On the “Do Viruses Exist?” Debate By Brian Simpson

Roosh v has joined the debate, now among Covid critics, about whether viruses exist at all, or whether if they do in some sense exist, do not play the causal role that mainstream medicine says. The main arguments are basically epistemological, based upon questions of proof and evidence. It is interesting, but one claim is that there has been no isolation of SARS-Cov-2. That is heavily disputed on the internet by the fact checkers. I don’t know. Something is definitely going on, and the postulation of a virus as the causal mechanism explains more than numerous ad hoc hypotheses about environmental causes. Still, interesting to think about, at a level that the mainstream seldom does.

https://www.rooshv.com/are-viruses-actually-contagious

“The coronavirus pandemic has revealed to me that science is not what I believed it to be when I received a bachelor’s degree in microbiology in 2001. Instead of striving for the pure, unadulterated truth of the natural world, it has blatantly become an authoritarian vehicle to enslave and spiritually destroy human beings at the hands of oligarchs who have the billions of dollars needed to fund science and therefore determine what is science. From my independent research into the germ theory of disease, which is the accepted theory of how we allegedly get sick from various pathogens, I can no longer say that I absolutely believe viruses are contagious.

A man who helped nudge me into my current belief is Dr. Tow Cowan, a medical doctor and researcher who has revealed the history of virology and other truths that were not taught to me in university. Breaking The Spell is a short 43-page book he wrote that reveals the sham of modern virology. After studying Dr. Cowan’s work and many others (see the reading list at the bottom of this article), I cannot in good conscience conclude that viruses are the main cause of respiratory illness and other diseases.

When I tell people that I don’t have a firm belief that viruses are contagious, they begin a series of “How about…” questions to which I sometimes have an answer and sometimes I don’t. If you’re new to virus skepticism, I hope the following passages from Dr. Cowan’s book and my explanations will be of aid.

Epidemiological observations are not proof that viruses exist

For more than a hundred years, people observed that one sailor after another got sick on ships. Their teeth fell out, and many went into heart failure and died. For many, it was “obvious” that something was being passed—a contagion—from one sailor to the next. At some point, however, a sailor ate a lime; the whole thing went away because, in fact, the sick sailors were suffering from scurvy, a disease caused by vitamin C deficiency.

[…]

There are many other examples illustrating how epidemiological observations have misled a medical profession stubbornly wedded to the idea of contagion. Beriberi and pellagra two well-known nutritional deficiencies, were considered for decades to be caused by a contagion. It turns out the case was B vitamin deficiency, which, as one would expect, would often show up in the same family members at the same time.

Last year, I came down with a flu-like illness while traveling. I returned home and then three days later, my mother came down with a similar but milder illness. It seemed quite intuitive that something was transmitted from me to my mother, but in spite of the timing, I cannot say with proof that a virus was transmitted. I have the epidemiological observation that my mother got sick three days after me, but if I want to say a virus caused it, I would need to prove it. Scientists have not proven that a viral particle floating in the air can be the cause of illness once inhaled, ingested, or transmitted through blood. If I can’t say it’s a virus in the case of me and my mother then what happened? I don’t know, but just because I don’t know, I will not hop onto a deceptively intuitive theory that does not have sufficient evidential backing. (Another intuitive theory that many have fallen for is evolution.)

Do you believe in a yawn virus? Probably not, but I’m sure it has happened to you that someone you were with yawned, and then almost immediately after, you also yawned. We don’t attribute such yawn contagion to a particle. Do you believe in a haircut virus? When I see a man with a nice haircut, I look in the mirror and evaluate if I need a haircut as well, and sometimes I get one soon after. Since it is theorized that diseases are the body’s method of expelling toxins, it could be that when you see someone who is sick, your body does an evaluation if it should also expel toxins. There are many other theories available that are beyond the scope of this introductory article, and I cannot claim to know the complete answer, but I have not seen credible evidence that virus particles are the cause of flu-like disease or otherwise.

During the Spanish influenza, Milton Rosenau was tasked with researching exactly how it was infecting humans. After a series of experiments, he was unable to infect anyone with the alleged virus (then called Pfeiffer’s bacillus). He went so far as getting sick people to cough and exchange fluids with healthy volunteers, and when that didn’t work, he took fluid from dead people’s lungs and tried to use that to infect people. It still didn’t infect anyone!

