It could also mean if you keep your immune system healthy, and pay attention to your body, you aren't going to get sick from the outside world. "Don't be afraid of germs" and "there is no such thing as a bacteria, or virus, or parasite, etc." are not the same thing.
There is an unbelievable amount of evidence that there are bacteria, parasites and viruses that can cause harm, but if you are not nutritionally deficient, and/or fearful (the power of the mind) those things aren't going to cause harm, because you yourself have listened to what your body needs to be the master of otherwise potentially harmful external agents.
Actually there's zero evidence of all you state. For starters, there is no such thing as the "immune system". The medical mafia made it up in 1971 which was its first appearance in any medical textbook. Everything you find in anatomy and physiology textbooks today is pure nonsense, lacking even a modicum of proof. It's literally all scare propaganda, like so much else being offered to us by the controlling forces.
Because the medical mafia destroyed the work and life of first Royal Rife, and then Gaston Naesans, the inventors of dark field microscopy, all modern histologists are ever able to do is examine dead, stained, static slides of cells/tissue, which are severely altered during this process and provide little to no value of how "LIFE" actually works.
There is no such thing as viruses. Doctors Stefan Lanka, Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, Sam & Mark Bailey have definitively demonstrated this for nearly two years now. The only thing virologists ever find are deteriorated particles of green monkey kidney cells that they CLAIM are viruses, but have never once demonstrated. Virology is literally 100% pseudo-science. And it's more than obvious now. Not a single virologist in the world will debate these doctors because they've been duped and they would be humiliated in under 10 minutes if they were to do so.
And the evidence is all so simple. Anybody with a middle school education can understand it. Virologists are "unable" to find any viruses in the fluids and tissues of any sick person, even 10,000 sick people's fluids and tissue all blended together. But you can still spit a microscopic particle out of your mouth while talking or breathing that can kill the person next to you. Right? What a joke.
The in vitro viral culturing process (aka, test tube full of poison) is an even bigger joke. They use abnormal green monkey kidney cells, mix in some aborted fetal bovine serum (slaughtered cow calves amniotic blood) as nutrition for a day. Then they add poisonous anti-biotics (against-life) to the mixture and greatly diminish the FBS nutrition the following days along with the fluids of a sick person, that they never check ahead of time for the ALLEGED virus (because they say they can't, LOL), let alone whether there are any other viruses in the mix. And voila, the monkey kidney cells deteriorate into tiny particles that the virologists later name "viruses" when they look at the static frozen, stained, dead tissue slides. It's a giant sham beginning to end.
As to bacteria, they do indeed exist, but don't CAUSE dis-ease. Bacteria's job is to repair and restore tissue that has been augmented, necrotized or damaged in some way. That's why you find bacteria "at the scene of the crime". Further, as Antoine Bechamp carefully explained in 1870, and Gaston Naesans later captured on video in the 1980s, bacteria are actually a component of life, not some separate "organism" that "invades". Cellular biology is also a farce, believe it or not. Harold HIllman demonstrated this over the past 40 years. But what Bechamp called "Microzymas" and Naesans called "Somatids" are actually the true BASIS OF LIFE. They are the tiny, indestructible "units of life" itself. And these microzymas are that which morph into all of our varied cells as well as morphing into bacteria. The process was named "pleomorphism" (many forms/shapes) but Gunther Enderlien in the 1930s, captured on video by Naesans in the 80s. These microzymas/somatids shape-shift into the specific type of bacteria needed to "do the job" and when the job is complete, they morph back into being micorzymas again. It's all quite beautiful and elegant.
In honor of the OPs post, I like to call these microzymas/somatids "The God particle", because that's what they are. They are life itself in a nutshell. When the body dies, they breakdown once again to 100% pure microzymas in the end.
Another source out there speaks of life being made up of "consciousness units", which I believe to be speaking of the microzymas as well.
