Just now, Stiddle Mump said:

Do they? Well if they exist, they do for sure. But one has never been found in a tissue or cell that is not dead. Personally, I think they are simply cell debris.

 

Most people, and many white-coats for that matter, believe there is a virus behind every tree, under every log and hiding in the shadows, just waiting to pounce. This view of viruses predominates. But that view is in itself anti-nature and not a viable argument.

 

I had a serious infection on my finger once. No idea where it came from. But if they didn't administer antibiotics, I would be in big trouble.

 

Call it whatever you want.

 

Fact is, I don't have to time to get a medical degree or hunt down banned books that prove your theory.

 

Sorry, I have no intricate knowledge of what is going on in labs and neither do I have to explore it.

 

Must be lonely since that's the only topic on your mind and you will soon run out of people to discuss it with.

 

 

2 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Um, uhh, but.....oh, geez.

 

But Dr. Koch...

 

Koch’s postulates were presented in 1890 (here and here), at a time when germ theory was still controversial and before the discovery of viruses, to which Koch’s postulates, as they were originally written, do not apply.

Why is that Sir?

 

I'm sure they are not your words. But they are one of a fool. Probably some gravy-train white-coat, anxious to keep the research funding going.

3 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Probably some gravy-train white-coat, anxious to keep the research funding going.

 

Show some respect for the medical establishment. There is some corruption, yes.

 

But there are many doctors working tirelessly to help humans as well.

 

 

2 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I had a serious infection on my finger once. No idea where it came from. But if they didn't administer antibiotics, I would be in big trouble.

Interesting Sir. Have you any pics?

 

Infections are the way of both protecting the injury - so it don't get further damaged - and healing it.

1 minute ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Interesting Sir. Have you any pics?

 

Infections are the way of both protecting the injury - so it don't get further damaged - and healing it.

 

No, I don't have pics.

Despite what you think, infections sometimes get the upper hand and the body cannot fight it off.

 

2 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Show some respect for the medical establishment. There is some corruption, yes.

 

But there are many doctors working tirelessly to help humans as well.

 

Especially the ones authorising the jabbing of babes and toddlers. And, dare I say it; for $$$.

 

Or they might be doing it themselves, and all the while saying to the anxious parent; 'safe n effective'.

Just now, save the frogs said:

 

No, I don't have pics.

Despite what you think, infections sometimes get the upper hand and the body cannot fight it off.

 

Infections are the body at work, healing the problem. What good did the antibiotics do you? Stopped the body fulfilling its task.

1 minute ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Infections are the body at work, healing the problem. What good did the antibiotics do you? Stopped the body fulfilling its task.

 

No no no no no.

It was SPREADING !!!!

The antibiotic KILLED it and prevented it from spreading.

Please please please do not get a job in my local hospital.

Thank you.

 

23 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

They do not show the existence of a living virus.

Please pay attention…

23 hours ago, novacova said:

Viruses are not considered truly alive because they lack the cellular machinery to reproduce on their own, they must hijack a host cell’s resources to make copies of themselves. A virus attaches to the cell surface, injects its genetic material, and forces the cell to produce more virus particles.

 

25 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Where do these white-coat virologists get their original samples from Sir?

Did you not read the articles in the links provided?

26 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Always best to read the methodology to find out what the experiment was really all about. Can't just go on the title or summary

Well then, obviously you didn’t read the articles in the links provided as the methods are clearly listed in them of which I read before posting.

28 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

As for the journals? Don't get me started. The really good papers don't get in.

Will have to agree to some extent on this, as science journals have taken wrong turn in some areas in the past some odd twenty years. Is why it’s crucial to understand what to look for while going through the data, such as wording conflating “probable” and “evidence” and nominal gaps in the data are indicators of something that hasn’t quite been proven yet it gets flared out and propagated, and subsequently defaults to being decisively chucked over this shoulder.

29 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

No no no no no.

It was SPREADING !!!!

The antibiotic KILLED it and prevented it from spreading.

Please please please do not get a job in my local hospital.

