This is a brilliant take-down of viroLIEgy that simultaneously attacks it on all 6 pillars. The useful idiots of virology certainly deserve blame but the real culprits are the PTB who funded it and determine the "consensus".
Thank you so much CK! That was my intention so I'm glad that it worked. It is difficult trying to condense a ton of information down and trying not to make the article too long. I appreciate the feedback. 🙂
One of the most interesting instances of indirect evidence is when Fauci admitted that they couldn't reliably culture viral samples that required more than 35 PCR cycles to test "+." Of course, this doesn't constitute any form of proof, but it is interesting.
Outstanding stuff! You just get better and better at presenting this information in ways that should tickle anyone at any level. You have a true gift Mike. Really appreciate all the time and effort it must take. You are the best at keeping up with the "new variant" etc. BS. We need that to throw back in their faces and have a laugh at their pathetic attempts to frighten us with their non-sense. You are a gem.
Good work, Mike. I share these with others. I am looking forward to your article about the Ethics Card.
The proponents of Germ Theory will argue it is unethical to attempt to make anyone ill or diseased >> Our team will point out how it is apparently ethical for Big Pharma to use volunteers for their clinical drug trials whereby the volunteer has to sign a waiver acknowledging the possibility of irreversible damage, and they will cough and sputter and say that isn't the same thing as trying to infect someone with HIV or Ebola or Rabies or even the common flu that could turn into fatal pneumonia.
That is their final argument, their final card, their magic bullet. Defeat that, and they have no leg to stand on in their support of the Germ Theory.
An amazing compilation of research into the "virus" question. Thank you for such detailed information. Very much appreciate the time and effort it took. Will be passing this on, as well as printing it out for posterity.
According to Golding et al., in their 2016 paper The scanning electron microscope in microbiology and diagnosis of infectious disease,
“The detection of agents such as poxviruses or polyoma viruses in patient specimens usually requires a minimum concentration of between 10e5 to 10e6 particles/ml for TEM.”
OK, so we need at least 100,000 or 1,000,000 particles per milliliter. Not sure why there’s a range with a factor of 10, but fine. Oh yeah, because it’s never been done and so they are guessing. But educatedly, no doubt.
But according to Dimmock et al., in the 2016 textbook Introduction to Modern Virology, 7th Edition,
“Viruses are too small to be seen except by electron microscopy (EM) and this requires concentrations in excess of 10e11 particles per ml, or even higher . . . ”
Wow. Some sientsts say 100,000 to 1,000,000 particles per milliliter are needed and another needs 100,000,000,000 particles per milliliter. Well, they only disagree by a factor of a hundred thousand or a million. Someone’s guess is probably off, I’d say.
Let’s begin by supposing that 1,000,000 particles per milliliter is correct. According to Wang et al., in their 2020 paper Modeling the load of SARS-CoV-2 virus in human expelled particles during coughing and speaking,
“From a single cough, a person with a high viral load in respiratory fluid (2.35 × 10e9 copies per ml) may generate as many as 1.23 × 10e5 copies of viruses that can remain airborne after 10 seconds…”
So wait a minute, a person infected with CoV-2 can have around 2 billion virions in every milliliter of respiratory fluid? 2 billion per ml is bigger that 1 million per ml, isn’t it? Can’t virologists use respiratory fluid from an infected human being and make a nice slide with many, many CoV-2 viral particles imaged? Why not?
Let’s see if we have more luck with the other fact? theory? idea? guess? that 100 billion viral particles per ml are needed in order to capture viruses in the act of existing. But look at what we run into now: According to Sender et al., in their 2021 paper The total number and mass of SARS-CoV-2 virions, there are an estimated 109–1011 virions in an infected individual’s entire body.
This means that in order to image viruses from bodily fluids and tissues directly from a human being, we will need to extract all the viruses from their entire body and get it into a single milliliter of fluid.
So which is it? Virologists can’t image viruses directly from human samples because they—I don’t know—don’t feel like doing it? A sneeze can give you 2000x the density you need but you just haven’t gotten around to it yet? Or is it they can’t image viruses directly from human samples because they need an entire human body’s viral load in 1/30 oz. of liquid?
But virologists point to TEM images of viruses that exist thanks to cell culture procedures that have successfully multiplied viruses in monkey kidney cells up to—how many particles per ml? 10e6, a seemingly trivial amount compared to a single sneeze, or 10e11, more than the entire amount of virus in a trillion-cell human being? Which one makes more sense for an explanation for why no one can seem to image viruses straight from human samples?
This is a brilliant take-down of viroLIEgy that simultaneously attacks it on all 6 pillars. The useful idiots of virology certainly deserve blame but the real culprits are the PTB who funded it and determine the "consensus".