I'd also like to add, that there has never been a scientific or medical study/experiment that has demonstrated HUMAN-TO-HUMAN transmission of any such "viral" or bacterial dis-ease. We've found a total of 14 documented studies over the past 100 years, and all failed totally and miserably to show the transference of dis-ease from a sick person to a healthy person. Goose eggs across the board. This is the nail in the coffin of "germ theory".
And never once has even the first of five of "Koch's Postulates" been achieved for any "viral" dis-ease, let alone all five. And only the first has ever been established for any "bacterial" dis-ease. Just more evidence of the fraud..
Louis Pasteur was an ENORMOUS fraudster, huckster, plagiarist and fame-seeker throughout his career. He was literally wrong about almost everything he ever touched. Funny how he's the one and only "medical hero" over the past 100 years. He ranks right up there with Einstein, Darwin and Freud for holding the crown of "fraud of the century".
And lastly, parasites are opportunistic scavengers that are actually doing a toxic, dis-eased body a service by eliminating toxins, waste, fetid material, etc. They form a symbiotic relationship with an organism that is sickly. That somebody might die with parasites in them is not due to a causal relationship between the parasite and the host, but rather the degraded condition of the organisms "terrain". The parasite was simply trying to help.
OP, you are on the right track with the verses you share and I appreciate you sharing these verses as I don't recall reading them. Would you mind sharing which chapter/verse you found these in? I'd like to share these with some people I know. Thanks!
Unfortunately, everybody alive today has been subjected to a relentless, all-encompassing propaganda agenda about the nature of dis-ease, and the utterly fraudulent "germ theory", which is still called a "theory" because it has never, EVER been proven to be true. I could go on and on about all the other dis-eases, like heart-diseases, congestive heart failure, heart attacks, cancers, etc. that we've also been lied to about, but I've rambled long enough.
Suffice it to say, the lies and deceptions run much deeper than most people are yet willing to even consider. Germ theory is just the tip of the iceberg...
Actually there's zero evidence of all you state. For starters, there is no such thing as the "immune system". The medical mafia made it up in 1971 which was its first appearance in any medical textbook. Everything you find in anatomy and physiology textbooks today is pure nonsense, lacking even a modicum of proof. It's literally all scare propaganda, like so much else being offered to us by the controlling forces.
It's like you think we are all idiots (those of us who work in biology and do experiments). Look, there are lies galore in both biology and medicine. There is no doubt about that. My education was full of dogma. I knew it at the time. However, the best lies are based on the truth, especially in a field where everything is experimentally based. A science education is experiment driven. You can't discount experiment as fraud. You can say, 'You've misinterpreted it," but you had better have something really good to back it up, and in truth, no one ever does. They put out half baked ideas that discount most of the evidence. .
I think you have fallen under the trap of "because there are lies and fraud, that means it is all lies and fraud." The two problems with this is that it is a logical fallacy, and that is just not what the evidence suggests. There is a metric FUCKTON of evidence in experiments that supports "an immune system." I don't even know where to begin to start explaining how many experiments support it. Billions. If you want to discount those experimental results, you have better be able to come up with a theory that fits all of those billions of results other than the one that fits extremely well (immune system).
As to bacteria, they do indeed exist, but don't CAUSE dis-ease.
Bacteria are primarily molecule creation factories. They take molecules in, and put molecules out. In some cases the molecules they put out are helpful, in some cases they are harmful. That's just how it works. That statement is backed by experiment not dogma. Millions, and millions, and millions of experiments. I have done some myself. You are telling me there are five lights. I insist THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS. Because I have seen four lights. For years.
There is no such thing as viruses. Doctors Stefan Lanka, Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, Sam & Mark Bailey have definitively demonstrated this for nearly two years now.