Thank you.

 

I'm a bit lost on this one Sir. 'It' was the infection I take it. 

 

I would have cleaned it up, sent you home, and let nature take its course.

 

2 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm a bit lost on this one Sir. 'It' was the infection I take it. 

 

I would have cleaned it up, sent you home, and let nature take its course.

 

 

But that's why I am asking you politely not to work in a hospital.

 

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

5 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

But that's why I am asking you politely not to work in a hospital.

 

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

Horses for courses Sir.

 

Have to take each case on its merit. I was never one for protocols. A splinter needs just removing and the wound cleaned up. Something more traumatic, like a dagger in yer back, might need a different procedure.

 

Shame you didn't have any pics.

17 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm a bit lost on this one Sir. 'It' was the infection I take it. 

 

I would have cleaned it up, sent you home, and let nature take its course.

 

If you actually had the intelligence required to earn a medical qualification - let alone practise medicine - you’d be liable for letting a simple infection spiral into full-blown sepsis....  But thankfully, the world is spared that catastrophe, because no sane system would ever let someone with your grasp of science anywhere near a patient, let alone an infant who depends on real medical care rather than your YouTube-educated witchcraft.

 

Thankfully, society has guardrails to keep quackery like yours from doing real harm. You can’t refuse vaccinations on behalf of vulnerable children. You can’t jeopardise patients with your bargain-bin “independent thinking”....  The only place your flat-earth, anti-vax drivel is permitted to stagger around is in the back-alley threads of sub-forums like this one.

 

... And you’re right about one thing: nature does have the answers. In this case, it’s kindly provided a clear demonstration of what a delusional fool looks like.

On 11/16/2025 at 6:35 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

Viruses - if they exist at all - are only evident when the cell dies. They are cell debris. Probably formed in the shape they are to enable trouble-free cell elimination from the body.

 

There is a school of thought, in the New Biology Camp, that reckon they are simply tiny gas bubbles. Others say they are exosomes.

 

Whatever they are, they have never been isolated. They don't, IMO, cause disease, and do not reproduce.

There is also a school of thought that the earth is flat .

 

5 minutes ago, 0ffshore360 said:

There is also a school of thought that the earth is flat .

 

 

He’s absolutely from that school of thought.

 

The overlap is uncanny: anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing deniers, 5G-panic merchants, chemtrail aficionados – the whole constellation of contrarian nonsense. The topic never matters. The science never matters. What they crave is the pose – the thrill of calling everyone else “sheep” while mistaking rebellion for free thinking.

 

What’s remarkable is the mental contortion it takes to live this way. They reject decades of science, medical consensus, and plain common sense, not because they’ve discovered a hidden truth, but because admitting expertise exists would shatter the self-image they’ve so meticulously built.

 

Their “research” is a self-reinforcing echo chamber - memes, fringe videos, and conspiracy forums...

 

It’s tragic, really, a kind of self-inflicted intellectual paralysis. They cannot admit they’re wrong, so they live in a private universe where the entire world is mistaken and they alone are brave enough to resist the “brainwashing.”

 

Nature has a cruel sense of irony: it ensures that in the quest to appear free-thinking, they reveal themselves as perfect examples of delusion.

 

 

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The overlap is uncanny: anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing deniers

 

No, no, no, that's not how it works.

 

Just because something in the mainstream is bs doesn't mean everything in the mainstream is bs.

 

Just because someone on the conspiracy side says or believes something which is not accurate doesn't mean all conspiracies are total bs.

It's not black and white. Doesn't work like that.

 

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The overlap is uncanny: anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing deniers

 

No, no, no, that's not how it works.

 

Just because something in the mainstream is bs doesn't mean everything in the mainstream is bs.

 

Just because someone on the conspiracy side says or believes something which is not accurate doesn't mean all conspiracies are total bs.

It's not black and white. Doesn't work like that.

 

 

Thats why I wrote there's an 'overlap'...  and a correlation... 

