Just now, johng said:

 

There is no "vaccine" that can save you on your deathbed !!!

Just for you, a scenario then.........🙄

6 minutes ago, johng said:

 

There is no "vaccine" that can save you on your deathbed !!!

 

22 minutes ago, transam said:

Big Dosh in Vaccines", that is all you are thinking about, a business that makes money, as all businesses do..Silly boy.......

 

Now, lets ask you a question...

 

1. If you were on your deathbed, and were told they had a vax that could save your life, would you refuse it....?

2. Are you a Jehovah Witness or similar..........?  🤗 

 

If you are on your deathbed and the hospital 

No vaccine can save you from anything.

1 minute ago, transam said:

Just for you, a scenario then.........🙄

If you say there is a treatment or antidote that may save your life  its a different matter ... if you are on your deathbed due to some  ailment then a "vaccine" is far too late  traditionally the vaccine was (supposedly) to try to prevent you from getting the ailment in the first place.

3 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I could answer all the above, but there is little point as you have put me on ignore.

 

Nature has the answers we seek buddy.

.... and humanity has discovered how nature's immunity works and how to invoke it without going through the hassle of getting sick.....

 

But, go ahead and blindly follow your 1880's mentor, while ignoring later medical experts.

 

You're new screen name is more appropriate than your original.  Owls are deemed wise and you're not.

2 minutes ago, johng said:

If you say there is a treatment or antidote that may save your life  its a different matter ... if you are on your deathbed due to some  ailment then a "vaccine" is far too late  traditionally the vaccine was (supposedly) to try to prevent you from getting the ailment in the first place.

Of course, you can go and lay down now.............😏

3 minutes ago, transam said:

Of course, you can go and lay down now.............😏

No not tired yet  its only 4pm

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

while ignoring later medical experts.

I'm quite prepared to listen to them. But, I know when they are defending their paymaster.

 

Modern medicine is not about getting to root causes. It's about lessening symptoms.

 

A pill for every ill.

On 7/11/2025 at 6:06 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

I take it that you believe Dr Suzanne Humphries is wrong then Trans bud.

 

But even if you don't agree with her; why what she says is 'complete tosh'?

It's hard to believe that a grandmotherly looking figure like Dr. Humphries is full of it.  But, she is.  I'm sure a few AN posters are gonna say... but, but, but.... .her book is a best seller.   Yes, sadly BS still sells well particularly in the wellness category; almost as well as the BS about cosmetics.

 

If sanitation and hygiene were largely responsible, those two factors would have led to similar consequence for most if not all of the nasty diseases that killed so many.  Here's the calendar of when several diseases almost disappeared in USA.... yellow fever:1905, polio:1979, smallpox:1980, measles:2000, neonatal tetanus:2000, congenital rubella:2004, respiratory diptheria:2009.

 

If vaccines "don’t really work and it is just sanitation and hygiene", then why aren’t the dates that these diseases are eradicated or controlled all the same?

 

Still not convinced.... ask yourself why better sanitation and hygiene only prevents chickenpox in countries that routinely use the chickenpox vaccine?

 

 

A vaccine expert........

 

 

59 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Modern medicine is not about getting to root causes. It's about lessening symptoms.

Just an ill formed opinion by a layman who's fixated beyond belief.

 

Medical science is beyond you so you continually try to over simplify it to something you can understand.

 

There is almost certainly more that researchers don't understand than what they do.  That's not something to blame them for.  It is what it is.  In the meantime science has found treatments that alleviate suffering.  That doesn't meant they are looking for the real cause or a real solution.  That notion is completely fabricated by you.

 

The profit motive, while not perfect is what works.  Unfortunately, it works for the kooks too.  Look at Alex Jones former empire.  Look at Jim and Tammy Faye Baker.  More kooks than you can 'shake a stick at'!

3 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

 

No vaccine can save you from anything.

I'm really hoping they're working on an anti-vaxer vaccine so the world won't be so bothered by those pests.

5 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

We - as in me, Rumak, Red Phoenix and others - have a different view on modern medicine than you. Why not debate with them instead of simply attempting to rubbish anything we post?