I'm not going to get in to the rest of your diatribe, instead I will say this. Investigations into the Truth are done using the tools of argument and debate. Someone brings their arguments, it is debated with other arguments, the debate continues forever. This allows any new evidence to be presented at any time, and then people look to see how it fits into all the other evidence. Any theory that does not fit all of the evidence is wrong. The theories you are putting forth cannot account for all of the evidence therefore they are wrong. I am not saying the theories put forth in standard biology and medicine account for all of the evidence. I am not saying that at all. I know that is not true. Many scientists know that is not true. Many scientists, myself included, have been saying that forever. That is mostly what science is, doing everything we can to prove our theories wrong. Of course not all scientists feel that way, and there is all sorts of fuckery there, but that is what it is at its core. You think we are all idiots. I assure you we are not.
In this case, the theories that do exist (immune system e.g.) do a better job than the theories put forth by the people you are espousing as "definitive truthsayers" when taking all of the evidence into consideration. I think your favorite truthsayers are likely controlled opposition agents whose sole purpose is to make people who believe that "its in opposition to the establishment therefore it must be true" make everyone else who are also looking into evidence of fuckery look like idiots by association.
First, as to the bacteria, I COMPLETELY AGREE with you that bacterial waste product can be toxic, putrid and cause sickness. But this is the result of the bacteria breaking down putrid, decaying substances. It is incidental to the more important job being performed by the bacteria, not purposeful.
There is a metric FUCKTON of evidence in experiments that supports "an immune system." I don't even know where to begin to start explaining how many experiments support it. Billions.
Well then one such study will suffice to support your claim. And to be clear, the word "immunity" is deliberately used to imply that you can become "immune" to some agent/organism. Let's not conflate "immunity", with say mercury poisoning, or getting some foreign substance inside your bloodstream or sterile environment which our bodies defend against and eradicate. You can never be "immune" to toxins or foreign substances inside your body. This is not "immunity" as the word is used and is the meaning being discussed in this thread. Everybody understands this word "immunity" to be dealing with "germs/microbes" and that's the context that I'm also using, to be clear. Agreed?
So I'd be happy to review one such study that supports this idea of an "immune system". And it must be absent the INJECTION OF substances of any kind. These are nonsense "studies" that prove nothing other than you should NOT inject foreign "stuff" into your body. This should be obvious. Further, if you inject foreign "stuff" into an organism, it should be no surprise that you can find this "stuff" inside it later on.
And for the record, I've read the John's Hopkins tuberculosis guinea pig experiment that took place over the course of 4 years. There are so many things wrong with it, I don't even know where to start. It proved nothing. If it were accurate, you should be able to "transmit TB" through the air in a few minutes with an aerosolizer or putting TB in their water and seeing results of illness within hours or days at most. And the key would be, generating an actual ILLNESS, not just "finding TB in their organs" after autopsy.
Ideally, you could produce just ONE of the "metric FU*#TON" of billions that was an actual HUMAN-TO-HUMAN (H2H) transmission experiment. I don't think you can but I'd love to see you try. It would be the first we would have been able to find after scouring the annals for the past 18 months.
You should ask yourself why you can't find an example of H2H transmission studies. It's a good thought experiment. And "ethical reasons" is not a good answer. The military regularly subjects enlistees to all sorts of experiments without limits for decades, including the "Spanish Flu" back in 1918/1919, without success - during the so-called "deadliest pandemic" in recent memory. Those in prison regularly volunteer for such experiments with the promise of a shorter sentence. And many volunteers have stepped up to the plate over the past century in need of money to take part in all manner of medical experiments.
And for the record, I don't think you're an "idiot', nor anybody else. I once believed in germ theory up until about 2 years ago, as did, I suspect, all of us. And I would have laughed off any suggestion to the contrary back then. I readily admit this.
However, we were all duped, plain and simple. But very few are willing to examine the evidence for themselves. The barrier to this is seemingly insurmountable for some reason. I suspect because everybody has at least one story where several people in the home or office got sick around the same time and the memory of this trumps all other possible evidence to the contary.
