• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

The Virus is Not Infective, It's Fake News for 100 years used to control populations.

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,054
Likes
3,727
#41
Coronavirus: You've been brainwashed (Here's how they did it)

For my way of perceiving, there seems to be as much brain washing in this video as it complains about. Replace Hitler with Jews and it comes out much truer than all the credit given to Hitler.

It seems the Jews who so dominate the print news industry of that time also changed Douglas Reed's news reports from mostly Germans locked up, to all Jews locked up.
 
Last edited:

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#42
Let's call em zionists, the more appropriate political designation. And yes, same shit different day.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#43
BÉCHAMP OR PASTEUR?
A LOST CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF BIOLOGY


PASTEUR: PLAGIARIST, IMPOSTOR

THE GERM THEORY EXPLODED

“If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat, diseased tissue – rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue.”
– Rudolph Virchow

“Nothing is lost, nothing is created ... all is transformed. Nothing is the prey of death. All is the prey of life.”
– Antoine Béchamp

“The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions.”
– Florence Nightingale

Béchamp or Pasteur?

A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology

ETHEL DOUGLAS HUME

The Germ Theory Exploded

**************************************************************
Long but worth it if you want the truth...
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#44
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#45
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2020
Messages
151
Likes
209
#46
I honestly believe this "Covid-19 virus" is a load of BULLSHlT invented for nefarious reasons, such as determining any unforseen problems with population control regarding finance, housing, food, health, self quarantines, curfews, and policing of the citizens.

Most people are scared to death of this "virus" and have allowed themselves to be herded into obeying all sorts of health organizations` orders/suggestions in order to save themselves.

My "evidence" is the fact that I and my entire family, including everyone we know and associate with hasn`t been a "victim" of this alleged "virus". I personally do not know of ONE single instance of a person contracting the virus other than what I`ve read. I believe that any reported cases are in fact just the FLU and nothing more. Not that the flu is any less dangerous, or more preferable, but it`s consideably more common than other viruses.

All in my family have been out shopping on a regular basis ....... going to work ....... etc etc ....... and not ONE case of the Covid-19 to date !!

It`s like winning the Lottery ...... you read about the winners, but it`s NEVER YOU .

I don`t think it`s the Covid-19 that we should be worried about, but the agenda behind it .
 

Silver

Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,697
Likes
11,089
#47
BÉCHAMP OR PASTEUR?
A LOST CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF BIOLOGY


PASTEUR: PLAGIARIST, IMPOSTOR

THE GERM THEORY EXPLODED

“If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat, diseased tissue – rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue.”
– Rudolph Virchow

“Nothing is lost, nothing is created ... all is transformed. Nothing is the prey of death. All is the prey of life.”
– Antoine Béchamp

“The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions.”
– Florence Nightingale

Béchamp or Pasteur?

A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology

ETHEL DOUGLAS HUME

The Germ Theory Exploded

**************************************************************
Long but worth it if you want the truth...
Gonorrhea is proof you can get a disease from contact with someone that has it.
 

Silver

Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,697
Likes
11,089
#49
No it’s not. Gonorrhea is a bacterial infection. It’s not a virus.
The article was about 'Germ Theory' and infection, not whether it was viral or bacterial.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#50
Interesting question. Is Neisseria Gonorrhoea is considered a germ. Yes, it is a microorganism that is infective, the definition of a germ. It is a bacteria that requires mucus membrane to mucus membrane to infect. And this bacterial 'germ' was discovered in 1879 with a microscope. There's a huge size difference between a virus and a bacteria. Bacteria are in the range of micrometers, and so called viruses are in the range of billionths of a meter. As usual, things aren't easily fitted into respective catagories we want to put them in. In this case yes technically bacteria are microorganisms and infective with close contact, but even then another interesting question, and nearly impossible to test, is that how many were infected with the bacteria and did not have any symptoms, because their immune system took care of it.