 

I'm speaking for myself here not others.

 

The words; isolation and purification. I know what they mean. You know what they mean. Virtually everyone knows what they mean. However virologists - starting with Dr Enders in 1954 - have confused the word isolation with 'petri dish soup'. You see Richard Bud, virology is build on the fraudulent 'non-isolation' of viruses. They - the virologists - have never found a pathogenic virus. So why do they continually say they do? Because, if they were to come clean, and admit say they have never isolated a virus, the whole Big Pharms system could collapse. Viruses are one of the major weapons to keep us in fear; and get us to roll up our sleeves.

 

Big dosh in vaccines.

 

Get with nature Richard. Get with truth. You'll not regret it.

No debate possible when you're fixated on theories (postulates to you) that were superseded by later discoveries.  All you've presented is denial, denial, denial of anything other than untested thought experiments from the 1880's.  Go back to contemplating your navel.

36 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

I'm really hoping they're working on an anti-vaxer vaccine so the world won't be so bothered by those pests.

I'm looking for a vaccine that is safe, effective and helpful. Not found one yet.

 

Can't you see that the whole thing is built on quicksand?

 

Good health is such a simple matter. It's the white-coats that make it seem complicated. And while they - the white-coats - are telling us there is an imaginary virus behind every tree, around ever corner just waiting to pounce and get us, the real villains, the ones filthing our land, rivers, skies and oceans are given a pass.

 

Nature is us. We are nature.

3 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

No debate possible when you're fixated on theories (postulates to you) that were superseded by later discoveries.  All you've presented is denial, denial, denial of anything other than untested thought experiments from the 1880's.  Go back to contemplating your navel.

Isolation, isolation, isolation. That word will not go away.

 

Virologists have never isolated a pathogenic virus. Although they say, that from a sick person, one sneeze will expel thousands, if not millions of them. But they not only can't they catch one, they can't show that they are at all infectious.

 

Beautiful nature has the answers.

6 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

We - as in me, Rumak, Red Phoenix and others - have a different view on modern medicine than you. Why not debate with them instead of simply attempting to rubbish anything we post?

 

Because you lot don't actually post anything of value – it's just a lazy pile-on of borrowed memes, half-arsed claims, and unformatted, unprocessed nonsense. You don’t debate, you parrot.

 

Memes are the currency of the Facebook-intellectually-bankrupt – cheap shots from people too lazy or too dim to build a real argument.

 

I engage with Rattlesnake because he puts thought, sources, and structure into his points – your lot are nowhere near that league. What you post isn’t worthy of debate, it’s barely worth flushing. I respond only to shoot it down – because, frankly, it's child’s play.

 

6 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

 

I'm speaking for myself here not others.

 

The words; isolation and purification. I know what they mean. You know what they mean. Virtually everyone knows what they mean. However virologists - starting with Dr Enders in 1954 - have confused the word isolation with 'petri dish soup'. You see Richard Bud, virology is build on the fraudulent 'non-isolation' of viruses. They - the virologists - have never found a pathogenic virus. So why do they continually say they do? Because, if they were to come clean, and admit say they have never isolated a virus, the whole Big Pharms system could collapse. Viruses are one of the major weapons to keep us in fear; and get us to roll up our sleeves.

 

Big dosh in vaccines.

 

You've mentioned Enders over and over again, being able to reference a scientist from 7 decades ago does not present a valid argument - its tired repetition.

 

You say you understand "isolation" and "purification", then spout Facebook-tier garbage that shows you don’t. Enders didn’t confuse anything.

 

Viruses have been isolated, sequenced, visualised, and studied in absurd detail. You’re just clinging to the “they’ve never isolated a virus” lie because it fits your tinfoil fantasy.

 

Big Pharma isn’t the threat here – it’s the wilful ignorance you’re proudly spewing.

 

6 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Get with nature Richard. Get with truth. You'll not regret it.

 

Tired repetition again... this constant “get with nature” and “nature has the answers” mantra is just retarded – like some poor Asperger's case stuck in a mental loop, unable to break the pattern. 

