The Final Refutal of Virology
The Final Refutal of Virology
Video transcription by Timothy Ray Walls.
I have been saying for some time, now, that everything from A to Z that is being perpetrated through governments and by governments, around the world, in relation to this present planned-demic is FAKE. It is a LIE on a grandiose scale of criminality never before witnessed in the whole of hue-man history.
I have further stated many times that there is no such thing as a virus. A virus, by definition is a poison. But the fraudulent criminal medical system has inverted the meaning of virus to signify a "living thing," which has never been proven exist.
Now, there are so many in the business of news reporting, left and right, who are lost in the jungle of confusion--the morass of fake details which perpetuate to keep the whole of hue-man civilization divided.
I continue to live by a principle which has and serves me well:
Entertain ALL, beLIEve nothing which you have not experienced firsthand and is purely anecdotal (has no basis in fact.)
This video narrative is based in fact. And this is the reason I have taken the time to transcribe it in full.
Transcription Begins Here: Is it a virus?
Hello, dear friends! Today, we will talk about a very important historical event. Thanks to the microbiologist Stefan Lanka on the 21st of April, 2021, we've got an irrefutable proof that virology is not based on scientific methods.
Now, I will introduce you to this and give you a very important context that will help you understand the topic.
If you are a virologist and you want to prove the existence of a virus and its causal relationship to a disease, you have to do 3 very simple things:
Step 1
How to prove the existence and pathogenicity of a virus: Isolate, in other words, extract the virus from a sick person and purify it, so you have an isolate consisting only of pure viral particles and nothing else.
Step 2
Visualize (observe) this virus under a microscope, take a photo, characterize it as a unique biochemical structure. Sequence it's genome and determine which proteins it is made of.
Step 3
Transfer the purified virus into an experimental host and cause disease.
If you follow these steps successfully, only then can you prove that the virus exists and causes disease.
This is what the Chinese virologists should have done with the first so called "Covid patients in Wuhan, to be able to claim that their respiratory conditions are caused by a virus.
People often ask me: Doesn't the fact that a certain number of people in Wuhan got sick at the same time prove the existence of the virus? Let's clarify this point.
When we see that certain number of people fall ill at the same time, we are making epidemiological observations.
Epidemiology does not prove the existence of anything, nor does it claim a specific cause for these conditions.
The role of epidemiological observations is to record the fact that people exhibit certain symptoms, and epidemiologists can also propose hypotheses that need to be tested to understand the cause of these conditions.
Epidemiology is not proving or asserting anything.
Determining the cause of these conditions occurs after epidemiological studies have taken place and we understand that something is happening and people start to show symptoms.
If you think that the fact that people get sick at the same time automatically proves the existence of a virus, then you think that scurvy is caused by a virus. After all, sailors began to fall ill with the same symptoms, simultaneously one after another.
Therefore, for a very long time, it was beLIEved that scurvy is a contagious and infectious disease, and all those who offered alternative explanations were ridiculed. Same about conditions such as beriberi and pellagra, which were considered infectious diseases,
when in reality they were a consequence of nutritional deficiency.
And these are not the only examples.
And if you think that the fact that disease is spreading and people in other regions begin to show the same symptoms automatically proves that the cause of this is a virus, then you should think that Chernobyl was not an accident at a nuclear power station, but a virus.
Any scientist or competent physician would agree that epidemiological observations alone do not prove the existence of a virus. Whether it is a virus or not remains to be seen.
Honest researchers understand that these respiratory diseases are caused by various factors. For example,
- chemicals,
- air pollution,
- toxic lifestyles
Just have a look at a huge amount of scientific literature about drug induced pneumonia. There are over 600 know drugs that induce pneumonia, and this list includes many common drugs such as paracetamol, antibiotics, statins, and even aspirin.
In reality, we can site here all day and discuss the factors that can lead to respiratory illnesses.
Therefore, if your goal is to determine the real factor that caused the disease in a person, and not just to impose something that is convenient only for you, then you will impartially investigate all possible causes and will not hold onto something untenable.
When it comes to a virus, you must follow all these steps to check, if it is the cause of the disease.
And what do you think, have these steps been ever taken in the one and a half year old story named Covid-19? Not a single time.
Despite the fact that there are a huge number of publications the title of which claims that the sars-cov-2 virus was isolated, in fact, this was never done.
The procedure of isolation is very simple and has been successfully used in microbiology, and it allows you to get viral particles cleared of all foreign matter, that is, a pure sample of a virus or something else that you want to study.
For this, the patient's lung fluid is taken, passed through special filters to get rid of all large molecules and get a filtrate, consisting of molecules measured in nanometers.
