Wow. Firstly OMG! I think you're amazing and brave for speaking up.
Yes I had all these questions and more.
I now think we don't understand what illness is at all. The symptoms of a cold can also be seen as a detoxification- of pollutants eg PM25 particularly in the winter when it's not sequestered by leafs, and also now many other environmental toxins, dead cells killed by hypothermia etc. There are only certain ways the body has to detox; mucus, coughing, rashes, spots, fever. This would partly explain why people get sick together, but to say that people in the same room all get presents at Christmas does not prove that it must be Santa!
I also think that there are signals that we send out to each, when it's important that we detox, to trigger reactions in each other and much that we don't understand. We are not islands, and function only in groups. Like trees and mushrooms communicate in incredibly complex ways. I also always think of the fact that yawning is contagious.
Yes I have worked with antibodies for many years. But if the so called viral proteins in cell culture are in fact cellular proteins produced under stress and therefore correlated with illness- then cells in the so called immune system would react to them and certain (not entirely specific) sticky globulins would be produced.
All the transmission studies I have seen for airborne viruses have involved just breathing out what was breathed in or injection directly into the trachea of small mammals and noting symptoms like coughing. I now think all scientific research is unacceptable if it uses animals.
I am sure you have read the Perth Group on the experiments performed by Montagnier which prove nothing. His patient sample (BRU) produced reverse transcriptase (accepted by all to be present in cells) which was called 'isolation' of a virus. He then added umbilical cord cells to the culture. These are known to produce a certain type of vesicle which he called an EM image of HIV (though it was only one 'virus' and it took the technician days to find). He then added his BRU blood back to the cell culture (containing proteins that came from him) and said look we have antibody/protein reactions. No wonder science died in 1984 when the probable cause for AIDS was announced at a press conference and no one was allowed to ask all these obvious questions.
Learning about the actual causes including DDT of polio, diphtheria and measles etc and how they were declining very rapidly into insignificance with better housing, water and the banning of child labour, and then looking at the Pharma marketing website wikipedia that it was actually vaccines that did this, has further confirmed my thoughts on the matter! and that it's easy to get a ban from twitter to mention autism and MMR in the same sentence.
Anyway thank you so much again, great to communicate
The set of symptoms we call the common cold. Do you think there’s an agent or several agents that confer those symptoms? If not, how do you interpret the everyday experience of catching a cold from someone else? Is it just their imagination?
Aside from how people become ill, whether by “catching” something or becoming spontaneously unwell because something is wrong with diet, stress, inactivity etc (& I’ve always though all of the above were true, why couldn’t they be?) there are measurable changes in components of what we call the immune system.
If we don’t “catch” any illnesses from other living critters, how should we account for changes like the appearance in blood of binding proteins we call antibodies & the changes in ability of certain blood cells to become super activated when exposed to pieces of what mistaken people call viruses? I struggle with those questions. I’m happy to accept I’ve been fooled about viruses. I do see the problem with claims for them. But that does throw up a few questions to which I’ve not read or heard satisfactory answers.
It’s ridiculous for example that “human respiratory viruses” simply won’t grow in cell culture of human primary airway epithelial cells (either immersed or in air-liquid interface culture) & more than odd that they won’t infect & injure cells lines (immortal, cancerous cells from airways, like A549 cells, which are de-differentiated in morphology & a bit crap as a model of anything).
I too used to think (without thinking) that viruses transit illnesses & that vaccines were in general, safe & effective, though occasionally they did injure or kill people.
Rule of thumb though on the safe part: absolutely nothing in the medical field is free of unwanted effects. And things that cause changes we like are more likely to cause illnesses than things that don’t.
Welcome again & thank you for any answers you’ve come across as you made the leap from a set of untruths.
Given our true limited understanding of both nature and our interactions within it. Can't our current understanding of Virology and it's mechanism be both wrong and right? Functions such as chorum sensing, pleomorphism and exosomes etc could be responsible for "symptoms" that have been designated "virions, and therefore in the virology domain. But perhaps the pleomorphic theory on bacteria would explain these and so the concept that there is something smaller, different to bacteria (as virology theorises) causing certain disease, is still valid, and should be studied further.
Why must it be black or white? I understand the posit that by dissolving the concept of Virology as a whole negates all the actions taken, but what does that actually solve in real time? The actions taken by institutions, in the name of public health were bigger than should have, regardless of positions on virology or terrainology, so it's less about actual "pandemic" and more about bureaucracy, technocrat, government over reach and human behavioural psychology.
Sorry for interjection, if this was meant to be just between you and Dr Mike🤗
Glad to say welcome to Substack and I very much look forward to reading more from you!
