept focus on a single target.
If it's not possible to engage in civil, rational debate with someone, that is a big red flag IMO. A lot of problems could be avoided if everyone stuck to the issues, and stayed away from judging someone's personal motivations, which we can never know for sure. But we can know if someone is spreading bad information--and that's not a subject that should be avoided IMO, if the ultimate goal is truth. If the person being challenged is on the up-and-up, then they will respond rationally, and if they were in error, acknowledge it.
If you allow yourself to become embroiled in the pretext you'll be 'caught' & caught again by the 'virus' of gaslighting.
The underling deceit is baited by the 'accuser' whatever its framing pretext.
Jesus used 'the accuser' for Satan - the deceiver by which we attack our own sins in the Othered as belief we thus gain from another's loss.
I see Jesus as exemplar for waking & walking out of the guilting booster for a religion set in ritualised sacrifice as sacred - and as core to any of the issues arising from the lie & the father of it.
The capacity of the ego to identify against a perceived evil as a claim to righteousness is so pervasive to 'our world' yet few see what they look out with!
I reiterate that a 'no virus' position is a counterclaim and subject to being attacked or undermined by every kind of false engagement.
But as a counterclaim it engages the polarised identity of conflict - which is a magnet and magnifier that attract the urge to 'fight'.
One the 'war' has been defined we see the factioning & fragmentation of an insanity.
hence I choose the 'what virus?' position. While always expanding on the illumination of the contexts or terrains of which such beliefs & invested identities arise to embody.
That is I don't attack people, I don't polarise with pejorative accusations or guilting insinuations but I may address behaviours that to me are incongruent with love or truth or freedom.
If those who engage in gaslighting, fear-porn and guilting accusations respond to an invitation to communicate with childish or malicious put-downs, I drop them as self-cancelled. If they later recognised and corrected the error, I would engage as there is someone to be in relationship with - rather than a masked manipulation.
I get bored of any 'movement' that becomes a broken record.
I'm not here to wake the dead but to grow in and with the living.
Much of the 'movement' is framed within deeper facets of a manipulative mindset that is not really 'awake' so much as disturbed and seeking to renormalise or regain lost love or power in a sense of grief & grievance.
I witness for freedom to question, to seek and uncover and share in answer. That cannot be served by forcing 'answers' onto others - else guilting, smear and underhand tactics claiming righteousness.
There IS contagion - hence the manipulation of mass mind by Media, Education, and Medical Care.
The underlying nature of undermining of health is revealed in psychic life shocks projected onto body as masking fear & guilt set in grievance driven vengeance to attack or deny others with a 'clear conscience' as they/we believe they are both justified and right.
Classic snark and ridicule. Trolls. People who have nothing better to do or people who knee jerk and throw the baby out with the bathwater. So much easier to cry "shill" or "controlled opposition" or "grifter" than take the time to be rational and ask questions, Take the time necessary to read clarifications and have a discusssion. The inability or unwillingness to understand a simple statement like, "I have changed my mind on this. I now have a better understanding." Mike you are the most level-headed, calm and civil person I know.
Venting off the mind boiling with nothingness - legitimized by the net and its programmers - is a training exercise. Huge populations are being systematically taught how to destroy their neighbors, friends, colleagues, associates, superiors, family members, even their own folks. And they are being actively rewarded for their actions. It’s a training. It’s about mastering one skill that everyone has - harming others through words, gossips, false stories, or without any reason, just because they can and they will not be punished in any way. (PS. These are all illegal actions, where are lawyers?) Everyone has this skill because it has been used in every family to cleanse the moods and restart the next day with more understanding.
Until recently, few took the liberty to make a living of this skill. Now that it has entered the academia, we know how little the “science” is worth if a single sentence can spoil the whole field, research teams, competition or the key principle of science: do not speak out if you have not been conducting long-term, true observations. We may be afraid to admit it, but - in my subjective opinion - the 2019-2023 campaign has ALREADY destroyed ALL science. It’s only a matter of time when we will witness more “science” buildings collapse, one by one. The reason is obvious: there are far too many educated people who understand what the control freaks do and why.