 

Sure, nature surely does have 'some' answers – good food, exercise, avoiding processed crap – no argument there

 

But “nature alone” doesn’t cure disease, prevent transmission, or protect you from contracting anything. That’s just wish-thinking dressed up as wisdom – and it's getting old.

 

Balance is good, taking care of your health holistically is great... avoiding necessary medicine and life saving vaccines is sheer idiocy and borders on being criminally negligent (i.e. a parent who avoids a rabies vaccination after their child is bitten by a street dog etc).

 

 

On 7/11/2025 at 7:39 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature is us. We are nature.

7 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Get with nature Richard. Get with truth. You'll not regret it.

On 7/11/2025 at 3:45 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature has all the answers.

On 6/26/2025 at 9:17 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

We must love nature and insist on the truth.

On 6/27/2025 at 9:51 AM, Stiddle Mump said:

Get with nature. You'll never regret it.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature is us. We are nature.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Beautiful nature has the answers.

 

 

You leave very little in the way of redeeming possibility that you are anything other than a complete fruit-cake !!! 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Isolation, isolation, isolation. That word will not go away.

LOL     you must be on the spectrum perseverating about one silly notion, over and over and over.... 

41 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Viruses have been isolated, sequenced, visualised, and studied in absurd detail. You’re just clinging to the “they’ve never isolated a virus” lie because it fits your tinfoil fantasy.

This is simply not true Richard Buddy.

 

You know what 'isolation' means. As do I. A virus has never been isolated. Without isolation there cannot be the next stage. Which is to determine if the isolated virus can cause illness, similar, if not the same, as in the original person. 

 

Pathogenic viruses do not exist in nature. These viruses, covid-19 particularly, are in a computer, not in the real world.

 

www.CanYouCatchaCold.com or read Dr Roytas' book; 'Can You Catch a Cold'.

 

 

15 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

LOL     you must be on the spectrum perseverating about one silly notion, over and over and over.... 

It is the basis of virology. The first of the 'Gold Standard' lab tests.

5 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

This is simply not true Richard Buddy.

 

You know what 'isolation' means. As do I. A virus has never been isolated. Without isolation there cannot be the next stage. Which is to determine if the isolated virus can cause illness, similar, if not the same, as in the original person. 

 

Pathogenic viruses do not exist in nature. These viruses, covid-19 particularly, are in a computer, not in the real world.

 

www.CanYouCatchaCold.com or read Dr Roytas' book; 'Can You Catch a Cold'.

 

Your repetition is exhausting... I'll give you the respect of a solid reply once... 

 

 

 

Virus Isolation & Identification is a Proven Lab Technique

 

Classic cell culture methods: Scientists routinely collect patient samples (like nasal swabs or lung fluid), inoculate them into cell cultures, and observe virus replication - known as “virus isolation”

https://beyondterrain.com/existence-of-a-virus

 

Varicella‑zoster virus, responsible for chickenpox, has been isolated in serial passage in cell lines -confirmed via plaque assays, PCR, immunofluorescence, and antigen testing .

 

Rotavirus, a major cause of infant diarrhea, was first shown to be a filterable agent in stool and later visualised directly with EM and grown in cell culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotavirus

 

Astrovirus, responsible for gastrointestinal illness, was isolated circa 1975 via EM, cultured in cells by 1981, and further characterised using PCR and immunoassays

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrovirus

 

Rhino‑, corona‑, entero‑, toroviruses, etc., have undergone similar processes: visualisation, culture, genome sequencing, and pathogenic testing.

https://fullfact.org/health/germ-theory-terrain-theory-covid-real

 

These aren’t fringe findings - they form the foundation of virology.

 

 

Pathogenicity Confirmed Through Disease Causation

 

Following Koch’s postulates modified for viruses (e.g., Rivers’ criteria), scientists have shown that purified viral isolates cause disease when introduced to animal models or human volunteers under controlled conditions.