And also for the record, what Lanka et al have definitively demonstrated is that virologists and germ-theory supporters have proven NOTHING. Literally NOTHING. And this is easy to see. It's not complicated. The medical establishment has made the CLAIM - that viruses exist - that bacteria cause dis-ease. But they have failed to scientifically demonstrate both of these claims. It's this simple -> He who makes the CLAIM bears the burden of proof.
So frankly, there's nothing to argue about if we don't yet have any proof. It would be like me CLAIMING the moon is made out of blue cheese and then demanding you prove me wrong. This is the situation we're in with "viruses".
The 1954 Enders measles experiment, which literally saved "virology" from certain death was the first, and LAST such scientific experiment to actually perform a control experiment with his new "viral culturing" method. And what did Enders find in this control experiment, where he didn't add the bodily fluids of the boy with measles? He found the results were INDISTINGUISHABLE from the main culturing experiment. Just like Dr. Lanka showed last year. And how many "scientific" studies in virology have run a control experiment since Enders did in 1954? As far as we can find, the answer is ZERO - ZILCH - NADA.
This is not science. This is pseudo-science, the cult of SCIENTISM at work. This fact alone of no control experiments should end any rational debate with a mic drop moment. What could possibly be their explanation for this "oversight" of adhering to the standard scientific method?
If the medical establishment's CLAIMS were true, we would should have thousands of studies on the record demonstrating them. But we don't. There is literally no SCIENCE involved. I'm not castigating science or setting up some sort of science versus religion argument. Science is great when it's actually used.
Antoine Bechamp demonstrated germ theory was pure nonsense in 1870 and yet here we are. Bechamp was the SCIENTIST, Pasteur was the fame-seeking charlatan.
So I challenge you to produce a viable scientific study that's been repeated countless times which demonstrates:
The transmission of a "microbe", without injections or the use of other substances, but strictly using the microbe alone
That demonstrates the transference of the defined and specific illness that said microbe is said to cause, not "similar" or "related" symptoms.
And ideally, in support of Koch's postulates, said microbe could then be taken from the newly dis-eased human/animal, purified and isolated, and then transferred to another human/animal which then gets the same dis-ease to complete the proof of claim.
Is this too much to ask? If so, please explain why. Explain why injections into the sterile environment and bloodstream are a necessity in these "scientific experiments" when we've all been indoctrinated into the idea of "the germs of the air" and that the majority are spread in this way?
None of what I request should be difficult to find and prove if germ theory is true - viruses or bacteria. And frankly, I don't get the anger and disdain. We've been duped - BIGLY. I'm just the messenger, of quite honestly, some VERY GOOD NEWS. Wouldn't you agree that it's good news that there are no germs floating around in the air that make us sick and kill us? Just as the scripture shown by the OP suggests? Why would this make you angry?
The very, very short answer is, the majority of dis-eases occur due to unexpected psychological shocks in our psyche/minds. Which apparently, almost nobody wants to hear. Very rarely, malnutrition (i.e. scurvy, goiter) and poisoning (i.e polio, small pox, and "the jab") can also be causes, but are normally rare in comparison to the big killers such as heart diseases, cancers, lower respiratory diseases, "auto-immune" dis-eases, etc. etc. etc.
Yes, you can extrapolate this to the etheric/spiritual level. Ultimately, a perfectly sound mind equates to perfectly spinning chakras which means no physical maladies are present. But that's a step wayyyy tooo far for most and it's "scientifically" unprovable, so will convince very few. Further, until we become fully spiritually "awake", encountering issues in life that catch us off guard (which cause the vast majority of illnesses) is unavoidable. This is the "scientific" part of explaining illnesses which does resonate with people that are ready and willing to understand this.
The context of the discussion is ritual purity where the Pharisees took ceremonial washing for priests from the Levitical law and made it a rule for everybody.
haha right, i realize i was reaching a bit there. but still funny to read in the context of the constant washing of the pots and pans lol. and we know (((who))) is behind all the household cleaners and germaphobia so theres that.