 

That doesn't mean an exactly binary ideology that if one is an antivaxxer they are also a definitely flat-earther - but, there appears to be a correlation which points towards a push-back and distrust of the official narrative. 

 

It would be interesting to see results of this in far greater numbers.

 

Who on these threads are are Anti-vaxxers and also Flat Earthers ?

 

I know Rattlesnake is both an Anti-Vaxxer and a Flat Eather, so is Stiddle. 

What about others ?

 

 

But its also true that 'some anti-vaxxers' are mistakenly labelled and they may only be anti-mRNA vaccines, or only anti-Covid vaccines while supporting Polio, MMR and more established vaccines.

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

He’s absolutely from that school of thought.

 

The overlap is uncanny: anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing deniers, 5G-panic merchants, chemtrail aficionados – the whole constellation of contrarian nonsense. The topic never matters. The science never matters. What they crave is the pose – the thrill of calling everyone else “sheep” while mistaking rebellion for free thinking.

 

What’s remarkable is the mental contortion it takes to live this way. They reject decades of science, medical consensus, and plain common sense, not because they’ve discovered a hidden truth, but because admitting expertise exists would shatter the self-image they’ve so meticulously built.

 

Their “research” is a self-reinforcing echo chamber - memes, fringe videos, and conspiracy forums...

 

It’s tragic, really, a kind of self-inflicted intellectual paralysis. They cannot admit they’re wrong, so they live in a private universe where the entire world is mistaken and they alone are brave enough to resist the “brainwashing.”

 

Nature has a cruel sense of irony: it ensures that in the quest to appear free-thinking, they reveal themselves as perfect examples of delusion.

 

 

 

You do have a tendency to dramatise and caricature things. One can question the heliocentric model and the germ theory without being a misfit entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echochambers.

 

This trope consisting in equating 'conspiracy theorists' with socially inadequate wretches has gotten a bit old. As a friendly reminder, the majority of the American people voted for Trump after he openly espoused RFK's ideas and project – this alone should challenge your view of things… that is, if you're capable of taking a step back to consider the possibility that you could be (at least partially) misguided.

1 minute ago, rattlesnake said:

You do have a tendency to dramatise and caricature things. One can refute the heliocentric model and the germ theory without being a misfit entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echochambers.

 

No... you can't...   

Flat earth - Anti-Vax - moon landing denier......   you just described it perfectly....   misfits entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echo-chambers...

 

 

1 minute ago, rattlesnake said:

This trope consisting in equating 'conspiracy theorists' with socially inadequate wretches has gotten a bit old. As a friendly reminder, the American people voted for Trump after he openly espoused RFK's ideas and project – this alone should challenge your view of things… that is, if you're capable of taking a step back to consider the possibility that you could be (at least partially) misguided.

 

Old or just true...   

 

Why do you Americans always need to bring Trump into everything ? - you really want to use an election as proof of scientific or intellectual legitimacy ?? its like using a karaoke contest to judge medical research, and the smug “step back and reconsider” flourish simply highlights how flimsy the argument is.

 

Tell me you are not also a Moon-landing denier rattlesnake ?...

 

... what about 9/11 inside job theories, chemtrails, 5G panic, Bill Gates microchips, depopulation plots, hidden cancer cures, New World Order fantasies, and “the government controls everything” paranoia ???

 

 

55 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

No... you can't...   

Flat earth - Anti-Vax - moon landing denier......   you just described it perfectly....   misfits entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echo-chambers...

 

Yeah, and when I post US Senate hearings, ex-CDC Director testimonies or studies, you just ignore them.

 

55 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Why do you Americans always need to bring Trump into everything ?

 

This is interesting, as it might at least partially explain why you keep defaulting back to the same positions, despite my refuting (and your acknowledging said refutations' validity on a given day) a lot of your points. I thought you were simply being dishonest, but perhaps you also have a memory problem? Over the past few  years, I have repeatedly stated where I am from (hint: not the US).

 

55 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

you really want to use an election as proof of scientific or intellectual legitimacy ??