 

The 1960s UK Common Cold Unit, for example, isolated multiple cold-causing viruses (“B814”, 229E, others), cultured them, and when inoculated into volunteers, reproduced cold symptoms - demonstrating causation

https://fullfact.org/health/germ-theory-terrain-theory-covid-real/

 

 

Molecular & Immunological Evidence

 

PCR, next-generation sequencing, and digital droplet PCR now detect and quantify viral genomes in patient samples with very high specificity and sensitivity 

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04848-22

 

Immunoassays (e.g., antigen tests, neutralising antibodies) confirm infection through the body’s immune response and pathogen presence .

 

Direct electron microscopy captures intact viral particles from clinical specimens, visualised and biochemically characterised.

 

Genomic Sequencing & Evolutionary Tracking

Full-length viral genome sequencing gives evolutionary lineages, letting us trace how viruses like SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV‑2 emerged, adapted, and spilled over from animals to humans .

Hundreds of thousands of SARS-CoV‑2 isolates have been cultured, sequenced, and phenotyped—allowing researchers to track variants like Alpha, Delta, Omicron, and assess how mutations influence infectivity or vaccine response .

 

 

Multiple Independent Confirmations

 

Public health agencies worldwide (CDC, WHO, OIE, UKHSA) confirm viruses as isolated, genome-sequenced, cultured, imaged, and shown to cause disease.

 

Independent reviews - like FullFact—debunk terrain-only theories, affirming: “viruses do exist… coronavirus that causes Covid‑19 has been isolated many times and sequenced extensively”

https://fullfact.org/health/germ-theory-terrain-theory-covid-real

 

 

Flaws in the "Terrain Theory" Critique

 

Authors like Dr Roytas argue early inoculation studies were flawed or non‑double‑blind - true, but they ignore the overwhelming, replicated evidence using purified, quantified viral preparations, not random nasal rinses

https://www.westonaprice.org/book-reviews/can-you-catch-a-cold-by-daniel-roytas

 

Assertions of circular reasoning in virology - the idea that “no pure virus = no proof” 

https://beyondterrain.com/existence-of-a-virus  ignorez techniques like gradient centrifugation, plaque purification, PCR, EM, and animal models all independently verifying viral presence and infection.

 

 

Representative Peer‑Reviewed Studies

Isolation of pathogenic coronavirus in Arabian oryx: pure viral isolates identified and characterised via molecular and culture methods.

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04848-22

 

Nature review on SARS/MERS origins: genetic sequencing of viruses from bats, civets, camels demonstrates spillover pathways .

 

 

Conclusion

The argument that “there’s no proof viruses exist or are contagious” ignores:

- Decades of laboratory virology using isolation, visualization, culturing, and infection formation.

- Repeated genomic sequencing showing virus mutation and spread.

- Immunological proof (antibodies, antigens) of viral infections.

- Disease causation in controlled human and animal models.

 

These methods are independent, validated, and cross-verified. The scientific consensus is rock-solid: viruses exist, are isolated, and are pathogenic. Terrain-only theories contradict an enormous body of experimental data.

 

 

 

Further information / Reading: 

- Cassedy & Parle‑McDermott (2021) – comprehensive review of viral detection tools Frontiers

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-biosciences/articles/10.3389/fmolb.2021.637559

 

- Nature Reviews Microbiology (2019) – deep dive into SARS/MERS viral origin & evolution

 

- Esna‑Ashari et al. (2022) – varicella‑zoster virus isolation & characterization Scientific Archives

https://www.scientificarchives.com/article/a-new-isolated-local-varicella-virus-isolation-identification-comparative-growth-characteristics-and-immunological-evaluation-in-an-animal-model

 

 

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Classic cell culture methods: Scientists routinely collect patient samples (like nasal swabs or lung fluid), inoculate them into cell cultures, and observe virus replication - known as “virus isolation”

https://beyondterrain.com/existence-of-a-virus

This is not isolation. It's virology nonsense-speak.

 

You know what isolation is Richard; as do I.

 

Inoculating them into cell cultures, is not isolating them. The 'them' is the snot or fluid. There is no isolating what-so-ever.

 

First step is to isolate the entity from the snot or fluid.

 

This is so typical of white-coats altering the meaning of words to suit their lab work.

47 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

It is the basis of virology. The first of the 'Gold Standard' lab tests.