It could also mean if you keep your immune system healthy, and pay attention to your body, you aren't going to get sick from the outside world. "Don't be afraid of germs" and "there is no such thing as a bacteria, or virus, or parasite, etc." are not the same thing.
There is an unbelievable amount of evidence that there are bacteria, parasites and viruses that can cause harm, but if you are not nutritionally deficient, and/or fearful (the power of the mind) those things aren't going to cause harm, because you yourself have listened to what your body needs to be the master of otherwise potentially harmful external agents.
Actually there's zero evidence of all you state. For starters, there is no such thing as the "immune system". The medical mafia made it up in 1971 which was its first appearance in any medical textbook. Everything you find in anatomy and physiology textbooks today is pure nonsense, lacking even a modicum of proof. It's literally all scare propaganda, like so much else being offered to us by the controlling forces.
Because the medical mafia destroyed the work and life of first Royal Rife, and then Gaston Naesans, the inventors of dark field microscopy, all modern histologists are ever able to do is examine dead, stained, static slides of cells/tissue, which are severely altered during this process and provide little to no value of how "LIFE" actually works.
There is no such thing as viruses. Doctors Stefan Lanka, Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, Sam & Mark Bailey have definitively demonstrated this for nearly two years now. The only thing virologists ever find are deteriorated particles of green monkey kidney cells that they CLAIM are viruses, but have never once demonstrated. Virology is literally 100% pseudo-science. And it's more than obvious now. Not a single virologist in the world will debate these doctors because they've been duped and they would be humiliated in under 10 minutes if they were to do so.
And the evidence is all so simple. Anybody with a middle school education can understand it. Virologists are "unable" to find any viruses in the fluids and tissues of any sick person, even 10,000 sick people's fluids and tissue all blended together. But you can still spit a microscopic particle out of your mouth while talking or breathing that can kill the person next to you. Right? What a joke.
The in vitro viral culturing process (aka, test tube full of poison) is an even bigger joke. They use abnormal green monkey kidney cells, mix in some aborted fetal bovine serum (slaughtered cow calves amniotic blood) as nutrition for a day. Then they add poisonous anti-biotics (against-life) to the mixture and greatly diminish the FBS nutrition the following days along with the fluids of a sick person, that they never check ahead of time for the ALLEGED virus (because they say they can't, LOL), let alone whether there are any other viruses in the mix. And voila, the monkey kidney cells deteriorate into tiny particles that the virologists later name "viruses" when they look at the static frozen, stained, dead tissue slides. It's a giant sham beginning to end.
As to bacteria, they do indeed exist, but don't CAUSE dis-ease. Bacteria's job is to repair and restore tissue that has been augmented, necrotized or damaged in some way. That's why you find bacteria "at the scene of the crime". Further, as Antoine Bechamp carefully explained in 1870, and Gaston Naesans later captured on video in the 1980s, bacteria are actually a component of life, not some separate "organism" that "invades". Cellular biology is also a farce, believe it or not. Harold HIllman demonstrated this over the past 40 years. But what Bechamp called "Microzymas" and Naesans called "Somatids" are actually the true BASIS OF LIFE. They are the tiny, indestructible "units of life" itself. And these microzymas are that which morph into all of our varied cells as well as morphing into bacteria. The process was named "pleomorphism" (many forms/shapes) but Gunther Enderlien in the 1930s, captured on video by Naesans in the 80s. These microzymas/somatids shape-shift into the specific type of bacteria needed to "do the job" and when the job is complete, they morph back into being micorzymas again. It's all quite beautiful and elegant.
In honor of the OPs post, I like to call these microzymas/somatids "The God particle", because that's what they are. They are life itself in a nutshell. When the body dies, they breakdown once again to 100% pure microzymas in the end.
Another source out there speaks of life being made up of "consciousness units", which I believe to be speaking of the microzymas as well.