 

It's simple, really. The CDC is the top of the pyramid regarding health policy guidelines. In your native UK, the NHS will typically follow what the CDC recommends. So citing a US example is far from irrelevant.

77 million people voted for Trump in 2024. That's 77 million people who voted for RFK, as he openly endorsed him and Trump stated unequivocally that he would apply RFK's vision and policies if he was elected. Therefore, according to your interpretative framework, anyone who voted for Trump de facto supported the "worthless and mentally challenged views" of the "conspiracy theorists" of this forum.

That's a lot of people "entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echo-chambers", don't you think? Certainly a far cry from the oft-repeated trope that this position is the exclusive domain of a few insignificant dropouts.

 

What is the threshold past which you start wondering whether your view of things might not be as accurate and relevant as you believe it is?

 

55 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Tell me you are not also a Moon-landing denier rattlesnake ?...

 

Moon-landing denial is entry-level conspiracy theory, Richard.

That said, I absolutely respect people's right to believe a giant barbecue wrapped in tin foil landed on – and departed from – the surface of the Moon. I mean, it's true the below evidence is compelling to say the least…

 

On 11/16/2025 at 8:07 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature is fundamentally interested in just two things. Survival and reproduction. There is no place for a pathogenic virus in nature.

How many times have you been awarded the class dunce cap?  Classic Dunning-Kruger overconfidence in your knowledge and abilities.  You obviously are not an expert on the full range of nature's ability to exploit a biosphere niche through evolution.   Back to school please before posting more such nonsense.

41 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Yeah, and when I post US Senate hearings, ex-CDC Director testimonies or studies, you just ignore them.

 

 

This is interesting, as it might at least partially explain why you keep defaulting back to the same positions, despite my refuting (and your acknowledging said refutations' validity on a given day) a lot of your points. I thought you were simply being dishonest, but perhaps you also have a memory problem? Over the past few  years, I have repeatedly stated where I am from (hint: not the US).

 

 

It's simple, really. The CDC is the top of the pyramid regarding health policy guidelines. In your native UK, the NHS will typically follow what the CDC recommends. So citing a US example is far from irrelevant.

77 million people voted for Trump in 2024. That's 77 million people who voted for RFK, as he openly endorsed him and Trump stated unequivocally that he would apply RFK's vision and policies if he was elected. Therefore, according to your interpretative framework, anyone who voted for Trump de facto supported the "worthless and mentally challenged views" of the "conspiracy theorists" of this forum.

That's a lot of people "entrapped in a warped universe of memes and fringe echo-chambers", don't you think? Certainly a far cry from the oft-repeated trope that this position is the exclusive domain of a few insignificant dropouts.

 

What is the threshold past which you start wondering whether your view of things might not be as accurate and relevant as you believe it is?

 

 

Moon-landing denial is entry-level conspiracy theory, Richard.

That said, I absolutely respect people's right to believe a giant barbecue wrapped in tin foil landed on – and departed from – the surface of the Moon. I mean, it's true the below evidence is compelling to say the least…

 

A complete waste of electrons... or do you not believe in them?

Please, leave Mr Trump out of this.

 

Discuss the topic.

 

Thank you 

Being an anti-vaxxer is a position comparable with David versus Goliath.  

This because "Big Pharma controls what is studied, how it is researched, and what qualifies as evidence".

That phenomenon is referred to as 'epsistemic capture' and it explains why anti-vax statements even when supported by irrefutable evidence are censored, ignored or ridiculed by the 'Sciency'-believers whose views have been shaped by the industry's so-called body of knowledge. 

 

2 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Being an anti-vaxxer is a position comparable with David versus Goliath.  

This because "Big Pharma controls what is studied, how it is researched, and what qualifies as evidence".

That phenomenon is referred to as 'epsistemic capture' and it explains why anti-vax statements even when supported by irrefutable evidence are censored, ignored or ridiculed by the 'Sciency'-believers whose views have been shaped by the industry's so-called body of knowledge. 