In the above discourse, germ means virus. The wording is retarded because it's not something they want folks to look closely at.
 

the_shootist

Trump 2020
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
45,915
Likes
76,655
#51
The article was about 'Germ Theory' and infection, not whether it was viral or bacterial.
The difference between a virus and bacteria are like night and day. The two simply should not be rolled together. Bacteria is living, virus is not. I knew this well before the beer virus was a thing. Most people don't!
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
14,336
Likes
19,430
#52
The word “virus” means poison or noxious substance.

late 14c., "poisonous substance," from Latin virus "poison, sap of plants, slimy liquid, a potent juice," from Proto-Italic *weis-o-(s-) "poison," which is probably from a PIE root *ueis-, perhaps originally meaning "to melt away, to flow," used of foul or malodorous fluids, but with specialization in some languages to "poisonous fluid" (source also of Sanskrit visam "venom, poison," visah "poisonous;" Avestan vish- "poison;" Latin viscum "sticky substance, birdlime;" Greek ios "poison," ixos "mistletoe, birdlime;" Old Church Slavonic višnja "cherry;" Old Irish fi "poison;" Welsh gwy "poison"). The meaning "agent that causes infectious disease" is recorded by 1728 (in reference to venereal disease); the modern scientific use dates to the 1880s. The computer sense is from 1972.

So the encapsulization of this thread is that Viruses are not transmissible from person to person, and thus cannot be pandemic. What science (sic) calls a virus today is actually a product of the human cell, that cell being poisoned with an external compound, and thus creates a remedy for cell repair, particles released from the cell called Exosomes. These Exosome vesicles that the cell creates is an attempt to repair the cell, and thus homeostasis. But these Exosome vessicles have been identified as an external infecting VIRUS. They are not infective, and they are not from any external source. Repeat. THEY ARE NOT INFECTIVE. This has been proven with the medical standard of double blind studies. And ignored in favor of better population control through induced mental contagion.

Studies have been done, and ignored because the conclusion doesn't benefit the current hysteria, and long term hysteria of the VIRUS as a boogieman of our nightmares and thus population control methods.

This is the real story of the virus...

--- Well worth the 90 minutes.
Must be because "yuutube" took it down
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
14,336
Likes
19,430
#53
1593263399243.png


Man made /generated alterations has made this far more dangerous than what people view as the Common Cold.
Of course the top line claims the list as just EXAMPLES.
 
Last edited:

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#54

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#55

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#56
Germ Theory Versus Terrain: The Wrong Side Won the Day

JULY 30, 2019 BY MERINDA TELLER, MPH, PHD 25 COMMENTS

Germ Theory Versus Terrain: The Wrong Side Won the Day

Whereas most Americans probably have heard of Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), it is doubtful that many are familiar with the name and work of Antoine Béchamp (1816–1908). The two nineteenth-century researchers were scientific contemporaries, compatriots and fellow members of the French Academy of Science, but key differences in their views on biology and disease pathology led to a prolonged rivalry both within and outside of the Academy.1

Béchamp was the more brilliant thinker, but Pasteur had political connections, including Emperor Napoleon III. Reportedly not above “plagiarising and distorting Béchamp’s research,”2 Pasteur achieved fame and fortune largely because his views “were in tune with the science and the politics of his day.”1 Meanwhile, mainstream medical historians relegated Béchamp’s ideas—not as attractive to conventional thinkers—to the intellectual dustbin.3

Pasteur’s promotion of germ theory (a flawed notion that he did not so much “discover” as repackage) has remained “dear to pharmaceutical company executives’ hearts” up to the present day,4 having laid the groundwork for “synthetic drugs, chemotherapy, radiation, surgical removal of body parts and vaccines” to become the “medicine of choice.”5 The unshakeable belief that there is one microbe for every illness is so ingrained as the “controlling medical idea for the Western world” that competing ideas about disease causation still have difficulty gaining traction.6

Over a century after the two Frenchmen’s demise, why bother to revisit their place in history? The answer is that the scientific (and industry) bias in favor of Pasteur’s model has not served the public’s health—to the contrary. Two decades into the twenty-first century, dismal national and international health statistics utterly belie the hype about medical advances.7 In the U.S., for example, over half of all children have one or more chronic conditions,8 as does a comparable proportion of millennials9 and up to 62 percent of Medicaid-population adults.10 Most health care dollars spent in the U.S. (86 percent) are for patients with at least one chronic condition.10 Similar trends are on the rise around the world.11