I'd also like to add, that there has never been a scientific or medical study/experiment that has demonstrated HUMAN-TO-HUMAN transmission of any such "viral" or bacterial dis-ease. We've found a total of 14 documented studies over the past 100 years, and all failed totally and miserably to show the transference of dis-ease from a sick person to a healthy person. Goose eggs across the board. This is the nail in the coffin of "germ theory".
And never once has even the first of five of "Koch's Postulates" been achieved for any "viral" dis-ease, let alone all five. And only the first has ever been established for any "bacterial" dis-ease. Just more evidence of the fraud..
Louis Pasteur was an ENORMOUS fraudster, huckster, plagiarist and fame-seeker throughout his career. He was literally wrong about almost everything he ever touched. Funny how he's the one and only "medical hero" over the past 100 years. He ranks right up there with Einstein, Darwin and Freud for holding the crown of "fraud of the century".
And lastly, parasites are opportunistic scavengers that are actually doing a toxic, dis-eased body a service by eliminating toxins, waste, fetid material, etc. They form a symbiotic relationship with an organism that is sickly. That somebody might die with parasites in them is not due to a causal relationship between the parasite and the host, but rather the degraded condition of the organisms "terrain". The parasite was simply trying to help.
OP, you are on the right track with the verses you share and I appreciate you sharing these verses as I don't recall reading them. Would you mind sharing which chapter/verse you found these in? I'd like to share these with some people I know. Thanks!
Unfortunately, everybody alive today has been subjected to a relentless, all-encompassing propaganda agenda about the nature of dis-ease, and the utterly fraudulent "germ theory", which is still called a "theory" because it has never, EVER been proven to be true. I could go on and on about all the other dis-eases, like heart-diseases, congestive heart failure, heart attacks, cancers, etc. that we've also been lied to about, but I've rambled long enough.
Suffice it to say, the lies and deceptions run much deeper than most people are yet willing to even consider. Germ theory is just the tip of the iceberg...
It's like you think we are all idiots (those of us who work in biology and do experiments). Look, there are lies galore in both biology and medicine. There is no doubt about that. My education was full of dogma. I knew it at the time. However, the best lies are based on the truth, especially in a field where everything is experimentally based. A science education is experiment driven. You can't discount experiment as fraud. You can say, 'You've misinterpreted it," but you had better have something really good to back it up, and in truth, no one ever does. They put out half baked ideas that discount most of the evidence. .
I think you have fallen under the trap of "because there are lies and fraud, that means it is all lies and fraud." The two problems with this is that it is a logical fallacy, and that is just not what the evidence suggests. There is a metric FUCKTON of evidence in experiments that supports "an immune system." I don't even know where to begin to start explaining how many experiments support it. Billions. If you want to discount those experimental results, you have better be able to come up with a theory that fits all of those billions of results other than the one that fits extremely well (immune system).
Bacteria are primarily molecule creation factories. They take molecules in, and put molecules out. In some cases the molecules they put out are helpful, in some cases they are harmful. That's just how it works. That statement is backed by experiment not dogma. Millions, and millions, and millions of experiments. I have done some myself. You are telling me there are five lights. I insist THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS. Because I have seen four lights. For years.
I'm not going to get in to the rest of your diatribe, instead I will say this. Investigations into the Truth are done using the tools of argument and debate. Someone brings their arguments, it is debated with other arguments, the debate continues forever. This allows any new evidence to be presented at any time, and then people look to see how it fits into all the other evidence. Any theory that does not fit all of the evidence is wrong. The theories you are putting forth cannot account for all of the evidence therefore they are wrong. I am not saying the theories put forth in standard biology and medicine account for all of the evidence. I am not saying that at all. I know that is not true. Many scientists know that is not true. Many scientists, myself included, have been saying that forever. That is mostly what science is, doing everything we can to prove our theories wrong. Of course not all scientists feel that way, and there is all sorts of fuckery there, but that is what it is at its core. You think we are all idiots. I assure you we are not.
