4 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Interesting. The CDC run by people like Fauchi and others of similar mind set.

One of the most respected infectious disease experts ever. Certainly more credible than RFK.

Just now, cjinchiangrai said:

One of the most respected infectious disease experts ever. Certainly more credible than RFK.

Of course he is. I don't know what you are taking but I am giving you the benefit and assuming you are joking. If not I suggest you get some help.

11 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

The one with the microscopes and chemistry set. You have no reputation.

The one with an agenda of falsification.

 

If there are so many viruses, why can't they catch one?

5 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Thimerosal - a vaccine adjuvant - is anything but 'safe' 

Here the link to RFK jr's X-post

 

According to which flat-earf' chiropractor?

 

57 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The one with an agenda of falsification.

 

If there are so many viruses, why can't they catch one?

If you do not believe the photos, you are deluded beyond hope.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Took a look. I particularly like the Ebola one. Looks a mean sod.

 

With all these viruses about. We are told that thousands can be expelled through one sneeze. It is somewhat mystifying why the white-coats can't actually isolate one and get a purification. Then some real science could be done, establishing they cause illness. Etc.

 

But!! Not done so far.

 

The pics look like cell debris to me.

Even your all time hero, Koch abandoned one of his postulates (assumptions).

 

Here's a breakdown of the refutations and limitations of the 140 year old Koch postulates:

1. Viruses and Prions:

Viruses:
Koch's postulates were originally designed for bacteria and other culturable microorganisms. Viruses, being obligate intracellular parasites, cannot be grown in pure culture outside a host cell, making it impossible to fulfill postulates 2 and 3.

Prions:
These infectious proteins cannot be grown in culture and also don't elicit an immune response, making them impossible to identify using Koch's postulates.

 

2. Asymptomatic Carriers:

Koch abandoned the first postulate when he discovered asymptomatic carriers of cholera, where an individual carries the pathogen without showing symptoms. 

Modern understanding of diseases recognizes that many pathogens can be carried without causing illness, making it difficult to definitively link a microbe to a disease solely based on its presence in all affected individuals.

 

3. Difficulty Culturing Pathogens:

Some pathogens are difficult or impossible to grow in the lab, even with modern techniques, preventing the fulfillment of postulate 2 (isolation and culture). 

Examples include viruses, some bacteria, and certain fungi.

 

4. Polymicrobial Infections:

Koch's postulates tend to focus on a single pathogen causing a disease, but many diseases are actually caused by a combination of different microorganisms.

This polymicrobial nature makes it challenging to isolate and test the role of each individual microbe in the disease process. 

 

5. Genetic and Host Factors:

Individuals can have different susceptibilities to the same pathogen due to genetic factors or other underlying health conditions, meaning the pathogen may not always cause the disease in every individual.

This variability makes it difficult to apply the postulates universally. 

 

6. Molecular Koch's Postulates and Alternatives:

Modern approaches, like molecular Koch's postulates, focus on identifying specific genes in a pathogen that are responsible for causing disease. 

Techniques like PCR and DNA sequencing have also been developed to identify pathogens, even those that are difficult to culture, and to establish links between pathogens and diseases. 

Other criteria, such as the Bradford Hill criteria, are also used to establish causality in infectious diseases. 

 

17 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

If you do not believe the photos, you are deluded beyond hope.

Have you any idea what procedures are actually involved in getting these images?

 

There are about 20 different steps. Each one is a pit-fall for error. But!! The first step is getting some actual virus. If yer can't isolate, and purify the thing, you can't be sure what you are actually looking at.

 

Looks like general tissue debris to me. A couple of the images look more like bacteria than any virus or exosome.

 

Love nature - love yourself.

6 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

Even your all time hero, Koch abandoned one of his postulates (assumptions).

 

Here's a breakdown of the refutations and limitations of the 140 year old Koch postulates:

1. Viruses and Prions:

Viruses:
Koch's postulates were originally designed for bacteria and other culturable microorganisms. Viruses, being obligate intracellular parasites, cannot be grown in pure culture outside a host cell, making it impossible to fulfill postulates 2 and 3.

Prions:
These infectious proteins cannot be grown in culture and also don't elicit an immune response, making them impossible to identify using Koch's postulates.

 

2. Asymptomatic Carriers:

Koch abandoned the first postulate when he discovered asymptomatic carriers of cholera, where an individual carries the pathogen without showing symptoms. 

Modern understanding of diseases recognizes that many pathogens can be carried without causing illness, making it difficult to definitively link a microbe to a disease solely based on its presence in all affected individuals.

 

3. Difficulty Culturing Pathogens:

Some pathogens are difficult or impossible to grow in the lab, even with modern techniques, preventing the fulfillment of postulate 2 (isolation and culture). 

Examples include viruses, some bacteria, and certain fungi.

 

4. Polymicrobial Infections:

Koch's postulates tend to focus on a single pathogen causing a disease, but many diseases are actually caused by a combination of different microorganisms.

This polymicrobial nature makes it challenging to isolate and test the role of each individual microbe in the disease process. 