Then, using a density gradient centrifuge, this filtrate is spun to separate all the different tiny molecules that are in the filtrate by density and by weight. This creates several bands of molecules and all the molecules with the same weight and density will end up in the same band. So, if the viral particles are present, they will be in one of these bands.
After this, you can take these particles and study them to determine their genome, proteins, and test them for pathogenicity. This is how you isolate a virus. It is important to understand that if you have performed these procedures, you do not have a sample of the virus, and further steps, such as proving a causal relationship to the disease, creating a diagnostic test and a vaccine, are simply not possible.
As I said, in virology, this procedures has never been done.
Virologists are the only scientists in the world who have decided not to rely on the dictionary definition of a word "isolation," and therefore, their methods for isolation of a virus have nothing to do with the general definition of this word.
In virology, to isolate a virus, means not to extract this virus from the body of a sick patient, but to perform a so called "cell culture."
They take a sample of lung fluid, from which they do not isolate the virus, so they have no idea if it is present at all in this sample.
Then, they put it on Vero cells - monkey kidney cells, and add large amounts of antibiotics and antifungals. They also severely restrict the cell's nutrition, causing them to starve.
Then, they observe a cytopathic effect - which is death of the cells and claim that this proves the presence of the virus in a sample and it's pathogenicity.
However, antibiotics and antifungal drugs that they add to the starving cells, are powerful cyto and nephrotoxins.
So, what in reality killed the cells--these toxic drugs and hunger, or a hypothetical virus?
The answer to this question could be provided by control experiments in which virologists would take non-infectious material, for example, sputum from a healthy person, or a sterile solution, or even nothing, but used the same conditions, meaning, the same high amounts of antibiotics, reduced nutrition, and show that the cytopathic effect did not happen.
Then it will be 100% clear that these drugs and hunger could not cause cell death.
Now, do you think that in at least one publication on the so-called isolation of the sars-cov-2 such a control experiment was ever conducted? The answer to this question is no, not even once.
Has such an experiment been carried out at least once in the entire history of virology? No, not with any so-called pathogenic virus. Not only that in virology, isolation means not to obtain a sample of the virus, but to perform a tissue culture, which has nothing to do with isolation, they also never do the control, which in science is simply unacceptable.
Why the control experiments are never done in virology? Because they will entail results that will lead to the disappearance of virology. (Editor's note: This is also a less overt way of say that viruses have never been scientifically proven to exist.)
John enders, the man who came up with this fraudulent procedure that virologists call isolation today, once conducted a control experiment, which has been ignored by everyone.
In his publication from 1954, entitled "Propagation in Tissue Cultures of Cytopathogenic Agents from Patients with Measles," where he first described the results of his tissue culture, he say, quote: "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."
This is a very important quote and I will read it again.
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.
And so you don't get confused, I will explain: viruses obtained from patients with measles are simply a snot sample taken from a sick person. It is not a purified virus. In this case, Enders took a sample from children.
Enders says that he conducted a control experiment. He took a cell culture, placed it in the same conditions, meaning, severely limited nutrition and added toxic antibiotics, but did not use any material from a sick person. He used only cells, a starvation diet, and antibiotics.
He got results, as he says, indistinguishable from the results he got using so called infectious material with a virus inside. This is a direct evidence that the cytopathic effect is not caused by any virus, but by toxic conditions of the experiment itself. What happens next?
It happens that during cellular decay, cells release a huge amount of different particles that contain genetic materials. They come from decaying monkey kidney cells, human lung fluid as well from fetal calf serum that they always add to the tissue culture. Enders also added cow's milk there.
So, we have several sources of genetic material, monkey cells, human lung fluid, fetal calf blood serum and milk. All these things contain genetic material. So, during decay, all of them will produce particles, extra cellular vesicles with nucleic acid inside. But the appearance of these particles is announced as proof that the virus has multiplied.
Virologists look at these particles in a microscope, choose the ones that they think have better appearance, take a photo, and call them sars-cov-2 virus.
They never isolate these particles; they simply look at them with a microscope and photograph them. There is no evidence that these particles are any kind of virus.
As I said, they can be common decay products of all materials involved in the experiment. For example, what is called sars-cov-2 virus in the photograph is the exact copy of exosomes, particles produced by human cells that are not pathogenic.
There is no evidence that these photographs show virus and not exosomes.
Let's see what Enders wrote about this in his publication from 1957, titled: Measles Virus: A Summary of Experiments Concerned with Isolation, Properties and Behavior. "Ruckle (another scientist) has lately reported similar findings and in addition has isolated an agent from monkey kidney tissue that so far is indistinguishable from human measles virus. The problem, however, of the origin of the agent responsible for the presence of these antibodies in apparently normal monkeys has not yet been solved."