Hello Mike,
Wow. Firstly OMG! I think you're amazing and brave for speaking up.
Yes I had all these questions and more.
I now think we don't understand what illness is at all. The symptoms of a cold can also be seen as a detoxification- of pollutants eg PM25 particularly in the winter when it's not sequestered by leafs, and also now many other environmental toxins, dead cells killed by hypothermia etc. There are only certain ways the body has to detox; mucus, coughing, rashes, spots, fever. This would partly explain why people get sick together, but to say that people in the same room all get presents at Christmas does not prove that it must be Santa!
I also think that there are signals that we send out to each, when it's important that we detox, to trigger reactions in each other and much that we don't understand. We are not islands, and function only in groups. Like trees and mushrooms communicate in incredibly complex ways. I also always think of the fact that yawning is contagious.
Yes I have worked with antibodies for many years. But if the so called viral proteins in cell culture are in fact cellular proteins produced under stress and therefore correlated with illness- then cells in the so called immune system would react to them and certain (not entirely specific) sticky globulins would be produced.
All the transmission studies I have seen for airborne viruses have involved just breathing out what was breathed in or injection directly into the trachea of small mammals and noting symptoms like coughing. I now think all scientific research is unacceptable if it uses animals.
I am sure you have read the Perth Group on the experiments performed by Montagnier which prove nothing. His patient sample (BRU) produced reverse transcriptase (accepted by all to be present in cells) which was called 'isolation' of a virus. He then added umbilical cord cells to the culture. These are known to produce a certain type of vesicle which he called an EM image of HIV (though it was only one 'virus' and it took the technician days to find). He then added his BRU blood back to the cell culture (containing proteins that came from him) and said look we have antibody/protein reactions. No wonder science died in 1984 when the probable cause for AIDS was announced at a press conference and no one was allowed to ask all these obvious questions.
Learning about the actual causes including DDT of polio, diphtheria and measles etc and how they were declining very rapidly into insignificance with better housing, water and the banning of child labour, and then looking at the Pharma marketing website wikipedia that it was actually vaccines that did this, has further confirmed my thoughts on the matter! and that it's easy to get a ban from twitter to mention autism and MMR in the same sentence.
Anyway thank you so much again, great to communicate
Jo
Welcome! A few questions if I may.
The set of symptoms we call the common cold. Do you think there’s an agent or several agents that confer those symptoms? If not, how do you interpret the everyday experience of catching a cold from someone else? Is it just their imagination?
Aside from how people become ill, whether by “catching” something or becoming spontaneously unwell because something is wrong with diet, stress, inactivity etc (& I’ve always though all of the above were true, why couldn’t they be?) there are measurable changes in components of what we call the immune system.
If we don’t “catch” any illnesses from other living critters, how should we account for changes like the appearance in blood of binding proteins we call antibodies & the changes in ability of certain blood cells to become super activated when exposed to pieces of what mistaken people call viruses? I struggle with those questions. I’m happy to accept I’ve been fooled about viruses. I do see the problem with claims for them. But that does throw up a few questions to which I’ve not read or heard satisfactory answers.
It’s ridiculous for example that “human respiratory viruses” simply won’t grow in cell culture of human primary airway epithelial cells (either immersed or in air-liquid interface culture) & more than odd that they won’t infect & injure cells lines (immortal, cancerous cells from airways, like A549 cells, which are de-differentiated in morphology & a bit crap as a model of anything).
I too used to think (without thinking) that viruses transit illnesses & that vaccines were in general, safe & effective, though occasionally they did injure or kill people.
Rule of thumb though on the safe part: absolutely nothing in the medical field is free of unwanted effects. And things that cause changes we like are more likely to cause illnesses than things that don’t.
Welcome again & thank you for any answers you’ve come across as you made the leap from a set of untruths.
Must it be one or the other?
Given our true limited understanding of both nature and our interactions within it. Can't our current understanding of Virology and it's mechanism be both wrong and right? Functions such as chorum sensing, pleomorphism and exosomes etc could be responsible for "symptoms" that have been designated "virions, and therefore in the virology domain. But perhaps the pleomorphic theory on bacteria would explain these and so the concept that there is something smaller, different to bacteria (as virology theorises) causing certain disease, is still valid, and should be studied further.
Why must it be black or white? I understand the posit that by dissolving the concept of Virology as a whole negates all the actions taken, but what does that actually solve in real time? The actions taken by institutions, in the name of public health were bigger than should have, regardless of positions on virology or terrainology, so it's less about actual "pandemic" and more about bureaucracy, technocrat, government over reach and human behavioural psychology.
Sorry for interjection, if this was meant to be just between you and Dr Mike🤗
Glad to say welcome to Substack and I very much look forward to reading more from you!