Freezing down ALL science for 20 or 50 years won’t change anything for them. They simply continue what they have been doing until now, this time away from journalists and media. But dumbing down students, doctors, professors, medicine professionals, economy analysts, trade experts - we saw this already, half a year was enough to destroy the economy of the whole world. After 20 years? Students won’t even know who “Newton” was. They will define a solar system in terms of power output of single panels. Laziness will push out thinking - it has already been happening. People cannot mentally calculate their change from $20 note in the shop. Adding 1/4” + 3/8” + 7/16” has always been a huge challenge for building constructors and engineers in the field, but now it will become an impossible task. The whole construction site will be stopped. For days, possibly. While for our generations (50s, 60s, 70s), adding three fractions in the mind was a 0.2 s fun game.
Well written Mike and I fully agree with you here. I certainly do not agree with everyone on everything like nobody does and I have always felt like the odd one in various groups because honestly, I generally do not hold the views of the majority of any group anywhere on any social media platform. I tend to use the various groups as springboards towards a higher understanding and when I feel I can't get any more out of it I leave. What always bug me is that some people seem to believe that we should only collaborate or support people that we agree with 100% on everything which is impossible because there is not a single human being on earth that we agree with on everything. Having that kind of false belief essentially shuts down all collaboration and support which hurts everyone including themselves.
Excellent and super-thorough as always, Mike. Thank you once again for having the patience and putting in the time to do this :)
A brilliant article, Mike, well-written, rational and reasonable.
Let's hope those who need to read this will do so and change their approach so that the 'no virus' position does not lose its credibility.
Yes, no one is perfect and no one knows everything, and so questions must continue to be raised of anyone and everyone, but this needs to occur in a spirit of curiosity and with respect.
Thanks, Mike! One wonders how much of this is the work of ops. But i'm not charging, just wondering. :-)
Hello Mike.
Thank you for this post.
I am only a bystander and commenter. I don't participate in private email lists and I'm not in contact with any of the leaders of the movement, neither with people at the base. I am only on substack. Yet, I have felt the burn of these people a couple times, maybe more.
I made quite a few mistakes back in April. I stirred the pot and attracted the attention of trolls. I tried to have a rational exchange, and it was not possible. The conversation went off rails and it was a sad and somewhat fun show. Thus, my days of trying to reason with deeply hurt and unreasonable individuals ended. I apologized to the hosts of a few substacks for my wrong behavior in feeding the trolls.
I don't understand why some are so obsessed about ivermectin. Is it wrong that people take it because it perpetuates the myth of the non-existent disease they called COVID? Probably, but there are people who need placebos to keep functioning. It would be better to use harmless placebos, but it would be even better that people try to overcome their obsessions, all of which seem to stem from disinformation. We all have been hit with an incredible amount of very harmful lies for a long time. I understand it takes a lot of time, personal effort and support to undo the damage. Some people seem to be able to reason their way out of a con in a short span of time. Some take years, and need crutches. In my opinion, it is morally wrong to insult people, and shame them so as to stimulate them to overcome their obsessions. So I don't do it. I would prefer for others to be more humane and not do that either, but it's not in my power to control the behavior of these zealots.
Kevin Corbett is a treasure of all humanity. He has proven he is a real caregiver. He knows both academic work and empirical clinical practice. The health of all patients would vastly improve if there were many Corbetts in the world. It seems to me one important job of a nurse is to make sure the Doctor does not kill the patient during an experiment disguised as treatment. Patient advocacy is a very serious occupation. So thanks to Kevin for all his hard work for so many years, and for sticking to his values. All people in the no-virus community should show more gratitude to him, and others like him.
It is very important this business of convincing people that there are no viral diseases, and also the more general case of germ theory being wrong, and a source of all kinds abuse. Most people believe it is true and take wrong decisions because of that wrong belief, which is constantly reinforced through common propaganda techniques. The behavior of certain people does not help the cause of dispelling this humongous myth. I wish they would rethink their position and understand their error.
