Cold & Flu Season?
Exploring the validity of this traditional concept, embedded in our cultural milieu. As 'obvious' as its validity has been throughout our lifetimes, how rooted in scientific rigor is the premise?
My apologies for coming out late, once again, with my weekly “Sunday” post. The fullness of my schedule doesn’t appear to be abating any time soon. I hope you find this post insightful. There’s a lot to say which I’ve needed to share for quite some time, so I hope it comes across clearly and not too jumbled. Future posts can help clarify, now that I’m sharing my thoughts in this area. Please post your comments and questions below!
We have been raised on the idea of contracting a cold or flu when the “season” comes around. Many never “catch a cold”, some do so reliably. Many of us may have been warned as children (depending on our cultural background) to avoid going out with wet hair, to avoid icy drinks in cold weather, or avoid leaving our jackets open in cold, windy weather.
Taking it a step further, we are warned of invisible stuff (can we really refer to a virus as a micro-organism? - a longstanding question, even amongst herbalists) which may pass from an inanimate object (ie. door knob or hand rail in a public place), via our hands, to our nose, eyes, or mouth allowing for said invisible organisms to enter our inner sanctum and begin their malevolent onslaught, hijacking our biology for their non-living proliferation.
Yes, especially after the past 3 years this should be OBVIOUS to anyone alive, right?
The “fact” that there are very real pathogenic organisms which, as a way of “life”, seek a foothold onto our vitality simply for the sake of proliferating (making more carbon copies of themselves) even if it means the destruction of the host.
That is the story of pathogen, particularly viral pathogen, the guilty culprit in the myriad variety of the common cold, and flu, aka influenza.
Why am I even bringing up this elementary point which has been beaten to d e a t h over the past 3 years, looked at upside down~inside out, and every which way, ad nauseam, for the sake of our health, safety, and security as a nation, as a human race, globally?
Perhaps because we have been missing the forest for the trees - or the shadows of trees; dead and dying ones.
Self-deception?
As an herbalist, I have been aware for many years of the presiding concept of viruses as relatively inert strands of RNA or DNA, depending, or sequences of genetic information with a protein coat, which possess no nucleus, require no food, and produce no waste (of their own accord), but simply exist in a neutral state UNTIL they come in contact with the tissue of a, presumably, immuno-compromised human (or other mammal) at which time they may begin to replicate by way of hijacking the cellular DNA of the host thus causing a host of secondary problems which all occur as a consequence of the host organism’s response but are not directly inflicted by the viral particle itself.
Thus, many an astute herbalist has commented over the previous decades that viruses are not alive, thus there can be no such thing as an antiviral herb - for how could one kill something which does not even exist??
Yes, I was aware of this seemingly important, underlying contradiction regarding the invisible pathogen known as a virus. However, I assumed that I did not know as much as those who brought forth this great knowledge from the high mount of scientific pursuits, but if I really applied myself, I, too, may one day come to understand, and this seeming contradiction would be resolved.
I ceased to question what otherwise begged to be questioned. I decided to trust (at least until further notice) and not verify.
Then came along those that questioned, and those that questioned once wore the white lab coats and carried the doctor’s credentials, too, and were well-versed in the arcane medical and scientific language.
Despite their questions, I, too, felt I knew well enough already and I required their line of questioning to address and confirm what I already knew about viruses and contagion (I had allowed myself to become indoctrinated). Then I would begin to consider what they were proposing. Why would I waste my time reviewing something I already knew and understood - that was so broadly accepted…for decades!?! That’s preposterous!!! There was so much we didn’t know and we were losing time - we needed to move forward, not backward!
Right?
Is this not a common refrain amongst the “freedom community”? from those who speak out against the vaccinations, conventional covid therapeutics, the lockdowns, masking, etc.?
But fortunately the questioning voices spoke clearly and consistently (a hallmark of truth), and I began to entertain more thoroughly their arguments, or at least, their presentation of the data at hand.
(Dr. Cowan 2020 “viral” video - so-called viruses are the results of cell poisoning)
What I came to see quickly is that they were posing real, valid questions pertaining to what was happening on the ground, so to speak, or behind the curtain, you might say. They were questioning the underlying presumptions upon which all statements within the realm of virology were based. And their questions, as I came to see, had merit, exceptional merit, and brought forth a clarity of understanding that had been previously obscured.
As we’d been told, the infected were often “teeming with virus”, so, understandably, one who’s properly equipped would be able to identify these tiny particles within the body and provide simple proof of their existence. Right?
In regards to isolation…
As a bioregional herbalist who’s spent thousands of hours on the land, if someone comes to me and says that they’ve discovered a new species of plant, the first thing I’d like to see is a specimen. A photo might be interesting, but it’s only cursory information at best. Two dimensional images may easily misrepresent what’s actually there in the three dimensional world… and there’s context - context is important!
So I want to at least be able to look at it under a 10x loupe, but would also like to hold it in my hand, walk the land and go to the place where the sample was derived from and see for myself what may be unusual about the space it’s growing in that may have contributed to this unusual phenomenon, let alone the proposed new species itself!
Now that very likely seems obvious to most of you if not entirely overstated. Wouldn’t it simply be common sense to expect to have at least a solid visual on such a discovery? And to identify a set of characteristics that could repeatedly be discovered upon encountering this new species within its natural setting?
But what if no natural setting was ever discovered? What if we only ever found a part of this plant? say, on the forest floor after a massive tree felling? or amidst a slough of wood chips? or after a forest fire? or it was only ever found in the new discoverer’s laboratory? derived from a blender experiment in which other known plant particles were added? maybe some insects, fungi, and or mammal tissue was added as well? treated along the way with a cocktail of toxic pharmaceuticals and other chemical substances?
And what of its proposed genome? That would tell us the truth, now wouldn’t it? We just need to read the genetic code and then we’ll know, right?
Well… of course… yes, of course! How do we do that again?
Well, in this case, it’s quite simple - but rather advanced. Don’t worry about any humans getting involved and messing up the sample. We actually have sophisticated computers utilizing complex algorithms doing the work. They simply analyze and assess data from snippets of previous sources of genetic code and upon exposure to a new sample, work back from the existing tapestry of possibilities to construct the new species. But we can’t see it, of course, as that’s too advanced for us humans so it is constructed in silico, that is to say by the silicon computer chip - it’s written the genetic code! Precisely! You see, we’ve programmed the computers after all, so it is truly the hand of God, er, humans which have seen this new life form into creation. Yes, it is very simple after all. Just a few clicks and there you go!
Dr Stefan Lanka
Despite being told that people were “teeming with viruses”, the experts persisted in stating that there was still not enough to get it to directly register (ie. visible) on any known test - even if we were to collect and combine the samples of 10,000 infected people (no, I’m not exaggerating).
What it comes down to is that no virus has ever been isolated and extracted from a human (or any mammal).
No. Not ever. Never. Anywhere. Ever.
This takes some time to sit and consider…
Then, begin to reconsider… what is really going on here? Great question.
Dr. Stefan Lanka, a German virologist, has gone to great lengths to show how the “viral” particles are very likely created through the process of “isolation” (which is anything but). This video details much of the process.
These techniques have been used for 50 years and represent a closed-loop system in which virologists will always be “right” about their discovery because it is a creation of their own imaginative process (another sort of “metaverse”, if you will).
“Cell cultures”, as they’re referred to, are essentially cocktails derived from tissues of different species which have been treated with antibiotics and other chemicals.
Viral particles are always derived from these cocktails and simply presumed to be unique, autonomous entities despite absolutely no attempt whatsoever, in any context, to truly isolate these compounds.
On that note, Lanka did something that, inexplicably, had never been done before: He used a control with “no active contagion” (ie. it was not, supposedly, derived from an infected patient) and applied the same technique, including the same substances as during the “live virus” cell culture “isolation” procedures. Visually, using electron microscopy, he found the same result - “viral particles”. However, these aren’t viral particles as we’ve been trained to view them, they’re a product of cell breakdown (eg. upon exposure to toxic substances). Call them extracellular vesicles, call them cell organelles, call them multivesicular bodies (MVB) - all names for the same thing (as recognized by several scientific papers) - regardless, they’re the signature of a broken down, disintegrated organism.
Thus, virus as “toxin” (derived from Latin) is somewhat of a misnomer as it is not the toxin itself, so much that it is the byproduct of the toxification.
Here comes the cavalry
Several other credentialed professionals have picked up on Lanka’s work and have made it their own, including American doctors, Tom Cowan and Andrew Kaufmann, and New Zealand doctors Sam and Mark Bailey (author of Virus Mania) have been leading the wave of exposure to the fraudulent science that supports the house of cards that is virology.
This questioning was spawned by the antics of the covid era (Dr. Mark & Sam Bailey admit knowing nothing of terrain theory prior to 2020), but extend well beyond coronaviruses. As covid policy wreaked havoc on our lives these courageous and free-thinking individuals looked deeper into the realm of virology and found very little to substantiate any of the “facts”, concerns, protocols, or relevance whatsoever regarding pathogenic viruses.
So, if there is no proof ever recorded (see Christine Massey’s FOIA requests from around the world seeking confirmation of an isolated virus), then how can they exist?
And for those utilizing the electron cryotomography images of virions as proof of the existence of viruses, please see Dr. Mark Bailey’s latest rebuttal to Dr. Peter McCullough’s recent Substack article.
Of course, the knee-jerk reaction is to glibly state, “well how do all these people get sick? Are you saying that no one is actually sick? That’s preposterous!”.
Yes, of course that’s preposterous, and no one in this camp is saying that. Not at all. But one must see that that’s a logical fallacy - to conclude that viruses exist simply because people get sick - primed by over a century of propaganda surrounding viral pathogen. It was laughable to the likes of Florence Nightingale, famed English nurse of the 19th century, and it is even more laughable now as the same proof exists now as did then for the existence of viral pathogen - none.
But how do people get sick then, if not a virus? That’s a question for another article. I’ll definitely get back to that.
Well done bringing that all together. Of course I’m interested “behind - the - scenes” of what’s going on in a strong & healthy body system!
Super interesting insights. As a former high school teacher it was always of interest to me to observe a class full of children during these flu, cough, cold etc outbreaks. Why do some children get ill and others don't when all have been exposed to the virus? A worthy question to explore.