For those who are able to steel themselves against medical propaganda, it is abundantly clear that the Pasteurian paradigm has failed to deliver. With Americans in such a shocking state of ill health,12 we cannot afford to let the profit-driven pharmaceutical perspective continue to dominate. As one writer more bluntly puts it, “The sooner we get over the legacy of Pasteur’s fake science and get back to reality the better.”13

CELEBRITY VS. HERETIC
History awarded renown to the reductionist Pasteur for being the “father of immunology”14 and popularizing the theory that disease involves “a simple interaction between specific microorganisms and a host.”15 In his singleminded focus on the germ side of the equation, Pasteur ignored the host and discounted the influence of environmental factors, thereby “conveniently dismissing social responsibility for disease.”15

Both at the time and thereafter, the public and most fellow scientists found germ theory easy to embrace, perceiving Pasteur’s model of life and health to be not only “superficially plausible” but also “financially exploitable.”3 In fact, most of the big-name pharmaceutical companies that we know today got their start in Pasteur’s era, often by merging with chemical firms, united in their goal of developing and selling synthetic products to “selectively kill or immobilize parasites, bacteria, and other invasive disease-causing microbes.”16 Quoting comments by Ethel Douglas Hume in 1923,17 one author has remarked that Pasteur’s “greatest claim to fame ought to have been the inauguration of the ‘calamitous prostitution of science and medicine to commercialism.’”3

Béchamp, according to his fans, held a rather “marvelous view of the life process”3 and espoused a more nuanced perspective on infectious and chronic illness—for which history branded him a heretic. Much of Béchamp’s work centered on the biological role of fermentation.18 He coined the term “microzymas” (from zyme, the ancient Greek word for a ferment)19 to describe tiny particles that he viewed as the “primary anatomical elements of all living beings”—“the beginning and end of all organization.”20 Béchamp viewed these particles as living entities precisely because of their “power of movement and production of fermentation.”20 Subsequent generations of open-minded researchers agreed with Béchamp’s pioneering observations about microparticles as the fundamental unit of biology, with the most recent research in this vein proposing a new genetic theory and a “universal life paradigm” involving spontaneous self-assembly of DNA.21

Béchamp’s various discoveries led him to conclude that our bodies are, in effect, “miniecosystems.” When an individual’s internal ecosystem becomes weakened—whether due to poor nutrition, toxicity or other factors—it changes the function of the microbes that are naturally present in the body, producing disease.20 In other words, microorganisms only become pathogenic after environmental factors cause the host’s cellular “terrain” to deteriorate.15

As one example of the powerful influence of weakening forces on the host’s ecosystem, a mid-1980s study looked at French children who experienced complications of wild-type varicella (chickenpox).22 (Note: France has never implemented varicella vaccination.) Although three deaths resulted from what is ordinarily an extremely benign childhood illness, all three fatalities took place within a subset of nine children who had been taking steroid medications on a long-term basis. In comparison, ninety-four previously healthy children recovered from varicella without incident. The researchers concluded that the deaths occurred “as a function of the [weakened] terrain.”

PROBLEMS OF OUR OWN MAKING
Many of the disease phenomena making news headlines these days underscore the deficiencies of the pharmaceutical model and reveal challenges that are the direct result of our take-no-prisoners assault on germs.

For example, dangerous superbugs23,24 are emerging—largely due to overuse of “anti-everything” drugs such as antibiotics and antifungals—and are ushering in a potential return “to a world in which infectious diseases drastically shorten lives.”25 Some have estimated that drug-resistant pathogens will become a bigger killer than cancer by 2050.25

Although the conventional pharmacopeia that created the superbug problem has thus far been helpless to address it, experts are unwilling to step out of the lucrative Pasteurian mindset. Thus, leading researchers at Harvard, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital suggest that the solution to superbugs is. . .more antibiotics, plus vaccines!25 In proposing vaccines as a response, the trio of establishment researchers makes the argument that vaccines are “evolution-proof” and do not generate resistance.25 The GSK researcher also confidently asserts that vaccination is “the most effective medical intervention that has ever been introduced”—and gives Pasteur considerable credit.26

INCONVENIENT FACTS
The complacent attitude that vaccines are the answer for everything sidesteps many inconvenient facts—documented by numerous studies—showing that vaccines are far from predictable or beneficial. In fact, in refutation of the static perspective promoted by Pasteur and evoked by the authors who want to use super-vaccines to solve superbug problems, vaccines not only increasingly fail to protect recipients against the microbes they target but are promoting increased susceptibility to vaccine strains as well as other strains and pathogens, while also augmenting disease severity.27