Part of this problem comes from the perennial show of political elections. People tend to get sidetracked with the bells and whistles of all that. It's better to focus on understanding better the scientific work and methods related to all this. That's time well spent.
Thanks again for this post and for all the things you have taught on your website and here on substack.
An excellent article, Mike, and I concur with all the points you've raised. However, I find myself willing to go even further in defending diverse viewpoints. I sense that within the no-virus camp, there's a tendency to categorize anyone endorsing germ theory as the antagonist, equating them with vaccine advocates—even those diligently educating the public about vaccine risks. It's reasonable for one to hold a pro-virus belief without endorsing the safety and efficacy of any and all vaccines. Drawing from my personal journey, my current stance on disavowing germ theory is an ongoing process, shaped by continuous learning. My perspectives have evolved thanks to individuals like Suzanne Humphries and her outstanding book, "Dissolving Illusions." I have noticed her being demonized here along with others who still cling to a belief in virus theory.
Even if practitioners such as Dr. Humphries still adhere to germ theory, they should be acknowledged as valuable contributors in awakening people to the potential brainwashing within contemporary medical practices. Engaging in constructive dialogue is essential, avoiding the dismissal of our own messengers of truth, even when their beliefs may not align entirely with our own understanding of truth.
I was one of those people fortunate enough to have stumbled into the work of both Duesberg and the Perth Group 20 years ago. It's been a kind of lone journey. I've been aware of these 2 camps in this space during that time. But to me they felt complementary to each other despite the obvious virus-no-virus core stance of each side. I'm glad you're writing about this because there's never going to be Borg like unification in thoughts, ideas and interpretations of data. Frankly this is kind of the fun of this process, allowing ourselves to entertain new ideas we hadn't considered before.
I knew the HIV theory of AIDS was wrong for 20 years, but for some reason didn't stop to consider that all viruses were crapola. I suspect that Eleni knew this too, but she was smart and kept focus on a single target.
Many of the people you are talking about, who have directed their deranged screeds at me as well, are at best thugs; and some are probably agents.
If it's not possible to engage in civil, rational debate with someone, that is a big red flag IMO. A lot of problems could be avoided if everyone stuck to the issues, and stayed away from judging someone's personal motivations, which we can never know for sure. But we can know if someone is spreading bad information--and that's not a subject that should be avoided IMO, if the ultimate goal is truth. If the person being challenged is on the up-and-up, then they will respond rationally, and if they were in error, acknowledge it.
If you allow yourself to become embroiled in the pretext you'll be 'caught' & caught again by the 'virus' of gaslighting.
The underling deceit is baited by the 'accuser' whatever its framing pretext.
Jesus used 'the accuser' for Satan - the deceiver by which we attack our own sins in the Othered as belief we thus gain from another's loss.
I see Jesus as exemplar for waking & walking out of the guilting booster for a religion set in ritualised sacrifice as sacred - and as core to any of the issues arising from the lie & the father of it.
The capacity of the ego to identify against a perceived evil as a claim to righteousness is so pervasive to 'our world' yet few see what they look out with!
I reiterate that a 'no virus' position is a counterclaim and subject to being attacked or undermined by every kind of false engagement.
But as a counterclaim it engages the polarised identity of conflict - which is a magnet and magnifier that attract the urge to 'fight'.
One the 'war' has been defined we see the factioning & fragmentation of an insanity.
hence I choose the 'what virus?' position. While always expanding on the illumination of the contexts or terrains of which such beliefs & invested identities arise to embody.
That is I don't attack people, I don't polarise with pejorative accusations or guilting insinuations but I may address behaviours that to me are incongruent with love or truth or freedom.
If those who engage in gaslighting, fear-porn and guilting accusations respond to an invitation to communicate with childish or malicious put-downs, I drop them as self-cancelled. If they later recognised and corrected the error, I would engage as there is someone to be in relationship with - rather than a masked manipulation.
I get bored of any 'movement' that becomes a broken record.
I'm not here to wake the dead but to grow in and with the living.
Much of the 'movement' is framed within deeper facets of a manipulative mindset that is not really 'awake' so much as disturbed and seeking to renormalise or regain lost love or power in a sense of grief & grievance.
