Do Viruses Exist?
By Timm Stein
There’s a lot of talk about vaccines, their effectiveness, their toxicity, and the associated health risks. But are vaccines actually justified? A common opinion is that vaccines are a medical miracle that protect the human body from a variety of viruses that apparently roam planet Earth. For that reason, a multitude of vaccines are regularly and continuously injected into human beings starting at infant stage. This article explores the common claim that pathogenic (which means disease causing) viruses exist. Where did this claim originate? What is the definition of a virus? And if it can be shown that no virus has ever been proven to exist, would that perhaps destroy the entire basis of the pharmaceutical industry and the corrupt medical establishment? Who would benefit from that? We all would.
By now it should be clear to most readers that the pharmaceutical industry needs continuously unhealthy human beings to remain profitable. A healthy human being does not generate any profit for Big Pharma, which in turn means that most physicians can’t get paid and become redundant. A large percentage of regular visits to family doctors is made up of people that show symptoms such as cough, fever, sneezing, runny nose, fatigue, and skin rashes. The physician compares that to what he or she was told in medical school and then writes a prescription for medications that will supposedly help ease the symptoms. Often, the diagnosis is something along the lines of “you have a viral infection”, or “you caught the flu virus that’s going around.” What if that was complete nonsense? What if you were fully capable of healing your own body if you only listened to it? The human body is a magnificent, biological system of complex processes that all work flawlessly together, and all in harmony with millions of bacteria. Problems only start to occur when there is intervention from the outside through toxic medications, processed foods, toxic substances such as sugar, alcohol and caffeine, and also viruses? Hmm, let’s take a closer look at viruses.
The Latin term “virus” means poison. That is its definition. It was used by scientists working under Louis Pasteur (who committed scientific fraud4) in the 19th century to classify material that could not be classified as bacteria. The thought process was that if it can’t be classified as bacteria, then it must be another single organism that causes disease.2 It was never even considered that the symptoms may not be a disease at all, but instead a normal biological process within the body. In June of 1954, a dubious publication suggested that the death of a tissue sample within a test tube was seen as possible evidence for the presence of a virus. On December 10, 1954, the author of this publication was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine, and subsequently this questionable theory became scientific fact and dogma.1 To this day, nobody has been allowed to question this theory. What scientific principles and control experiments was that publication in 1954 based on? A true scientist must abide by scientific principles and rules of scientific conduct, including control experiments.
But what are control experiments? In the lab, virologists (scientists that investigate viruses) prepare a sample by first removing nutrients, which the cells depend on, and then adding toxic antibiotics. They do this, they claim, in order to make the cells “hungry” so that they absorb the alleged virus more easily, and to exclude the possibility that bacteria could cause the death of the sample.1 It should be noted that at this point the sample has been tremendously weakened and poisoned. In the next step, virologists add a sample (usually blood or saliva) taken from an allegedly infected individual. The subsequent death of the initial, sterilized sample (the so-called cytopathic effect) is then proclaimed to have been caused by the alleged virus. However, no virologist has bothered to complete an experiment in parallel, in which no blood or saliva from an allegedly infected individual is added, for the sole purpose of ruling out that it was not the antibiotics, for example, that caused the death of the initial sample. That is what a control experiment is. Dr. Stefan Lanka recently performed these control experiments and confirmed that the initial sample dies in the same manner when not injected with an allegedly infected sample. As a result, the concept of virology has been entirely dismantled. This has since been confirmed by other, independent laboratories and scientists around the world. Even Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President of Pfizer, has concluded that respiratory (which means “affecting your aiways”) viruses have not been proven to exist. There is an abundance of documented evidence and testimony that no virology lab has ever conducted the required control experiments. Why not? For one, virologists never questioned the dogma after the wrongful award of the Nobel Prize for Medicine. In addition, virologists have claimed that it would be too expensive to conduct such control experiments.
At this point, it should be mentioned that this mixture of dying material, toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal serum (a substance that is sourced from the blood of unborn calves at the slaughterhouse, which is highly unethical, excruciatingly painful for the unborn calf and the cow and leads to the death of both) is also used as “live” vaccine that allegedly contains “weakened” virus.1 Aluminum, mercury and formaldehyde are often added. These are highly toxic substances! If such a vaccine was to be injected directly into the bloodstream instead of the muscle tissue, a child would die immediately because the body would not be able to cope with the poisoning.1
But then how are virologists able to determine the genetic sequence (the gene footprint) of an alleged virus? They ask a computer to invent it for them. A simple analogy to what virologists perform in their labs is the following: imagine that you would find a hoof and a horn somewhere in the forest. You would tell your computer that you have a hoof and a horn, and then you would ask your computer to fill in the gaps that are missing between the hoof and the horn (this is what virologists call “alignment”; it’s literally the making up of material that is not there). Your computer then tells you that the hoof and the horn are most likely from a unicorn. And on top of it, your computer presents you with a beautiful image of a unicorn. You now take this as scientific proof that unicorns exist. Sounds rather unscientific, doesn’t it?
But then how do virologists know what a virus looks like? They don’t. Electron microscopes are not capable of taking photographs. They only show a single snapshot of dying tissue and cells at one specific moment in time.1 Electron microscopes are not like optical microscopes where a sample can be observed in real time. The images you have been shown on tv and in magazines are computer-generated 3D images and do not reflect any real tissue samples, germs, or cells. Like so many other things, it has likely all been a lie. From HIV to Polio, Hepatitis, Measles, Rabies, and all others. (spoiler: even the so-called Tetanus pathogen (germ) has never been proven to exist)
Where does that leave you? I hope with many questions and a thirst for more information. The book Virus Mania referenced below is a great read!
But wait, we still have one important question:
But then what makes me sick? That is a great question, and to fully understand the answer we have to really step out of the concept of “sickness”. That kind of language is rather negative and drags us down even further. We are led to believe that whenever we experience a headache, feel fatigue, fever, sneezing, a runny nose, or a cough, we should feel afraid, helpless and confused, and we should take medications and seek the opinion of a physician, who will often give us more medications. Instead, once you understand that each “symptom” you experience is part of a preprogrammed, inner biological process that is closely tied to your brain and your mind, your perception of “disease” completely changes, and even deeply negative terms such as “incurable” and “malignant” lose their destructive effect.1 Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer made important observations in 1981 and pioneered what is known as Universal Biology or New Germanic Medicine. Once you start listening to your body and understand how it functions, and once you understand how each of these processes has a natural, biological reason, you will lose the fear and likely ditch the flawed Western medicine model for good. The book Universal Biology referenced below is a great introduction. More in-depth knowledge should be discussed in a future article.
References:
- The Virus Misconception Parts 1-3, Stefan Lanka, Wissenschaffftplus Magazin, 01/2020.
- Virus Mania, Torsten Engelbrecht, Dr. Claus Köhnlein, Dr. Samantha Bailey, Dr. Stefano Scoglio, 3rd English Edition, 2021.
- Universal Biology, 2021, Praxis Neue Medizin Verlag, Giuliana Lüssi.
- The Private Science of Louis Pasteur, 1995, Princeton University Press, Gerald L. Geison.
