The conspiracy level for something like this to be true is off the charts. My wife did medical research on viruses back in the day. Is she part of it? Did some shadowy cabal fund fake research and go so far as to fabricate all the tests and build fake lab equipment for people to use? And not just for my wife, but many thousands of other people all over the world? All with little to no leaks? Seems a bit much.
Viruses aren’t living organisms, they are essentially just proteins. One theory is that viruses are simply a byproduct of parasitic infection. So viruses do exist, but they are not the cause.
Modern medicine commonly chases after the wrong components of an issue.
For example, the idea that cholesterol causes heart disease, then prescribing anti-cholesterol meds. Cholesterol is the body’s defense mechanism to reduce inflammation. So whatever is causing the inflammation is probably the cause of the heart issue, cholesterol is simply the byproduct.
Correlation not causation….
At least I think that’s the basis of this parasite theory.
I don't think you're looking at it from the right angle. The lab equipment doesn't have to be faked. Ask her how many viruses she looked at and how she could tell them apart and if she would recognize a virus if she saw it again and if she could prove that consistently...or...if she was just repeating what she was being taught so she could pass her tests.
She wasn't passing tests, she was doing commercial research. And yes, they could tell a whole lot about the viruses and distinguish between them in excruciating detail... When she gets going my eyes glaze.
Listen to Kary Mullis' lectures. Not saying they don't exist nor that there aren't any with a substantive enough side effect but the fact that the very idea of HlV being the root cause of AlDs was contested by one of the most distinguished scientists in medical history should be cause to question.
The explanation given by this other guy I watched was that, quite simply, they can't see what they say they can see. They've been taught/groomed differently than scientists in other fields so they simply don't know what's wrong with their methods because they have no other methods to compare it to. He talked about how when oncologists look at (or maybe that was this lady) look at parasitic cysts, they ask why they're being shown a cancer cell. They've never seen a parasitic cyst before and they didn't realize they were indistinguishable from cancer cells.
These different specialties are siloed from each other to an enormous degree. They might all be experts in their respective fields but they have no idea that people in other fields have different understandings of the very same things they look at and different verbiage for it too. They all get smarter and smarter as they suppose, in their chosen fields, without the context of what the other fields have to offer and invariably arrive at bad conclusions. Why else would cancer still be such a mystery to oncologists? Why else would anti-parasitic medication be so effective on cancer and oncologists never knew?
Conspiracies? At the top, maybe. Further down the line, it's just knowledge/expertise/observational silos.
Here's an example. Let's take teachers. They have a curriculum. That's what they teach. Who controls the curriculum? And now imagine the people who push that think they're doing something positive. Because the "studies" have set these so called factual parameters as a jump off point.
I'm other words, they assume at the very base of everything the foundation is proven and reliable.
But what if the foundation is itself completely fabricated?
Drs-they practice what they learn. Are drs out to murder people, by and large? No, the foundation of modern medicine gives them parameters to study and practice within because the foundation is beyond reproach.
But what if it's all incorrect?
What if viruses are complete bullshit? There's ample proof that at the very least it's a questionable theory.
I don't trust much these days, but...
The conspiracy level for something like this to be true is off the charts. My wife did medical research on viruses back in the day. Is she part of it? Did some shadowy cabal fund fake research and go so far as to fabricate all the tests and build fake lab equipment for people to use? And not just for my wife, but many thousands of other people all over the world? All with little to no leaks? Seems a bit much.
Viruses aren’t living organisms, they are essentially just proteins. One theory is that viruses are simply a byproduct of parasitic infection. So viruses do exist, but they are not the cause.
Modern medicine commonly chases after the wrong components of an issue.
For example, the idea that cholesterol causes heart disease, then prescribing anti-cholesterol meds. Cholesterol is the body’s defense mechanism to reduce inflammation. So whatever is causing the inflammation is probably the cause of the heart issue, cholesterol is simply the byproduct.
Correlation not causation….
At least I think that’s the basis of this parasite theory.
I don't think you're looking at it from the right angle. The lab equipment doesn't have to be faked. Ask her how many viruses she looked at and how she could tell them apart and if she would recognize a virus if she saw it again and if she could prove that consistently...or...if she was just repeating what she was being taught so she could pass her tests.
She wasn't passing tests, she was doing commercial research. And yes, they could tell a whole lot about the viruses and distinguish between them in excruciating detail... When she gets going my eyes glaze.
Listen to Kary Mullis' lectures. Not saying they don't exist nor that there aren't any with a substantive enough side effect but the fact that the very idea of HlV being the root cause of AlDs was contested by one of the most distinguished scientists in medical history should be cause to question.
The explanation given by this other guy I watched was that, quite simply, they can't see what they say they can see. They've been taught/groomed differently than scientists in other fields so they simply don't know what's wrong with their methods because they have no other methods to compare it to. He talked about how when oncologists look at (or maybe that was this lady) look at parasitic cysts, they ask why they're being shown a cancer cell. They've never seen a parasitic cyst before and they didn't realize they were indistinguishable from cancer cells.
These different specialties are siloed from each other to an enormous degree. They might all be experts in their respective fields but they have no idea that people in other fields have different understandings of the very same things they look at and different verbiage for it too. They all get smarter and smarter as they suppose, in their chosen fields, without the context of what the other fields have to offer and invariably arrive at bad conclusions. Why else would cancer still be such a mystery to oncologists? Why else would anti-parasitic medication be so effective on cancer and oncologists never knew?
Conspiracies? At the top, maybe. Further down the line, it's just knowledge/expertise/observational silos.
I think about this dilemma all the time.
We have to think about parameters.
Here's an example. Let's take teachers. They have a curriculum. That's what they teach. Who controls the curriculum? And now imagine the people who push that think they're doing something positive. Because the "studies" have set these so called factual parameters as a jump off point.
I'm other words, they assume at the very base of everything the foundation is proven and reliable.
But what if the foundation is itself completely fabricated?
Drs-they practice what they learn. Are drs out to murder people, by and large? No, the foundation of modern medicine gives them parameters to study and practice within because the foundation is beyond reproach.
But what if it's all incorrect?
What if viruses are complete bullshit? There's ample proof that at the very least it's a questionable theory.
The answer is yes.