I witness for freedom to question, to seek and uncover and share in answer. That cannot be served by forcing 'answers' onto others - else guilting, smear and underhand tactics claiming righteousness.
There IS contagion - hence the manipulation of mass mind by Media, Education, and Medical Care.
The underlying nature of undermining of health is revealed in psychic life shocks projected onto body as masking fear & guilt set in grievance driven vengeance to attack or deny others with a 'clear conscience' as they/we believe they are both justified and right.
Keep up the good work, Mike! Just remember, trolls can never be appeased--that would go against their nature.
Classic snark and ridicule. Trolls. People who have nothing better to do or people who knee jerk and throw the baby out with the bathwater. So much easier to cry "shill" or "controlled opposition" or "grifter" than take the time to be rational and ask questions, Take the time necessary to read clarifications and have a discusssion. The inability or unwillingness to understand a simple statement like, "I have changed my mind on this. I now have a better understanding." Mike you are the most level-headed, calm and civil person I know.
Venting off the mind boiling with nothingness - legitimized by the net and its programmers - is a training exercise. Huge populations are being systematically taught how to destroy their neighbors, friends, colleagues, associates, superiors, family members, even their own folks. And they are being actively rewarded for their actions. It’s a training. It’s about mastering one skill that everyone has - harming others through words, gossips, false stories, or without any reason, just because they can and they will not be punished in any way. (PS. These are all illegal actions, where are lawyers?) Everyone has this skill because it has been used in every family to cleanse the moods and restart the next day with more understanding.
Until recently, few took the liberty to make a living of this skill. Now that it has entered the academia, we know how little the “science” is worth if a single sentence can spoil the whole field, research teams, competition or the key principle of science: do not speak out if you have not been conducting long-term, true observations. We may be afraid to admit it, but - in my subjective opinion - the 2019-2023 campaign has ALREADY destroyed ALL science. It’s only a matter of time when we will witness more “science” buildings collapse, one by one. The reason is obvious: there are far too many educated people who understand what the control freaks do and why.
Freezing down ALL science for 20 or 50 years won’t change anything for them. They simply continue what they have been doing until now, this time away from journalists and media. But dumbing down students, doctors, professors, medicine professionals, economy analysts, trade experts - we saw this already, half a year was enough to destroy the economy of the whole world. After 20 years? Students won’t even know who “Newton” was. They will define a solar system in terms of power output of single panels. Laziness will push out thinking - it has already been happening. People cannot mentally calculate their change from $20 note in the shop. Adding 1/4” + 3/8” + 7/16” has always been a huge challenge for building constructors and engineers in the field, but now it will become an impossible task. The whole construction site will be stopped. For days, possibly. While for our generations (50s, 60s, 70s), adding three fractions in the mind was a 0.2 s fun game.
Well written Mike and I fully agree with you here. I certainly do not agree with everyone on everything like nobody does and I have always felt like the odd one in various groups because honestly, I generally do not hold the views of the majority of any group anywhere on any social media platform. I tend to use the various groups as springboards towards a higher understanding and when I feel I can't get any more out of it I leave. What always bug me is that some people seem to believe that we should only collaborate or support people that we agree with 100% on everything which is impossible because there is not a single human being on earth that we agree with on everything. Having that kind of false belief essentially shuts down all collaboration and support which hurts everyone including themselves.
Mike this is a well thought out post as usual came to it from your doctor Baileys interview well played as usual.
Hi Mike,
Thank you very much for this article!
This might be one of your most important ones,
at least of those that I've read :)
Though you might not have been thinking about this other Mike while writing that piece,
I'd like to share the following two links for anyone who's interested:
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/dr-mike-yeadon-im-being-censored
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/dr-mike-yeadon-is-censored-again
I think it's a good case in point for potential misjudgement by all those
who like to jump to conclusions about who is CO (whatever that empty term means).
Of course, one can always claim that it's all part of the plan - can't argue with that.
Once again thank you and all the best to you and yours!
Well said Mike Stone.