The Virus Misconception Parts 1 & 2

This work argues that the concept of pathogenic viruses is a fundamental misinterpretation rooted in unscientific laboratory practices dating back to 1954. It posits that the phenomena attributed to viral infections are, in fact, the result of cell and tissue death caused by starvation and poisoning during experiments. Central to this argument is the assertion that modern virology lacks the necessary control experiments to validate its claims. Consequently, "viral genomes" are described not as real, isolated entities but as theoretical models computationally assembled from genetic fragments of dying cells, a process that has significant implications for virus testing and vaccine development.

The foundation of modern virology questioned

The core of this critique targets the experimental procedures established by John F. Enders in 1954, which became the standard for "proving" the existence of viruses. In these experiments, scientists add allegedly infected material to a tissue culture after withdrawing most of its nutrient solution and adding toxic antibiotics. The subsequent death of the cells, known as the cytopathic effect, is attributed to a virus.

However, the author asserts that this conclusion is scientifically invalid because the crucial control experiments were never performed. A proper control would involve subjecting a separate cell culture to the exact same conditions—nutrient withdrawal and the addition of antibiotics—but without the "infected" material. It is argued that such a control would demonstrate that the cells die from starvation and poisoning, proving the laboratory procedure itself is the cause of death, not a hypothetical virus.

The measles virus and the role of control experiments

The measles virus serves as a primary example of this alleged scientific error. During the German measles virus trial, it was reportedly revealed that the foundational publications claiming to have isolated the virus contained no control experiments. The court-appointed expert, Professor Podbielski, allegedly confirmed this absence, leading to the conclusion that the scientific basis for the existence of the measles virus is unsubstantiated. The death of tissue in a test tube was accepted as proof of the virus's existence and isolation, a dogma that has persisted without challenge.

Deconstructing the "virus": from isolation to digital assembly

A key claim is that a pathogenic virus has never been truly isolated, purified, and biochemically characterised as a complete particle. Instead, the process for identifying a "new" virus involves taking short sequences of nucleic acids from dying tissues and using computer programs to arrange them into a longer, theoretical genome strand. This process, known as "alignment," creates a digital model of a virus that has never been observed in its entirety in nature.

This contrasts with bacteriophages, which can be isolated as whole particles. The model of the genetic virus, developed from 1953 onwards, was based on these bacteriophages, yet the same standards of verifiable isolation have not been applied to alleged human viruses.

Implications for testing and vaccines

This theoretical basis for viruses directly impacts the validity of diagnostic tests and vaccines. PCR tests are designed to detect these short, computationally derived genetic sequences. The argument follows that since these sequences originate from dying human or animal cells, tests can react to the body's own metabolic by-products, leading to "positive" results in healthy individuals. Furthermore, "live" vaccines are produced from the same toxic mixture of dying animal tissue, foetal cells, and antibiotics, which is then claimed to contain an "attenuated" virus.