Here, Enders says that they do not know whether these particles obtained as a result of the cytopathic effect are viruses or just products of cell decay.
Another quote in the same publication: "There is a potential risk in employing cultures of primate cells for the production of vaccines composed of attenuated virus, since the presence of other agents possibly latent in primate tissues cannot be definitely excluded by any known method." What does it mean?
This means absolutely the same thing that modern researchers said in 2020.
Here is a quote from a publication from a journal, titled >>Viruses<< from 2020, where they look at extracellular vesicles in relation to what they call HIV virus, SARS, and hepatitis C. "Nowadays, it is an almost impossible mission to separate EVs and viruses by means of canonical vesicle isolation methods, such as differential ultracentrifugation, because they are frequently co-pelleted due to their similar dimension [56, 57]. To overcome this problem, different studies have proposed the separation of EVs from virus particles by exploiting their different migration velocity in a density gradient or using the presence of specific markers that distinguish viruses from EVs [56,58,59]. However, to date, a reliable method that can actually guarantee a complete separation does not exist."
This quote means that the so-called viruses and extracellular vesicles are so much identical, that you can not even distinguish or separate them from each other. This is simply not possible. Therefore, what grounds are there for asserting that you are looking at a virus and not at exosomes or other cellular decay products after a cytopathic effect? Absolutely none.
If you conducted control experiments, and also isolated these particles and proved their pathogenicity, we could say that this is a virus, but virologists never do it.
In the 1950s, control experiments made by Enders was ignored by everyone, including Enders himself. And his procedure has become a standard procedure in virology and the only proof of the existence of viruses. I want to emphasize that this procedure is not just one of the ways in which virologists prove the existence of a virus; it is the only way.
Since then, no one has conducted any control experiments. But now, the end has come to this scientific fraud, and we are on the verge of a real scientific revolution.
On April 21st, 2021, Stefan Lanka, a German microbiologist, did something that no other scientist has done since John Enders. Stefan Lanka performed control experiments. What results do you think he got?
Exactly the same cytopathic effect occurred in cell culture, without any infectious material added, but with the same conditions, such as high doses of antibiotics and decreased nutrition. Let's take a closer look at these experiments.
So, here are the images of the control experiments that Stefan Lanka did. And now, I will explain everything to you.
As you can see, 4 cell lines are used here. The very first line serves as a control. The other 3 are the lines with which the experiment is being carried out.
Here at the top we can see what these3 experimental cell lines looked like before the start of the experiment. And as you can see, they look very healthy. So, let's move on to top control group. Here it says:
Control group 1, CM - is a culture medium, that is, complete, normal cell nutrition, and 1 dose of ABAM, which means antibiotics / antimycotics. To be specific, the drug called amphotericin is used here, because it was the drug that was used in all sars-cov-2 isolation studies.
Further, it says here, 1 day after stress and 5 days after stress. Stress refers to a change in the nutrient medium. As you can see, the cell line that from the very first day received good nutrition and a small dose of antibiotics, remained healthy on the 5th day of the experiment. We do not observe any cytopathic effect or cell death. Let's move on to the next group.
What we are seeing now (in the next group) is closer to what virologists are doing in their experiments, but not completely. A different kind of culture medium is used here, DMEM, which stands for Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium. This medium differs from the standard culture medium because it has reduced nutrient concentrations.
Then, 10% FCS is used, which is fetal calf serum. It is used to add extra nutrition, because DMEM is not enough for cells to survive. And so far, the same dose of amphotericin is used. We see that these changes in the nutrient medium led to serious changes in the cell culture; it is not as healthy as the first one.
We see that the cells have lost their shape; they are not as uniform as in the first picture.
If we look at the third image, we see exactly what virologists are doing with cell cultures. Here, the concentration of nutrients was further decreased, approximately in half.
Then, the concentration of fetal calf serum was reduced from 10% to 1%. In addition, the dose of antibiotics was increased from 1 to 3. And here we can see very clearly how cells degrade and break down.
They were healthy, but a a day after changing the nutrient medium, and using such a high dose of amphotericin, they begin to look abnormal. And after 5 days, we observe a serious cytopathic effect. And all this happens without the use of any infectious material, only due to the toxic conditions in which these cells were placed.
The last group was used for further control experiments, for the so-called genomic sequencing, during which virologists, of course, do not conduct any control experiments.
But Stefan Lanka will do it for them and show that from this cell culture, in which there is no virus at all, using their methods, you can sequence the genome of sars-cov-2 virus, Ebola virus, measles virus, and any virus you want.
I will talk about these experiments later, when they are finished. We will not discuss this, now.