 

Don't disagree with that post Sir. Or Dr Rogers succinct prose.

 

I'd like to add, that it was big money that set out deliberately to turn natural health into quackery. Once the dosh became involved the modern medical system became entrenched into German, American and later the west generally.

 

This got underway in the first decade of the 20th century, although there was a balanced view of medicine at this time. It took of, big time, in the second decade**. By the time the roaring 20s came along it was done and dusted. And it was during the third decade of the 1900s that the science had to be distorted to match the system demands. And really that has been going on ever since.

 

The ostracising of outspoken healing voices is nothing new. Many of the disciples of the natural world went through hell. And it continues to this day.

 

** The Flexner report of 1910 is key. It was held up as the way forward, and indeed could be termed as the 'allopathic' bible. Funded by Carnagie and put into place by Rockefeller.

 

9 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Don't disagree with that post Sir. Or Dr Rogers succinct prose.

 

I'd like to add, that it was big money that set out deliberately to turn natural health into quackery. Once the dosh became involved the modern medical system became entrenched into German, American and later the west generally.

 

This got underway in the first decade of the 20th century, although there was a balanced view of medicine at this time. It took of, big time, in the second decade**. By the time the roaring 20s came along it was done and dusted. And it was during the third decade of the 1900s that the science had to be distorted to match the system demands. And really that has been going on ever since.

 

The ostracising of outspoken healing voices is nothing new. Many of the disciples of the natural world went through hell. And it continues to this day.

 

** The Flexner report of 1910 is key. It was held up as the way forward, and indeed could be termed as the 'allopathic' bible. Funded by Carnagie and put into place by Rockefeller.

 

Money, money, money, that is all you are interested in, medical businesses making money, NOT, saving lives.

I guess you were never in business..............

3 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Being an anti-vaxxer is a position comparable with David versus Goliath.  

This because "Big Pharma controls what is studied, how it is researched, and what qualifies as evidence".

That phenomenon is referred to as 'epsistemic capture' and it explains why anti-vax statements even when supported by irrefutable evidence are censored, ignored or ridiculed by the 'Sciency'-believers whose views have been shaped by the industry's so-called body of knowledge. 

 

Don't disagree with that post Sir. Or Dr Rogers succinct prose.

 

I'd like to add, that it was big money that set out deliberately to turn natural health into quackery. Once the dosh became involved the modern medical system became entrenched into German, American and later the west generally.

 

This got underway in the first decade of the 20th century, although there was a balanced view of medicine at this time. It took of, big time, in the second decade**. By the time the roaring 20s came along it was done and dusted. And it was during the third decade of the 1900s that the science had to be distorted to match the system demands. And really that has been going on ever since.

 

The ostracising of outspoken healing voices is nothing new. Many of the disciples of the natural world went through hell. And it continues to this day.

 

** The Flexner report of 1910 is key. It was held up as the way forward, and indeed could be termed as the 'allopathic' bible. Funded by Carnagie and put into place by Rockefeller.

 

1 hour ago, transam said:

Money, money, money, that is all you are interested in, medical businesses making money, NOT, saving lives.

I guess you were never in business..............

I'm interested in nature. I'm interested in truth. I'm interested in good health.

 

What I don't like is lies, fraud and wickedness. All three I see in the medical system.

 

Lies - making up stuff that puts fear into people.

Fraud - virology.

Wickedness - pushing the needle into babes and toddlers.

8 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm interested in nature.

Understanding nature is a vast task, and little is known at this stage of humanity. Though there are vast quantities of insight and knowledge available now that is more than enough to fill the lifetime of any individual born today.

10 minutes ago, novacova said:

Understanding nature is a vast task, and little is known at this stage of humanity. Though there are vast quantities of insight and knowledge available now that is more than enough to fill the lifetime of any individual born today.

Difficult to know everything Sir. I'll agree with that.

 

Just worked it out; I only know 7.15%. But I'm getting there. Still learning; unlike many on here. In fact unlike most compromised, dumbster white-coats.