So you only know of chapter one in a long line of medical knowledge leaps over the 14 decades since Koch postulated.   Nobody knew viruses existed when Koch sat down to write his theories.   It shouldn't take that long for you to catch up with medical knowledge.   But.... we all know you never will.  I often wonder why people close their minds... something wrong upstairs, I believe.

 

Koch had to amend his third postulate when he learned of asymptomatic infections. 

 

Table 1. Koch’s postulates 1890

 

1. The parasite occurs in every case of the disease in question and under circumstances which can account for the pathological changes and clinical course of the disease.

 

2. The parasite occurs in no other disease as a fortuitous and non-pathogenic parasite.

 

3. After being fully isolated from the body and repeatedly grown in pure culture, the parasite can induce the disease anew.

 

He applied these principles to other infectious diseases: “The proof has been fulfilled in a number of diseases, anthrax, cholera, tuberculosis, tetanus, and many animal diseases.” Importantly, Koch recognized that it was not always possible to satisfy his third criterion:

In accordance with this hypothesis, we must then consider as parasitic a number of diseases in which it has not yet been possible—or only in an incomplete manner—to infect experimental animals and to prove the third part of the rules. To these diseases belong typhoid fever, diphtheria, leprosy, relapsing fever, Asiatic cholera.

 

In his day, because infections in the absence of antibacterial drugs were usually of great severity, little attention was paid to non-pathogenic commensals, subclinical infections, or to asymptomatic carriers. These now commonplace aspects of infections constitute many of the exceptions to Koch’s postulates. But others have emerged so that Koch’s postulates have been reported as outdated or unfit for purpose.

 

From: https://hekint.org/2022/09/22/kochs-postulates-revisited/

 

Your hero recognized the flaw in his postulates.  It's time you did as well.

It's also time to realize that so far your 'research' has misinformed you instead educating you.

 

 

Will it ever be safe to cross the road.

2 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

So you only know of chapter one in a long line of medical knowledge leaps over the 14 decades since Koch postulated.   Nobody knew viruses existed when Koch sat down to write his theories.   It shouldn't take that long for you to catch up with medical knowledge.   But.... we all know you never will.  I often wonder why people close their minds... something wrong upstairs, I believe.

 

Koch had to amend his third postulate when he learned of asymptomatic infections. 

 

Table 1. Koch’s postulates 1890

 

1. The parasite occurs in every case of the disease in question and under circumstances which can account for the pathological changes and clinical course of the disease.

 

2. The parasite occurs in no other disease as a fortuitous and non-pathogenic parasite.

 

3. After being fully isolated from the body and repeatedly grown in pure culture, the parasite can induce the disease anew.

 

He applied these principles to other infectious diseases: “The proof has been fulfilled in a number of diseases, anthrax, cholera, tuberculosis, tetanus, and many animal diseases.” Importantly, Koch recognized that it was not always possible to satisfy his third criterion:

In accordance with this hypothesis, we must then consider as parasitic a number of diseases in which it has not yet been possible—or only in an incomplete manner—to infect experimental animals and to prove the third part of the rules. To these diseases belong typhoid fever, diphtheria, leprosy, relapsing fever, Asiatic cholera.

 

In his day, because infections in the absence of antibacterial drugs were usually of great severity, little attention was paid to non-pathogenic commensals, subclinical infections, or to asymptomatic carriers. These now commonplace aspects of infections constitute many of the exceptions to Koch’s postulates. But others have emerged so that Koch’s postulates have been reported as outdated or unfit for purpose.

 

From: https://hekint.org/2022/09/22/kochs-postulates-revisited/

 

Your hero recognized the flaw in his postulates.  It's time you did as well

 

As you are aware Buddy, I have posted my own steps for proving an entity exists.

 

I stand by them.

 

Step one; isolate the entity.

 

It is all so simple. The white-coats cannot isolate the virus because there is nothing there to isolate.

25 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

This is not isolation. It's virology nonsense-speak.

 

You know what isolation is Richard; as do I.

 

Inoculating them into cell cultures, is not isolating them. The 'them' is the snot or fluid. There is no isolating what-so-ever.

 

First step is to isolate the entity from the snot or fluid.