Thank you so much CK! That was my intention so I'm glad that it worked. It is difficult trying to condense a ton of information down and trying not to make the article too long. I appreciate the feedback. 🙂
I am a detective and your investigative work is astounding. I consider you a fellow detective.
Wow Christian! That is a wonderful compliment! Thank you. I greatly appreciate it. 🙂
👏🏼 👏🏼👏🏼 bravo!!!
Thank you Bridget. 🙂
One of the most interesting instances of indirect evidence is when Fauci admitted that they couldn't reliably culture viral samples that required more than 35 PCR cycles to test "+." Of course, this doesn't constitute any form of proof, but it is interesting.
Fauci is always great for some laughs. 😉
Outstanding stuff! You just get better and better at presenting this information in ways that should tickle anyone at any level. You have a true gift Mike. Really appreciate all the time and effort it must take. You are the best at keeping up with the "new variant" etc. BS. We need that to throw back in their faces and have a laugh at their pathetic attempts to frighten us with their non-sense. You are a gem.
Thank you so much Sue! I really appreciate the kind words and feedback. I will continue to do my best to throw their crap back into their faces. 😉
Good work, Mike. I share these with others. I am looking forward to your article about the Ethics Card.
The proponents of Germ Theory will argue it is unethical to attempt to make anyone ill or diseased >> Our team will point out how it is apparently ethical for Big Pharma to use volunteers for their clinical drug trials whereby the volunteer has to sign a waiver acknowledging the possibility of irreversible damage, and they will cough and sputter and say that isn't the same thing as trying to infect someone with HIV or Ebola or Rabies or even the common flu that could turn into fatal pneumonia.
That is their final argument, their final card, their magic bullet. Defeat that, and they have no leg to stand on in their support of the Germ Theory.
An amazing compilation of research into the "virus" question. Thank you for such detailed information. Very much appreciate the time and effort it took. Will be passing this on, as well as printing it out for posterity.
Thank you Sue! I appreciate it. 🙂
This was a long one to write, but hopefully, I was able to get the point across that I was trying to make.
According to Golding et al., in their 2016 paper The scanning electron microscope in microbiology and diagnosis of infectious disease,
“The detection of agents such as poxviruses or polyoma viruses in patient specimens usually requires a minimum concentration of between 10e5 to 10e6 particles/ml for TEM.”
OK, so we need at least 100,000 or 1,000,000 particles per milliliter. Not sure why there’s a range with a factor of 10, but fine. Oh yeah, because it’s never been done and so they are guessing. But educatedly, no doubt.
But according to Dimmock et al., in the 2016 textbook Introduction to Modern Virology, 7th Edition,
“Viruses are too small to be seen except by electron microscopy (EM) and this requires concentrations in excess of 10e11 particles per ml, or even higher . . . ”
Wow. Some sientsts say 100,000 to 1,000,000 particles per milliliter are needed and another needs 100,000,000,000 particles per milliliter. Well, they only disagree by a factor of a hundred thousand or a million. Someone’s guess is probably off, I’d say.
Let’s begin by supposing that 1,000,000 particles per milliliter is correct. According to Wang et al., in their 2020 paper Modeling the load of SARS-CoV-2 virus in human expelled particles during coughing and speaking,
“From a single cough, a person with a high viral load in respiratory fluid (2.35 × 10e9 copies per ml) may generate as many as 1.23 × 10e5 copies of viruses that can remain airborne after 10 seconds…”
So wait a minute, a person infected with CoV-2 can have around 2 billion virions in every milliliter of respiratory fluid? 2 billion per ml is bigger that 1 million per ml, isn’t it? Can’t virologists use respiratory fluid from an infected human being and make a nice slide with many, many CoV-2 viral particles imaged? Why not?
Let’s see if we have more luck with the other fact? theory? idea? guess? that 100 billion viral particles per ml are needed in order to capture viruses in the act of existing. But look at what we run into now: According to Sender et al., in their 2021 paper The total number and mass of SARS-CoV-2 virions, there are an estimated 109–1011 virions in an infected individual’s entire body.
This means that in order to image viruses from bodily fluids and tissues directly from a human being, we will need to extract all the viruses from their entire body and get it into a single milliliter of fluid.
So which is it? Virologists can’t image viruses directly from human samples because they—I don’t know—don’t feel like doing it? A sneeze can give you 2000x the density you need but you just haven’t gotten around to it yet? Or is it they can’t image viruses directly from human samples because they need an entire human body’s viral load in 1/30 oz. of liquid?
But virologists point to TEM images of viruses that exist thanks to cell culture procedures that have successfully multiplied viruses in monkey kidney cells up to—how many particles per ml? 10e6, a seemingly trivial amount compared to a single sneeze, or 10e11, more than the entire amount of virus in a trillion-cell human being? Which one makes more sense for an explanation for why no one can seem to image viruses straight from human samples?