 

5. Genetic and Host Factors:

Individuals can have different susceptibilities to the same pathogen due to genetic factors or other underlying health conditions, meaning the pathogen may not always cause the disease in every individual.

This variability makes it difficult to apply the postulates universally. 

 

6. Molecular Koch's Postulates and Alternatives:

Modern approaches, like molecular Koch's postulates, focus on identifying specific genes in a pathogen that are responsible for causing disease. 

Techniques like PCR and DNA sequencing have also been developed to identify pathogens, even those that are difficult to culture, and to establish links between pathogens and diseases. 

Other criteria, such as the Bradford Hill criteria, are also used to establish causality in infectious diseases. 

 

Seems like a virologist is about. Here are Stiddle's lab guidelines.

 

Fins a virus in someone who is sick.

Isolate the virus.

See if it can cause anything resembling the original sickness in a new host

Take the new virus from the new host

Repeat with the new virus.

Characterize it.

 

With at least one control and independent observer.

 

Easy peasy - lemon squeezy. Wonder why they don't do it?

4 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Have you any idea what procedures are actually involved in getting these images?

Not a clue, but I am not a medical researcher.

 

There are about 20 different steps. Each one is a pit-fall for error. But!! The first step is getting some actual virus. If you can't isolate, and purify the thing, you can't be sure what you are actually looking at.

I hope they figured that out. Vaccines work so they must know something.

 

Looks like general tissue debris to me. A couple of the images look more like bacteria than any virus or exosome.

Maybe, but I still trust the medical lab more than I trust you.

 

Love nature - love yourself.

Love vaccines and live long enough to love others. That is the goal.

 

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Easy peasy - lemon squeezy. Wonder why they don't do it?

See above.  All in English and layman's terminology.  Easy peasy..... can you not read?

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

Even your all time hero, Koch abandoned one of his postulates (assumptions).

 

Here's a breakdown of the refutations and limitations of the 140 year old Koch postulates:

1. Viruses and Prions:

Viruses:
Koch's postulates were originally designed for bacteria and other culturable microorganisms. Viruses, being obligate intracellular parasites, cannot be grown in pure culture outside a host cell, making it impossible to fulfill postulates 2 and 3.

Prions:
These infectious proteins cannot be grown in culture and also don't elicit an immune response, making them impossible to identify using Koch's postulates.

 

2. Asymptomatic Carriers:

Koch abandoned the first postulate when he discovered asymptomatic carriers of cholera, where an individual carries the pathogen without showing symptoms. 

Modern understanding of diseases recognizes that many pathogens can be carried without causing illness, making it difficult to definitively link a microbe to a disease solely based on its presence in all affected individuals.

 

3. Difficulty Culturing Pathogens:

Some pathogens are difficult or impossible to grow in the lab, even with modern techniques, preventing the fulfillment of postulate 2 (isolation and culture). 

Examples include viruses, some bacteria, and certain fungi.

 

4. Polymicrobial Infections:

Koch's postulates tend to focus on a single pathogen causing a disease, but many diseases are actually caused by a combination of different microorganisms.

This polymicrobial nature makes it challenging to isolate and test the role of each individual microbe in the disease process. 

 

5. Genetic and Host Factors:

Individuals can have different susceptibilities to the same pathogen due to genetic factors or other underlying health conditions, meaning the pathogen may not always cause the disease in every individual.

This variability makes it difficult to apply the postulates universally. 

 

6. Molecular Koch's Postulates and Alternatives:

Modern approaches, like molecular Koch's postulates, focus on identifying specific genes in a pathogen that are responsible for causing disease. 

Techniques like PCR and DNA sequencing have also been developed to identify pathogens, even those that are difficult to culture, and to establish links between pathogens and diseases. 

Other criteria, such as the Bradford Hill criteria, are also used to establish causality in infectious diseases. 

What a load of monumental humbug. All this nonsense (above) because they can't find a virus. Of course they can't. Pathogenic viruses don't exist.

 

Virologist should be made to walk the log.

3 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

The one with the microscopes and chemistry set. You have no reputation.

The one on the pay-role you mean Sir. BTW, are you Ian?

 

My reputation is legendry.

4 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The one on the pay-role you mean Sir. BTW, are you Ian?

 

My reputation is legendry.

Never heard of Ian.

 

Your view of your own reputation, may be as flawed as your view of vaccines.

5 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Never heard of Ian.

 

Your view of your own reputation, may be as flawed as your view of vaccines.

Never heard of Ian? In your name cjinch Ian grai.

 

My view of vaccines eh!. I'll have you know that I started a group for like-thinking souls 5 years ago. Hurry if you want to join. There is a one million limit on membership.

But we have known this for years! It's only the conspiracy theory nutters who think otherwise. And they are 12 idiots in the states who spread their toxic rubbish to other countries during Covid-19; which did kill thousands of people until a vaccine was developed. It's time to move on now but the small minded trouble makers are on this forum and it's the obligation of every decent person to fight back against the anti medical nonsense before it kills one of us or someone we know or love. As vaccines work on a community basis not just an individual; the anti-vaxx nutters are spreading disinformation that damages us all and our children. 