As the preliminary trials proved negative, we became bolder, and selecting nineteen of our volunteers, gave each one of them a very large quantity of a mixture of thirteen different strains of the Pfeiffer bacillus, some of them obtained recently from the lungs at necropsy; others were subcultures of varying age, and each of the thirteen had, of course, a different history. Suspensions of these organisms were sprayed with an atomizer into the nose and into the eyes, and back into the throat, while the volunteers were breathing in. We used some billions of these organisms, according to our estimated counts, on each one of the volunteers, but none of them took sick. The Infectious Myth Busted: The Rosenau Spanish Flu Experiments

I know this may be hard for you to believe, since you were bombarded with viral theory when you are a child, and everyone you know believes in it, but they have never proved that viral diseases are caused by viruses. It’s just an intuitive theory that has been accepted as fact. When I go to national parks in the United States, there are information placards that say a particular rock formation is billions of years old. That is presented confidently as fact, but it is also a mere theory (Orthodox Church doctrine puts the age of the earth at about 7000 years).

How are viruses “isolated”? (Hint: they’re not)

In the history of medicine, not one published study shows the isolation of identical particles that would represent a disease-causing virus from any bodily fluid from any sick person.

Let me make this even more clear. If one takes any person with any “viral” illness—for example, chicken pox, rabies, measles, AIDS or COVID-19—the published literature does not contain any evidence of any virus that was directly isolated from any bodily fluids from even one person suffering from these illnesses. The interesting thing about this statement is that no health institution from any government in the world disagrees.

[…]

…here are the steps Enders [the first scientist who “isolated” viruses”] outlined in his 1954 paper [describing viral isolation]. Enders started his experiment by taking a throat swab from seven children hospitalized with symptoms consistent with measles. He mixed the cotton swab with two milliliters of milk—interestingly, itself a source of genetic material. Then he added the throat swab in milk to a solution containing: “Penicillin, 100ug/ml and streptomycin, 50 mg/ml were added to all throat specimens which were then centrifuged at 5450 rpm for about one hour. Supernatant fluid and sediment resuspended in a small volume of milk were used as separate inocula in different experiments in amounts varying from 0.5 ml to 3.0 ml”.

“Inocula” is just the sample used in the next step, which was to inoculate this material onto a culture of “trypsinized human and rhesus monkey kidney” cells. To this culture medium, he added the following: “The culture medium consisted of bovine amniotic fluid (90%), beef embryo extract (5%), horse serum (5%), antibiotics, and phenol red as an indicator of cell metabolism”.

In simple language, Enders mixed his sample with six other substances that are known to be sources of protein and genetic material. We now know that these substances break down into particles with the size and morphology of what are called viruses. These six sources are milk, human kidney cells, rhesus monkey kidney cells, bovine amniotic fluid, beef embryo extract and horse serum.

To this culture, Enders’ research group next added antibiotics that are known to be toxic to the kidney cells, especially streptomycin. (Nowadays, scientists tend to use the antibiotics gentamicin and amphotericin.) Enders and colleagues then observed this brew over a number of days. When they saw a characteristic cytopathic effect (CPE) in the cells of the cultures—meaning the transition of healthy, normal-sized culture cells into giant, disorganized cells with internal holes or vacuoles—they concluded that these were proof that the virus from the throat swab was destroying the cells in the culture. To Enders, this cytopathic effect was the hallmark of dying cells, and he believed it could only have occurred because the virus in the measles sample infected and destroyed the cells in the culture.

To this day, with minor exceptions, every “viral isolation” starts with this flawed culturing process. Furthermore, every genetic analysis of any purported virus is done on the results of this cell culture, not on an isolated, purified virus. No exceptions. Thus, if virologists want to elucidate the genome of a new virus, they don’t isolate the virus from a sick person and sequence that specific particle. Rather, they take an unpurified sample from a sick person, run it through a tissue culture (as described above) and do their analysis on the resulting mixture—not on the virus itself.

[…]

…every “live-viral vaccine” basically is nothing more than a partly purified (minimally filtered) cell culture mixture.

[…]

Today, virologists refer to the inevitable breakdown products of dead and dying tissues as extracellular vesicles or sometimes as “exosomes.” These particles can be isolated and purified directly from bodily fluids of sick people. They are conceptually different from viruses in that viruses supposedly come from outside the person and, at least sometimes, are considered pathogens. EVs come from the breakdown of the person’s own tissues and are non-pathogenic. And, as of May 2020, virologists acknowledged that they can’t distinguish between the two. There is only one realistic explanation for this. All particles with the size, composition and morphology of “viruses” are, in reality, the normal and inevitable results of the breakdown of our own tissues. And our tissues break down for the same reason as the cultures in Enders’ experiments broke down: They’re either starved, poisoned or both. Dying tissues produce a myriad of particles, and these particles have unfortunately been mistaken for pathogenic, exogenous viruses. It’s time to clear up this misconception.