For example:

• Children who receive pertussis-containing vaccines are more susceptible to pertussis “throughout their lifetimes”;28 five years after completing a pertussis vaccine series, a child will be up to fifteen times more likely to acquire pertussis than in the first year after receiving the vaccine series.29

• Flu shots make people more susceptible to other severe respiratory viruses,30 and people who get flu shots annually are more susceptible to non-vaccine strains of influenza.31

• In clinical trials of Merck’s human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil, women with evidence of current or prior exposure to HPV had a 44 percent increased risk of developing cervical lesions or cancer after receiving the vaccine.32

• Waning vaccine-based immunity has increased measles33 and mumps34 severity in the most vulnerable age groups.

Béchamp surely would have had some comments about these significant breakdowns in vaccination’s underlying assumptions. In addition, he likely would have been disturbed by the vaccine industry’s little-discussed reliance on DNA from species such as birds, dogs, monkeys, cows, pigs, mice and insects in vaccine manufacturing.35 Noting Béchamp’s belief that “an organism’s microzymas are unique to it, and are not interchangeable with those of another,” a modern author suggests that Béchamp would disapprove of introducing microzymas “proper to one species. . .into an animal of another species”—which is exactly what vaccines do.3 This author continues:

How. . .foolhardy is it then, when vaccinal microzymas are not only from another species, but are already morbidly evolved and are accompanied by preservatives, formaldehyde, and other chemicals? There is no sanity whatever to this practice. The best that can be said about it is that it may prevent, against the odds, the appearance of varying sets of symptoms. But this is at the price of weakening the immune system, toxifying the body, and possibly setting the stage for degenerative symptoms later in life—all the while doing absolutely nothing for, except perhaps worsening, the underlying disease condition.

The picture of weakening and degeneration painted in the previous quote is in fact precisely what is now occurring on a massive scale. In his 2018 book Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness, Dr. Thomas Cowan (founding Weston A. Price Foundation board member) describes how “immune system imbalance disorders” are debilitating both children and adults in record numbers “unheard of before the introduction of mass vaccination programs.”36 Explaining why the (Pasteur-influenced) model of vaccine-induced immunity is so flawed, Cowan notes that vaccines deliberately favor and provoke one type of immune response (antibodies) but short-circuit the other crucial prong of our immune system (cell-mediated activity). In short, vaccines generate a state of “excessive antibody production”—and “this excessive antibody production actually defines autoimmune disease” [emphasis in original].36

GUT HEALTH
The worrisome iatrogenic challenges posed by superbugs and vaccine failure are bad enough. However, the Pasteur-influenced medical model also must accept a share of blame for the widespread disruption of the human microbiome that is such a standout feature of the modern ill-health picture.37 Awareness of the intestinal microbiome’s critical importance in providing “resilience against external perturbation” 38 has increased in recent years, in tandem with awareness of the factors exerting an adverse influence on gut health. The latter include antibiotics, of course, but also toxins such as glyphosate, which alters the gastrointestinal microbiome in favor of pathogenic microbes.39 Diminished microorganism diversity in the gut has been associated with conditions as varied as “allergy, diabetes, obesity, arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases and. . .neuropsychiatric disorders.”40

Researchers who study the microbiome point out that under optimal circumstances, exposure to microorganisms educates the immune system “from the moment we are born”—and that “correct microbial-based education of immune cells may be critical in preventing the development of autoimmune diseases and cancer.”40 Reflecting this knowledge, Cowan devotes an entire chapter in his autoimmunity book to gut ecology (“the preserver of our integrity”) and to the ways in which this form of “early education” can go awry even from birth.36

Factors that compromise microbiome diversity, probably synergistically, include C-sections (which prevent babies from picking up healthy microbes in the birth canal); vaginal birth to mothers whose own internal ecology is skewed by prior antibiotic use or other factors; the standard American diet, full of genetically modified (GM) ingredients and antibiotics and lacking in live cultured and fermented foods; ubiquitous glyphosate; and, finally, vaccination. Regarding the latter, Cowan states:

t has been shown that vaccination does have a direct effect on the microbiome and gut permeability even when given intramuscularly, not orally. The precise mechanism of how this happens is unknown, but I believe that anytime you affect the balance of immune response, you affect the largest and most important organ system of immune response that we have—the gut.