In this case, the theories that do exist (immune system e.g.) do a better job than the theories put forth by the people you are espousing as "definitive truthsayers" when taking all of the evidence into consideration. I think your favorite truthsayers are likely controlled opposition agents whose sole purpose is to make people who believe that "its in opposition to the establishment therefore it must be true" make everyone else who are also looking into evidence of fuckery look like idiots by association.
First, as to the bacteria, I COMPLETELY AGREE with you that bacterial waste product can be toxic, putrid and cause sickness. But this is the result of the bacteria breaking down putrid, decaying substances. It is incidental to the more important job being performed by the bacteria, not purposeful.
Well then one such study will suffice to support your claim. And to be clear, the word "immunity" is deliberately used to imply that you can become "immune" to some agent/organism. Let's not conflate "immunity", with say mercury poisoning, or getting some foreign substance inside your bloodstream or sterile environment which our bodies defend against and eradicate. You can never be "immune" to toxins or foreign substances inside your body. This is not "immunity" as the word is used and is the meaning being discussed in this thread. Everybody understands this word "immunity" to be dealing with "germs/microbes" and that's the context that I'm also using, to be clear. Agreed?
So I'd be happy to review one such study that supports this idea of an "immune system". And it must be absent the INJECTION OF substances of any kind. These are nonsense "studies" that prove nothing other than you should NOT inject foreign "stuff" into your body. This should be obvious. Further, if you inject foreign "stuff" into an organism, it should be no surprise that you can find this "stuff" inside it later on.
And for the record, I've read the John's Hopkins tuberculosis guinea pig experiment that took place over the course of 4 years. There are so many things wrong with it, I don't even know where to start. It proved nothing. If it were accurate, you should be able to "transmit TB" through the air in a few minutes with an aerosolizer or putting TB in their water and seeing results of illness within hours or days at most. And the key would be, generating an actual ILLNESS, not just "finding TB in their organs" after autopsy.
Ideally, you could produce just ONE of the "metric FU*#TON" of billions that was an actual HUMAN-TO-HUMAN (H2H) transmission experiment. I don't think you can but I'd love to see you try. It would be the first we would have been able to find after scouring the annals for the past 18 months.
You should ask yourself why you can't find an example of H2H transmission studies. It's a good thought experiment. And "ethical reasons" is not a good answer. The military regularly subjects enlistees to all sorts of experiments without limits for decades, including the "Spanish Flu" back in 1918/1919, without success - during the so-called "deadliest pandemic" in recent memory. Those in prison regularly volunteer for such experiments with the promise of a shorter sentence. And many volunteers have stepped up to the plate over the past century in need of money to take part in all manner of medical experiments.
And for the record, I don't think you're an "idiot', nor anybody else. I once believed in germ theory up until about 2 years ago, as did, I suspect, all of us. And I would have laughed off any suggestion to the contrary back then. I readily admit this.
However, we were all duped, plain and simple. But very few are willing to examine the evidence for themselves. The barrier to this is seemingly insurmountable for some reason. I suspect because everybody has at least one story where several people in the home or office got sick around the same time and the memory of this trumps all other possible evidence to the contary.
And also for the record, what Lanka et al have definitively demonstrated is that virologists and germ-theory supporters have proven NOTHING. Literally NOTHING. And this is easy to see. It's not complicated. The medical establishment has made the CLAIM - that viruses exist - that bacteria cause dis-ease. But they have failed to scientifically demonstrate both of these claims. It's this simple -> He who makes the CLAIM bears the burden of proof.
So frankly, there's nothing to argue about if we don't yet have any proof. It would be like me CLAIMING the moon is made out of blue cheese and then demanding you prove me wrong. This is the situation we're in with "viruses".