 

This is so typical of white-coats altering the meaning of words to suit their lab work.

 

Your argument misunderstands both the scientific definition of "isolation" in virology and the actual laboratory process used to isolate and characterise viruses. Let’s dismantle it with clear, referenced facts.

 

Your Claim: “Inoculating into cell cultures is not isolation. The ‘them’ is the snot or fluid. There is no isolating whatsoever.”

This misunderstands what virus isolation means in virology.

 

Facts: Virus isolation means taking a clinical sample (yes, “snot” or fluid), filtering or centrifuging it to remove debris and bacteria, and then applying it to a sterile cell culture. If a virus is present, it infects the cells and replicates. The result is a virus isolate - a population of virus that has been separated from the original sample and grown independently.

This is standard microbiological practice, just like isolating bacteria by growing them on agar plates.

 

----

 

Your Claim: “This is not isolation. It’s virology nonsense-speak.”

Facts: This is textbook virology. The scientific definition of virus isolation has been consistent for decades.

A virus is considered isolated when:

- It is shown to replicate in a cell culture

- Its presence is confirmed by:

    > PCR (detects viral RNA/DNA),

    > Immunofluorescence (detects specific viral proteins),

    > Electron microscopy (direct visual confirmation),

    > Genome sequencing (identifies it by its genetic code).

 

 

This isn't wordplay. It’s the foundation of modern virology and has been used to isolate thousands of viruses.

 

Examples:

 - SARS-CoV-2 isolation by CDC (March 2020):
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

- Varicella-Zoster Virus (chickenpox) isolated and sequenced:
https://www.scientificarchives.com/article/a-new-isolated-local-varicella-virus-isolation-identification-comparative-growth-characteristics-and-immunological-evaluation-in-an-animal-model

- SARS-CoV isolation in 2003 (Drosten et al., NEJM):
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa030747

 

----

 

Your Claim: “First step is to isolate the entity from the snot or fluid.”

 

Facts: That’s exactly what’s done.

Samples are filtered or centrifuged to remove contaminants. Viruses, being tiny (~100 nm), pass through 0.2 μm filters. The filtered material is then applied to uninfected cells.

If the virus is there, it replicates and causes visible effects (cytopathic effect).

Controls are used to rule out other causes.

The virus is then confirmed by multiple independent techniques (PCR, sequencing, EM, etc.).

 

----

 

Claim: “White coats are changing definitions.”

 

Fact: Scientific definitions evolve to be more accurate, not to mislead. “Isolation” in virology doesn’t mean picking a virus up with tweezers - it means separating it from a mixture and demonstrating it replicates independently. This is a valid, reproducible, internationally accepted method used for decades.

 

 

 

Summary:

- Virology uses clear protocols to isolate viruses.

- “Inoculating cell cultures” is the method of isolation.

- The presence of a virus is confirmed by multiple methods: genome sequencing, microscopy, antigen testing.

- This is not “nonsense-speak”. It’s science backed by repeatable, peer-reviewed results.

 

If anyone genuinely doubts this, they can read the CDC’s own virus isolation protocol here:
🔗 https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article\

 

Or look up Fields Virology - the standard textbook used in labs and universities worldwide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Virology

https://www.umassmed.edu/globalassets/ambros-lab/meetings/rna-biology-club-2019_20/masters-and-perlman-2013-in-fields-virology_1.pdf

https://shop.lww.com/Fields-Virology--Fundamentals/p/9781975112516 (perhaps you should buy the book !)

 

 

 

And thats the last of your comments I'll give any credibility to.

Yes. Will there ever be a an idiot who can not stop spreading lies and conspiracy theories about perfectly safe vaccines such as the POLIO VACCINE.  Which has changed our lives. When I was growing up in Salford it was terrible to see so many people strapped in leather and steel harnesses barely able to walk; dragging their feet behind them in clad in enormous leather boots. NOW WE DONT SEE THIS HORROR SHOW ANY MORE. Thanks to the POLIO VACCINE. 

It's free in Britain but very cheap anyway.  Poor countries are begging for the vaccine. 