PARADIGM LOST
If the medical community were honest, it would be forced to admit that the model of disease that catapulted Pasteur to fame has played itself out and is pushing us to disability and death.

Here and there, scientists working within the mainstream framework recognize this. For example, researchers tackling the problem of multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) acknowledge that a wide variety of factors increases host susceptibility to TB and TB mortality, including “immune-dysregulation from any cause (including stress, poor living conditions, socioeconomic factors, micronutrient deficiencies, HIV), malnutrition, aberrant or excess host inflammatory response to infection, alcohol and substance abuse, co-morbidities with noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes, smoking, and chronic obstructive airways disease, [and] pneumoconiosis.”41 They suggest, therefore, that it is time to build on “the historical Pasteur-Bechamp debates on the role of the ‘microbe’ vs the ‘host internal milieu’ in disease causation” and invest in “host-directed therapies” (HDTs) that “alter the ‘host terrain’ in favor of the host.” Unfortunately, what HDTs mean to this group of researchers is. . .more pharmaceutical interventions.41

Realistically, we cannot expect researchers who receive direct or indirect funding from the pharmaceutical industry to suggest commonsense steps for supporting or strengthening the immune system. If Béchamp were around today, chances are that his recommendations would be more sound, emphasizing basics such as high-quality nutrition and excellent sleep. At a deeper level, Cowan also reminds us that the quest for a life of “abundance, joy, and meaning” is equally important and sustaining to our health.

SIDEBAR

GETTING OUT OF THE WAY
“Our job as parents, doctors, and caretakers for children is mostly to observe and, only when needed, help guide a process to its healthy conclusion. But mostly we don’t. We intervene. We manage. We attempt to control. Doing something, anything, temporarily assuages our fears (and creates massive industries in the process).

The result, however, is. . .a medicalized society that must devote huge resources to dealing with sick people; as the amount of medicine in our world increases, so, too, does the amount of sickness. Beyond a certain basic level of care, use of more medicine not only undermines an individual’s freedom and autonomy, but also degrades a society’s health.”

SOURCE: Thomas Cowan, Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing;
2018, p. 137.