If I hand you a canister and tell you it’s gasoline, you will assume that the liquid inside is only gasoline. If I give you a bottle of extra virgin olive oil, you will assume it only has extra virgin olive oil without adulterants. With virus isolation, however, you’re getting a potpourri of genetic and medicinal junk in addition to the alleged virus. A virus “isolate” is anything but. They have not isolated any viruses, so whenever you hear in the news that a new virus has been isolated, they are using a definition of isolation that is quite different than what you would expect by the word “isolation.” To help convince you of their sham, they will say they’ve used electron microscopes and various dyes, pointing with a soy meme expression that the little particles are viruses that will go on to infect other human beings, when really it’s just cell junk and debris that is created when you expose healthy mammalian cells of various animals to a toxic brew.

Coronavirus spike proteins are only seen after adding protein-digesting enzymes

The authors [in a paper announcing the discover of coronavirus spike proteins] then describe the electron micrographs done on the resulting culture fluid: “Electron micrographs of sectioned Vero/hSLAM cells showed cytoplasmic membrane-bound vesicles containing coronavirus particles. Following several failures to recover virions with the characteristic fringe of surface spike proteins, it was found that adding trypsin to the cell culture medium immediately improved virion morphology.”

In other words, the particles the Australian researchers call “coronaviruses” included the characteristic halo of spike proteins only after the investigators added trypsin to the culture medium. Trypsin is a protein-digesting enzyme; viruses are alleged to have a protein “coat.” It would be reasonable to assume that if one adds protein-digesting enzymes to particles with a protein coating, some of the protein coating will be eaten away, leaving a final particle that might look in an electron micrograph as if it has spikes. This lab-induced result obviously would bear no relationship to what such a particle might look like inside a live person.

There is only one rational, logical and scientific conclusion that one can draw from this paper: These researchers had no idea what made the Vero/hSLAM cells break down. Moreover, they had no idea where any genetic material they subsequently tested for originated. Finally, they did not find any particle with the characteristic morphology of a coronavirus until they manufactured its appearance. In sum, there is no evidence in this paper that any particle known as SARS-CoV-2 was found, or that any virus had anything to do with this Australian person’s illness.

Spike proteins are a laboratory-made creation. They have not been observed in human tissue nor isolated from them. They do not exist naturally. If you’re watching a video of a based scientist who is telling you the “truth” of spike proteins as compared to establishment scientists, he is also far from the truth, despite his good intentions. Starting in the year 2020, there has been a wave of illnesses around the world, but I do not believe it is caused by coronavirus or spike proteins, and any research or content that discusses these alleged particles as the cause of illness is probably a waste of your time.

The coronavirus PCR test is actually a test for common human, bacterial, and fungal DNA

Doing a BLAST search for the Drosten primer sequences [of SARS-CoV-2], Davis came up with more than 90 matching sequences in the human genome and more than 90 matching sequences in the microbial world. This finding means that the primer sequences being used in RT-PCR testing to identify “SARS-CoV-2” could be possibly of human or microbial (bacterial, fungal, etc.) origin. Any claims that these PCR primer sequences are unique to SARS-CoV-2 are, therefore, false.

[…]

…all illness creates genetic debris, and similar illnesses cause similar patterns of genetic breakdown. When these patterns are picked up by the PCR process and erroneously used as a diagnostic test, that is when we run into trouble.

[…]

The biggest danger of using the PCR process as a diagnostic test is that the number of cycles will determine the percentage of positives and negatives. Any PCR “test” done with 25 or fewer cycles is likely to be negative in almost every case. With that amount of amplification, one rarely is able to pick up the primer sequence in question. On the other hand, if the amplification cycles are above 40, almost everyone will test positive because those sequences are present in every human-and every human has a baseline of tissue breakdown happening all the time.

The implications of this feature of the PCR process are clear. If any tyrant wanted to show that there was a “viral pandemic,” all they would have to do is increase the cycle numbers to more than 40. If they then wanted to show that whatever intervention they were using to combat this “pandemic” was helping, they could just lower the cycles to fewer than 25. Suddenly, all those “positive” cases would become “negative” simply because the sensitivity of the test was altered.

The only way to combat this potential fraud is to eliminate the use of any PCR process as a diagnostic test.