On 6/15/2025 at 6:44 AM, Red Phoenix said:

In this very interesting contribution dr Kevin STILLWAGON explains why vaccines NEVER will be safe.

No matter the avenues that have been and are being followed there is no way to avoid their harmful effects.

It's literally a dead-end street.

Source: https://drkevinstillwagon.substack.com/p/will-there-ever-be-a-safe-vaccine

 

= = =

Here the intro-paragraph: 

> In my last video I stated that no vaccines are safe, which leads to the question, will they ever be safe. I don’t think so, and here is my reasoning. The vaccine idea sounds logical, and that’s how they get you to do it, because it sounds good. They say, here, just inject these parts of pathogenic organisms like bacteria and viruses into the body, create an immune response without creating disease symptoms, and then WHEN you get infected, you’ll have protection. But, did you hear what I just said? When you get infected, you’ll have some protection. The injected vaccine procedure will not prevent you from becoming infected, it’s only supposed to react to the infection after it happens. All injectable vaccines are designed that way. Unfortunately, somehow, people got the idea that injecting that stuff would prevent the infection from happening, and Big Pharma loves that, because they know it can’t prevent infections. But they’re OK with YOU believing that it does, because you’ll keep demanding it, and they’ll stay rich.

 

And here his conclusion after explaining all the ways to administer the shotss that are being used and researched to avoid their inevitable harmful effects:

> So no, we’ll never have safe vaccines, no matter how you administer them. The safest thing to do is to let natural exposures happen, most of which will be asymptomatic anyway. Let that natural immunity happen, and don’t mess with it by injecting something that will refocus immune cells and antibodies on the thing you just injected, not what’s in the environment that you’re constantly exposed to anyway. Concentrate on building strong immunity through clean diet, exercise, sunshine, fresh air, and vitamin supplementation when necessary. When symptoms happen, don’t be fearful, and know that they can be managed.

 

You can view the 15' video or read the transcript here: > https://drkevinstillwagon.substack.com/p/will-there-ever-be-a-safe-vaccine

Mainly rubbish that can't be published in a reputable medical or scientific journal  so it's dumped here where there is nobody to examine it closely. 

The Lancet is an international medical magazine: ASK THEM THEIR OPINION OF THIS CON MAN AND WHY HE HAS NEVER PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE IN "THE LANCET"

You can defeat 40 experts with ONE fact ,,,, BUT you cannot defeat one ignorant idiot  with 40 facts 

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Your Claim: “This is not isolation. It’s virology nonsense-speak.”

Facts: This is textbook virology. The scientific definition of virus isolation has been consistent for decades.

A virus is considered isolated when:

- It is shown to replicate in a cell culture

- Its presence is confirmed by:

    > PCR (detects viral RNA/DNA),

    > Immunofluorescence (detects specific viral proteins),

    > Electron microscopy (direct visual confirmation),

    > Genome sequencing (identifies it by its genetic code).

'''A virus is considered isolated when:

- It is shown to replicate in a cell culture

- Its presence is confirmed by:

    > PCR (detects viral RNA/DNA),

    > Immunofluorescence (detects specific viral proteins),

    > Electron microscopy (direct visual confirmation),

    > Genome sequencing (identifies it by its genetic code).'''

 

This is not isolation to any person with a brain. Call it a series of steps. Or detection procedure. But isolation it is not.

 

The steps to show that a 'virus' exists, and causes effects in a petri dish, should run alongside another that does precisely the same steps, but without the snot. As Dr Enders did in 1954. However, they do not. Why? I'll tell you why Richard Buddy. Because it is mixing the petri soup with chemicals and bio-waste that causes the effects.

 

Can't you see that virology is a load of nonsense? You are easily fooled Richard. But you are not alone.

10 hours ago, Magictoad said:

Mainly rubbish that can't be published in a reputable medical or scientific journal  so it's dumped here where there is nobody to examine it closely. 

The Lancet is an international medical magazine: ASK THEM THEIR OPINION OF THIS CON MAN AND WHY HE HAS NEVER PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE IN "THE LANCET"

I would suggest that at least half the papers précised in medical magazines are fraudulent. Many papers highlighting experiments that go against the narrative don't get published.