REFERENCES
1. Cantwell A. Cancer and most diseases are caused by BACTERIA: Bechamp’s microzymas & human disease. March 17, 2017. https://rense.com/general96/bechamps.htm/.
2. Review of Béchamp A, The Blood and Its Third Element. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2213391.The_Blood_and_Its_Third_Element.
3. Young RO. Who had their finger on the magic of life—Antoine Bechamp or Louis Pasteur? Int J Vaccines Vaccin 2016;2(5):00047.
4. Williams LL. Radical Medicine: Profound Intervention in a Profoundly Toxic Age (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: International Medical Arts Publishing, 2007-2008, p. 34.
5. “Honoring Antoine Béchamp: The gentle giant of science & medicine.” https://oawhealth.com/article/honoring-antoine-bechamp-the-gentle-giant-of-science-medicine/.
6. Appleton N. Why Louis Pasteur’s germ theory is a curse. http://whale.to/w/appleton1.html.
7. Cox L, Peck P. The top 10 medical advances of the decade—from genome to hormones, doctors pick the top medical advances of the decade. MedPage Today, Dec. 17, 2009.
8. Bethell CD, Kogan MD, Strickland BB et al. A national and state profile of leading health problems and health care quality for US children: key insurance disparities and across-state variations. Acad Pediatr 2011;11(3 Suppl):S22-S33.
9. “Highlights: 2016 millennials survey.” https://www.transamericacenterforhe...reresearch/2016-millennials-survey-highlights.
10. Chapel JM, Ritchey MD, Zhang D et al. Prevalence and medical costs of chronic diseases among adult Medicaid beneficiaries. Am J Prev Med 2017;53(6 Suppl 2):S143-S154.
11. GBD 2017 Child and Adolescent Health Collaborators, Reiner RC Jr., Olsen HE, et al. Diseases, injuries, and risk factors in child and adolescent health, 1990 to 2017: findings from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors 2017 study. JAMA Pediatr 2019 Apr 29:e190337.
12. Aldhous P. Why Americans are so damn unhealthy, in 4 shocking charts. BuzzFeed News, May 24, 2017.
13. https://arizonaenergy.org/BodyEnergy/antoine_bechamp.htm.
14. Smith KA. Louis Pasteur, the father of immunology? Front Immunol 2012;3:68.
15. Raines K. Pasteur vs Béchamp: The germ theory debate. The Vaccine Reaction, Feb. 6, 2018.
16. “Emergence of pharmaceutical science and industry: 1870-1930.” https://pubsapp.acs.org/cen/coverstory/83/8325/8325emergence.html.
17. Hume ED. Béchamp or Pasteur? A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology. http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/history/biographies/Bechamp-or-Pasteur.pdf.
18. “Antoine Béchamp.” http://www.pnf.org/compendium/Antoine_Bechamp.pdf.
19. “Zyme.” https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zyme.
20. “History – Antoine Béchamp.” https://www.brmi.online/antoine-bechamp.
21. Lee H-S, Lee B-C, Kang D-I. Spontaneous self-assembly of DNA fragments into nucleus-like structures from yolk granules of fertilized chicken eggs: Antoine Béchamp meets Bong Han Kim via Olga Lepeshinskaya. Micron 2013;51:54-59.
22. François P, Guyot A, Jean D et al. [Complications of varicella as a function of the terrain. Apropos of 103 cases.] [Article in French] Pediatrie 1985;40(2):99-106.
23. Ventola CL. The antibiotic resistance crisis. Part 1: causes and threats. P T 2015;40(4):277-83.
24. Schiavone R. Drug-resistant superbug confirmed in California. Patch, May 7, 2019.
25. Rappuoli R, Bloom DE, Black S. Deploy vaccines to fight superbugs. Nature, Dec. 12, 2017.
26. De Gregorio E, Rappuoli R. From empiricism to rational design: a personal perspective of the evolution of vaccine development. Nat Rev Immunol 2014;14(7):505-14.
27. Children’s Health Defense. Failure to vaccinate or vaccine failure: what is driving disease outbreaks? Mar. 6, 2019. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/...ne-failure-what-is-driving-disease-outbreaks/.
28. Cherry JD. The 112-year odyssey of pertussis and pertussis vaccines—mistakes made and implications for the future. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc 2019 Feb. 22.
29. Lapidot R, Gill CJ. The pertussis resurgence: putting together the pieces of the puzzle. Top Dis Travel Med Vaccines 2016;2:26.
30. Cowling BJ, Fang VJ, Nishiura H et al. Increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54(12):1778-83.
31. Flu vaccine paradox adds to public health debate. CBS News, Jan. 16, 2015.
32. https://www.fda.gov/media/74350/download.
33. Brewer NT, Moss JL. Dangers of vaccine refusal near the herd immunity threshold: a modelling study. Lancet Infect Dis 2015;15(8):922-6.
34. Kennedy, Jr. RF. MMR vaccine’s poison pill: mumps after puberty, reduced testosterone and sperm counts. Children’s Health Defense, Apr. 4, 2019. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/...uberty-reduced-testosterone-and-sperm-counts/.
35. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf.
36. Cowan T. Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing nature of Childhood Illness. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing; 2018.
37. Bush Z. Disruption of the gut microbiome and gut permeability as ground zero for the nutrition-related epidemics of the developed world. Presented at the 13th International Congress on Advances in Natural Medicines, Neutraceuticals & Neurocognition, Rome, Italy, July 27-28, 2017.
38. Lange K, Buerger M, Stallmach A et al. Effects of antibiotics on gut microbiota. Dig Dis 2016;34(3):260-8.
39. Myers JP, Antoniou MN, Blumberg B et al. Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement. Environ Health 2016;15:19.
40. Thomas S, Izard J, Walsh E et al. The host microbiome regulates and maintains human health: a primer and perspective for non-microbiologists. Cancer Res 2017;77(8):1793-1812.
41. Zumia A, Maeurer M, Host-Directed Therapies Network (HDT-NET) Consortium. Host-directed therapies for tackling multi-drug resistant tuberculosis: learning from the Pasteur-Bechamp debates. Clin Infect Dis 2015;61(9):1432-8.
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,984
Likes
4,225
#57
Can you “catch a virus” in the air?