Most people I know have fallen for the “coronavirus is infectious” sham and relay their adventures with clinical testing. Today they test negative, and three days later they still test negative, and then a day after that they test positive. From my observation, those who don’t have symptoms seem more likely to test positive. Coronavirus testing is a spin of the roulette wheel because it does not test for what it claims to test. Instead of testing for a virus, it’s actually testing for burrowed pieces of your own DNA that sometimes shows up on the test. The result it generates could be completely random.

Dr. Cowan’s explanation of the virus sham is thorough, logical, elegant, and clear, because instead of merely theorizing, he’s deconstructing the research papers from the virologists themselves who have made claims that later became normalized in medical science. He’s using the words and techniques of the scientists to show how ridiculous their research and “isolation” really is. This means that the viral model for disease is a theory, just like the theory of evolution, and we already know how wrong that theory is. Scientists have not isolated viruses and have not proved they cause disease unlike with bacteria or parasites. Something is being communicated when you get sick after spending time with someone else who is sick, but there is absolutely no proof that it’s a virus.

After Dr. Cowan debunks modern medicine, he then theorizes about what he believes is really going on. This is where he loses me. In the last chapter of his book, he proposes a theory of water crystallization that ends up deifying water and how it can rearrange itself ad-hoc into needed biochemical structures. He stresses this is just a theory, but it’s one I do not accept. I did discover that Dr. Cowan believes in a spiritual reality, which is more than most modern scientists who are pompously atheist. I find that scientists who at least believe in God are more likely to be closer to the truth of our material world.

Scientists in the 20th century were sure that certain diseases were spreading from person to person, but they were being caused by something other than bacteria, parasites, or fungi. So what did they do? They invented a particle called the virus to solve the problem. All the scientists who believed in emerging viral theory went on to receive much acclaim, prestige, and financial success as many billions of research dollars poured into an exciting new field that was extremely profitable to pharmaceutical companies developing vaccines, which are essentially soups of cell culture mixed with toxic preservatives. Lies seem to have a momentum of their own, and viruses are just one of many lies that the average secular person believes in. (Ironically, I think that scientists may have created or become close to creating a man-made virus, or at least harmful biological matter that has a greater ability to spread than purely chemical agents.)

So what’s causing illness? I don’t know, but I do have my suspicions about seed oils, environmental toxins, and electromagnetic waves. The fascinating and well-researched book The Invisible Rainbow makes a very strong case that every stepwise advancement in radio and telecommunications technology has resulted in a worldwide “pandemic.” Getting sick from electromagnetic waves would end up having a similar epidemiology to person-to-person transmission. How else can we explain why sailors far at sea would get sick with flu-like illnesses at the same time as those on land?

If influenza is primarily an electrical disease, a response to an electrical disturbance of the atmosphere, then it is not contagious in the ordinary sense. The patterns of its epidemics should prove this, and they do.

[…]

“The English warship Arachne was cruising off the coast of Cuba ‘without any contact with land.’ No less than 114 men out of a crew of 149 fell ill with influenza and only later was it learnt that there had been outbreaks in Cuba at the same time.”

[…]

During the 1918–1919 pandemic, monkeys and baboons perished in great numbers in South Africa and Madagascar, sheep in northwest England, horses in France, moose in northern Canada, and buffalo in Yellowstone.47 There is no mystery here. We are not catching the flu from animals, nor they from us. If influenza is caused by abnormal electromagnetic conditions in the atmosphere, then it affects all living things at the same time, including living things that don’t share the same viruses or live closely with one another. —The Invisible Rainbow

If this is your first exposure to the “viruses aren’t contagious” position, I’m sure you’re skeptical and filled with questions, because I sure was. This article is not meant to be exhaustive, and cannot possibly answer all of your “what ifs” and “how abouts,” but as a truth-seeker, where truth is all that is from God, I can no longer believe in modern viral theory without question. The theory does seem intuitive at first glance from our own epidemiological experiences, but the facts don’t support the existence of a transmissible virus. I need to see direct, causative proof and not mere correlation or conjecture.

Unfortunately, we don’t have the absolute truth of why we get various illnesses, and while industrial food and EMF radiation are strong contenders as causes, it seems that God does not want us to know everything about disease and illness, and He is using them as part of His plan to save the souls of men. People of old never thought that diseases were caused by particles but instead were the result of God’s will; perhaps that is where we must return. I don’t believe in the scientists, but I do believe in God, so whatever the cause of the next disease I have, may His will be done.

Further Reading:

Learn More: Breaking The Spell by Dr. Tom Cowan