All the same, the presence of thimerosal in so many vaccines is a valid reason not to get more vaccines than is necessary.

1 minute ago, JackGats said:

All the same, the presence of thimerosal in so many vaccines is a valid reason not to get more vaccines than is necessary.

What about not getting any vaccines? Much better for your health.

6 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Never heard of Ian? In your name cjinch Ian grai.

 

My view of vaccines eh!. I'll have you know that I started a group for like-thinking souls 5 years ago. Hurry if you want to join. There is a one million limit on membership.

No need to join your Qanonsense club. I get quite enough of it here.

 

Insulting misuse of names is against board rules, and I still have no idea who Ian is. Maybe lead singer for a 70s art band?

11 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Never heard of Ian? In your name cjinch Ian grai.

 

My view of vaccines eh!. I'll have you know that I started a group for like-thinking souls 5 years ago. Hurry if you want to join. There is a one million limit on membership.

If you cannot figure out CJ in Chiang Rai then it doesn’t bode well for the rest of your theories !!

5 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

If you cannot figure out CJ in Chiang Rai then it doesn’t bode well for the rest of your theories !!

Thanks for that Andy Bud.

 

Would be good to have your savvy.

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Never heard of Ian? In your name cjinch Ian grai.

 

My view of vaccines eh!. I'll have you know that I started a group for like-thinking souls 5 years ago. Hurry if you want to join. There is a one million limit on membership.

Yeah... sign me up....  I'll write a chat bot to fill your misinformation group with real information.  Sorta like your role here only faster!

22 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

And yet every third grader knows that germs exist. If you can upend lifetimes of research from your mothers basement, you could be wrong. Many viruses and bacteria have been identified, cataloged and sometimes defeated. Your fearmongering lies are not going to interfere with my medical care.

Just saying, but the fact that you need medical care is already testimony for the success of the vaccines and allopathic medicine in general... 

A post linking to a site with a pay wall has been removed, it also contravenes the fair use rule

On 6/26/2025 at 4:42 PM, Red Phoenix said:

 

HHS Secretary Kennedy unleashed a 1500-word MOAB of a tweet yesterday about vaccines, stenographic corporate media, and white coated lies. It is far too long to republish the whole thing (read it for yourself). His theme featured a common vaccine ingredient, thimerosal, and his targets included luminaries such as The Guardian, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and “the vaccine industry” writ large.

Source: 

 

 

 

The CDC site outlines multiple large epidemiological studies and reviews showing no association between thimerosal and autism or neurodevelopmental issues.

 

So why get stressy about an article that doesn't cite any articles?.......massive misdirection. 

 

 

.

On 6/27/2025 at 11:22 AM, cjinchiangrai said:

One of the most respected infectious disease experts ever. Certainly more credible than RFK.

Fauci eh!? He knows less than RFK or me. Or rather, he does know stuff, but can't go against his Big Pharma masters.

 

Hope you don't mind me quoting Dr Kary Mullis; "Fauci don't know what he is talking about.''

10 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Fauci eh!? He knows less than RFK or me. Or rather, he does know stuff, but can't go against his Big Pharma masters.

 

Hope you don't mind me quoting Dr Kary Mullis; "Fauci don't know what he is talking about.''

Well, you do know more than most experts about 1880 medical practices..... but thankfully everyone but you ( and the rest of the Luddites) has moved on.

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

Well, you do know more than most experts about 1880 medical practices..... but thankfully everyone but you ( and the rest of the Luddites) has moved on.

If you think giving 90 jabs to kids before teen years is good then you are smitten. Vaccines are not only anti-science, they are anti-nature.

26 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

If you think giving 90 jabs to kids before teen years is good then you are smitten. Vaccines are not only anti-science, they are anti-nature.

Only in your make believe land do they give 90 jabs.

 

Why don't you try and contribute just one truthful post?  Are you afraid you'll get addicted?

24 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

Only in your make believe land do they give 90 jabs.

 

Why don't you try and contribute just one truthful post?  Are you afraid you'll get addicted?

I think over 30 jabs are given before the toddlers are 18 months old.

 

No vax is safe. No vax is effective. No vax is necessary. All simply anti-science.

 

Dr Kary Mullis was right about the fraudulent Fauci. Spelt out by Kennedy and Mikovits in their books.

9 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

Only in your make believe land do they give 90 jabs.

 

Why don't you try and contribute just one truthful post?  Are you afraid you'll get addicted?

 

Here the 2025 CDC immunization schedule. 

That has ballooned from 5 shots 40 years ago to a whopping 33 shots, and that's only for the period from 'in the womb' to 1 year. 

And in 30 years autism has increased from 1 in 1000 to now a 1 in 34 prevalence. 

The battery of non-placebo and mutual enforcement tested  injections are surely not the only factor contributing to that disastrous development.  But the unwillingness to even CONSIDER it, makes it clear that other motives are at play here.