But as you can see, a source of RNA was added to this cell culture. This RNA is obtained from yeast, but not from ordinary yeast, but from a matrix substance. It was added there, because when virologists add lung fluid from a patient to a cell culture, they introduce a large amount of nucleic acids.
Therefore, with the help of RNA from yeast, they tried to mimic the patient's sputum, which is rich in such molecules.
Yeast-derived RNA is completely neutral. It is not pathogenic in any way, but here you can see that its presence causes an even greater cytopathic effect, although it is not related to any pathogen.
Friends, this experiment refutes all the theory on which virology is built.
The theory that viruses exist and cause disease has now been completely disproved.
These experiments show that what virologists call evidence of the presence of a virus in a tissue sample are just consequences caused by the very conditions of the experiment in the laboratory. And they are never caused by the presence of a non-existent virus.
So, let's summarize. If the sars-cov-2 virus does not exist, as has now been definitively scientifically proven, this means that: There is no virus structure and no spike protein exists.
I know that someone will definitely ask about research on spike protein,
If you read these studies, you will se that they do not get this protein from the virus. They get a recombinant protein, and this is done in the laboratory using fake, computer-generated genetic sequences. In general, this is not a real spike protein derived from a real virus. There is no viral genome.
The so-called genome of the sars-cov-2 virus is an absolutely artificial computer creation that has nothing todo with anything real, and subsequent control experiments will demonstrate this to absolutely everyone.
There are no viral strains.
It is not possible to create any diagnostic test and a vaccine.
Again, the PCR test, vector and mRNA vaccines are based on a completely fake genetic sequence that has nothing to do with anything real.
It is impossible to prove a causal relationship between a disease and a virus that does not exist.
And the so-called preventative measures taken by the government are not based on science. And the whole story called Covid-19 is necessary only for social control and getting people used to dictatorship.
Friends, as I said earlier, we are on the verge of a very real scientific and medical revolution.
I ask each of you to share this video wherever you can, because this is the only way we can make this revolution a reality.
The scientific work of Stefan Lanka, which I told you about, today, will not be allowed to be published in any scientific journal. This information will be suppressed as much as possible. Therefore, it is the duty of each of us to share this information.
This is the only way it can get enough publicity to influence the course of our history.
My Own Summary and Conclusion
Long before this planned-demic, I took time to research the meaning of the word, "virus," and its etymology. So, let's take a look at it, again, here.
Keyword search: online Latin dictionary
Latin Dictionary Result:
vīrusneutral noun II declensionView the declension of this word1 venom, poisonous secretion of snakes, creatures and plants2 acrid element
Next, let's compare this original Latin meaning with Webster's Dictionary meaning given:
virus noun
vi·rus | \ ˈvī-rəs \
plural viruses
Definition of virus
1a: any of a large group of submicroscopic infectious agents that are usually regarded as nonliving extremely complex molecules, that typically contain a protein coat surrounding an RNA or DNA core of genetic material but no semipermeable membrane, that are capable of growth and multiplication only in living cells, and that cause various important diseases in humans, animals, and plants
also : FILTERABLE VIRUS
b: a disease or illness caused by a virus
c: the causative agent of an infectious disease
2: something that poisons the mind or soul
the force of this virus of prejudice
— V. S. Waters
3: a computer program that is usually disguised as an innocuous program or file, that often produces copies of itself and inserts them into other programs, and that when run usually performs a malicious action (such as destroying data or damaging software)
4archaic : VENOM sense 1.
From these two definitions, several observations may be made:
1. The original Latin meaning of "poisonous substance" has been relegated to 4archaic in usage.
2. The primary definition 1a. follows the established medical research scientific community's meaning of "any of a large group of submicroscopic infectious agents that are usually regarded as nonliving extremely complex molecules, that typically contain a protein coat surrounding an RNA or DNA core of genetic material but no semipermeable membrane, that are capable of growth and multiplication only in living cells, and that cause various important diseases in humans, animals, and plants."
3. The above video detailing the current fake control experiments used by the medical research scientists and the control experiments by Stefan Lanka proving they are fraudulent control experiments prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 1a. definition of a virus is made up--fake.
4. The is fraudulently criminal medical research community would have you beLIEve that a virus is a "living thing" that can be transmitted from person-to-person. No such proof exists.
5. Digital photography representations show exosomes (which each hue-man cell produces to eliminate toxins out of the cell membrane. These exosomes are then carried in the blood stream to the colon and the liver, passing out of the stools and the urinary tract. Therefore, all digital photo representations of so-called virus are fake, a fraud and used to scare an ignorant public into submission to medical and governmental tyranny.
💖
Comments