The 1954 Enders measles experiment, which literally saved "virology" from certain death was the first, and LAST such scientific experiment to actually perform a control experiment with his new "viral culturing" method. And what did Enders find in this control experiment, where he didn't add the bodily fluids of the boy with measles? He found the results were INDISTINGUISHABLE from the main culturing experiment. Just like Dr. Lanka showed last year. And how many "scientific" studies in virology have run a control experiment since Enders did in 1954? As far as we can find, the answer is ZERO - ZILCH - NADA.
This is not science. This is pseudo-science, the cult of SCIENTISM at work. This fact alone of no control experiments should end any rational debate with a mic drop moment. What could possibly be their explanation for this "oversight" of adhering to the standard scientific method?
If the medical establishment's CLAIMS were true, we would should have thousands of studies on the record demonstrating them. But we don't. There is literally no SCIENCE involved. I'm not castigating science or setting up some sort of science versus religion argument. Science is great when it's actually used.
Antoine Bechamp demonstrated germ theory was pure nonsense in 1870 and yet here we are. Bechamp was the SCIENTIST, Pasteur was the fame-seeking charlatan.
So I challenge you to produce a viable scientific study that's been repeated countless times which demonstrates:
The transmission of a "microbe", without injections or the use of other substances, but strictly using the microbe alone
That demonstrates the transference of the defined and specific illness that said microbe is said to cause, not "similar" or "related" symptoms.
And ideally, in support of Koch's postulates, said microbe could then be taken from the newly dis-eased human/animal, purified and isolated, and then transferred to another human/animal which then gets the same dis-ease to complete the proof of claim.
Is this too much to ask? If so, please explain why. Explain why injections into the sterile environment and bloodstream are a necessity in these "scientific experiments" when we've all been indoctrinated into the idea of "the germs of the air" and that the majority are spread in this way?
None of what I request should be difficult to find and prove if germ theory is true - viruses or bacteria. And frankly, I don't get the anger and disdain. We've been duped - BIGLY. I'm just the messenger, of quite honestly, some VERY GOOD NEWS. Wouldn't you agree that it's good news that there are no germs floating around in the air that make us sick and kill us? Just as the scripture shown by the OP suggests? Why would this make you angry?
What causes “disease” then?
The very, very short answer is, the majority of dis-eases occur due to unexpected psychological shocks in our psyche/minds. Which apparently, almost nobody wants to hear. Very rarely, malnutrition (i.e. scurvy, goiter) and poisoning (i.e polio, small pox, and "the jab") can also be causes, but are normally rare in comparison to the big killers such as heart diseases, cancers, lower respiratory diseases, "auto-immune" dis-eases, etc. etc. etc.
Ah, physical manifestations of mental conditions, basically. Physical manifestations of unbalanced chakras you think?
Yes, you can extrapolate this to the etheric/spiritual level. Ultimately, a perfectly sound mind equates to perfectly spinning chakras which means no physical maladies are present. But that's a step wayyyy tooo far for most and it's "scientifically" unprovable, so will convince very few. Further, until we become fully spiritually "awake", encountering issues in life that catch us off guard (which cause the vast majority of illnesses) is unavoidable. This is the "scientific" part of explaining illnesses which does resonate with people that are ready and willing to understand this.
Just let kids play in the dirt, eat worms and send them to measles parties. and breast feed,
They will grow into strong resilient adults.
The context of the discussion is ritual purity where the Pharisees took ceremonial washing for priests from the Levitical law and made it a rule for everybody.
haha right, i realize i was reaching a bit there. but still funny to read in the context of the constant washing of the pots and pans lol. and we know (((who))) is behind all the household cleaners and germaphobia so theres that.
Context is important. Jesus is talking about ceremonial laws in Jewish tradition. "Clean" and "unclean" do not have anything to do with sickness.
wait so germs don't exist? news to me but at this point i wouldn't be surprised if viruses didn't exist
Interesting, is plausible about the “no virus”. https://www.stankovuniversallaw.com/2020/06/why-there-are-no-viruses/ https://theconversation.com/germ-theory-denialism-is-alive-and-well-and-taking-the-nuance-out-of-scientific-debate-163408