Dr Kaufman says no....as do other medical professionals.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#58
You can't catch a virus period. There are no, that is, no verifiable replicable studies of a virus being infective, even when healthy noninfected groups were spoonfed infected saliva.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#59
The whole debate boils down to this:

Germ vs Terrain Theory – Which Do We Adopt To Be Healthy?

By Derek Henry

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 04:02pm EDT

In the Western world, we are desperately obsessed with killing things off that we feel can threaten our livelihood. Whether it is germs, terrorists, or the next door neighbour, we seek to eliminate anything that doesn’t agree with us rather than trying to maintain a healthy balance between desired and undesirable circumstances.

When it comes to our health, the Western world has largely adopted the germ theory, meaning we need to identify and destroy anything we deem as a foreign invader as it is directly responsible for causing disease. However, there is another theory called the terrain theory, which believes that it is not the “germ” that determines disease, but rather, the state of our internal health and its ability to maintain homeostasis in the face of “unfriendly” organisms.

Let’s look into each theory a bit further to determine which theory we should adopt when trying to be healthy.

Germ Theory

The germ – or microbial – theory of disease was popularized by Louis Pasteur (1822 – 1895), the inventor of pasteurization. This theory states that there are fixed, external germs which invade the body and are the direct cause of a variety of separate, definable diseases. If you truly want to get well, you need to kill whatever germ made you sick, and do whatever possible to make “sure” that you never allow a microbe to enter your body in the first place.

With this theory comes Western medicine and its tools and technology that treats the symptoms of an unfriendly microbe rooting itself in the internal environment, through things such as drugs, surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Taking it a step further, in order to try and avoid an infection in the first place, various vaccines have been introduced to attempt to keep the disease from invading our body in the first place.

The germ theory was partly shaped around Pasteur’s idea that the human body is sterile, meaning it is a blank slate devoid of any germs. With this notion in mind we could conclude that we have to combat germs all the time in every way possible, and that preventative measures through things like nutrition are basically useless.

So, if you are to closely follow the germ theory, you need to be vigilant against various types of infections through prevention (primarily vaccinations), and destruction (antibiotics, surgery, radiation, chemotherapy) of any external microbe that ever attempts or succeeds to get inside our body.

Anything else is basically fruitless against disease prevention.

Terrain Theory

The terrain theory was initiated by Claude Bernard (1813 – 1878), and later built upon by Antoine Bechamp (1816-1908). He believed that the “terrain” or “internal environment” determined our state of health. When the body is functioning in homeostasis, and immunity and detoxification is operating well, he claimed there was a healthy terrain which could handle various pathogenic microorganisms that inevitably are thrown its way.

In essence, he believed the quality of the terrain and the elements it faced determined an individual’s susceptibility to disease.

Bernard, Bechamp, and their successors, believed that disease occurs to a large extent as a function of biology and as a result of changes that take place when metabolic processes become imbalanced. Germs then become symptoms that stimulate the occurrence of more symptoms, which eventually culminate into disease. A weak terrain is naturally more vulnerable to external threats, so it needs to be built up through nutrition, detoxification, and by maintaining a proper pH or acid/alkaline balance.

For this and other reasons Bechamp argued vehemently against vaccines, asserting that “The most serious disorders may be provoked by the injection of living organisms into the blood.” Untold numbers of researchers have agreed with him.

So, if you are to closely follow the terrain theory, you may make yourself aware of various external microbes that could be harmful to our health and the gentle, non-toxic removal of them, but your focus is on building and maintaining the integrity of your inner terrain so that any external microbe that you may ingest does not morph into anything with serious implications to your health.

This means nutrition, detoxification, and mindset are key factors you consider important in disease prevention and elimination.

Pasteur Recants On His Deathbed

One of the most interesting twists in this battle for “disease prevention supremacy” primarily headlined by Pasteur and Bernard, is that Pasteur recanted on his deathbed over his entire life work, stating that “the microbe is nothing; the milieu is everything.” Another way of stating these words is that it is not the germ that causes disease, but the terrain in which the germ is found.

Another gentleman, Rudolf Virchow, father of the germ theory, stated in his later years, “If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat–diseased tissues–rather than causing disease.”

So when you are considering your health plan, strongly consider the results we are seeing in a germ theory dominated health care system. Then decide whether you want to take that road, or follow those who are healthy that predominantly follow the terrain theory.

This author staunchly believes in the terrain theory and has removed many disease labels and symptoms from his life by completely following this theory and admonishing the idea of the germ theory. You can see the type of results he generated by re-establishing his terrain, here.

If you are also a firm believer that health of your terrain largely determines your overall health, and want to know how to master that environment so you can not only survive but THRIVE, check into this online holistic health program
 

BarnacleBob

Moderator
Founding Member
Site Mgr
Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
15,787
Likes
29,898
Location
Ten-Oh-Cee
#60
THIS IS A MURAL HANGING IN THE DENVER AIRPORT. IT WAS PAINTED IN 1994.

TELL ME THIS ISN'T JUST WEIRD...HOW FAR IN ADVANCE DO [THEY] PLAN THIS STUFF??

FB_IMG_1593469756459.jpg
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#61
Pretty obvious to some of the the concept of the infective virus has used for many years for medical control of the population, and this is a plan executed by some very influential weathy people for the sole purpose of population control.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#62
In three posts YOU have been ignorant about chemistry, chiropractor doctors, and mask dynamics.

YOU don't know anything about me or my knowledge, except what you read here. Also YOU don't tell me what or how to do.

If you don't like of those options, GTFO.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,054
Likes
3,727
#63
You have very little knowledge and understanding of this topic. Stop getting information from those far out websites you go to. You need to first start with general chemistry then progress from there.
Why don't you post some erudite discourse that supports your position, instead of just throwing enough mud to hope some sticks?
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#64
Virus can 100% infect both prokaryote (bacteria) and eukaryotic (yeast, plant, human, monkey, cat etc.) cells. Every student that has taken a bacterial genetics lab course has proven this using phage lambda to infect Escherichia coli cells. Lambda infects E. coli cells, lyses (bursts) them, and thus produces plaques (or holes) on a lawn of E.coli. Phage are virus that infect bacteria. In a similar manner, it can be shown that virus can infect eukaryotic cells by growing cells in a dish and infecting with virus; the cells will burst and plaques will form. Electron microscopy has also captured images of virus infecting cells.
Rubbish. Totally specious reasoning. None of that has ever been translated from in vitro fantasys to verified in vivo infection.

This is exactly how the science and universities have been corrupted.
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,984
Likes
4,225
#65
Viruses are exosomes. Under an electron microscope, the SARS-CoV2 virus and an exosome look dimensionally and architecturally the same. It is very easy to view an exosome and call it a virus.

Covid-19, like the “seasonal flu virus” can be explained as being the symptoms of a seasonal purge of toxins. Dr Andrew Kaufman has featured in some intriguing videos recently where he posits some questions about germ theory and makes a case for exosomes being behind “viral” symptoms. Of course StasiTube is banning them as fast as they can sniff them out....which adds to his credibility.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#66
Then do it.
 

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#67
All fantasies projected to control the narrative. No true double blind studies behind any of them.

Exosomes are microscopic vesicles released by cells when that cell is touched, contacted by a foreign agent that the cell recognizes as foreign and possible dangerous. AKA poison. Exosomes are vehicles of repair for the cell which released them in order to control cellular damage / repair cell membranes as needed. Because these exosomes appear around a damaged cell, they are taken for the infective agent that caused damage to the cell, rather than the environmental poison that actually caused the damage.

This entire fraud process was formented during WW1, to cover the incredible environmental damage caused them and has been fake news since.
 
Last edited:

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#68

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,510
Likes
7,957
#70
^^^ That was excellent. Thanks.

@ 13:52 Nobody in their right mind would say; "Your compost pile has an infection." :laughing:


"The germ is nothing, the terrain is everything" Louis Pasteur, from his actual diaries. What a piece of work this moron was.

Reducing science to assumption.

HIV? Herpes? Rabies? Common cold? Warts? Smallpox? Chickenpox? Ebola? <All words of ART intended not to truly discover and heal, but to obfuscate in order to perpetuate fraudulent funding schemes.

^^^ Exactly what billy boy and fuckchi are doing today.
 
Last edited: