The mindless repeating of terms without acknowledgement of the lack of logic seems to be one major tactics of virus pushers. They stubbornly stay in their tunnel view. And when nothing helps anymore, they come up with anecdotes (Kirsch) or ad hominem attacks (Couey). They never answer question, they repeat them with counter questions in order to get out of the debate (Kirsch). Not to mention those who are still deeply trapped in not only the virus lie but also in the believe that there was a pandemic. Hysterical. That french guy with the strong accent in the podcast was a master example for this. We need to walk them through "the papers" word by word, but even then most of them won't get it, i'm afraid. Their horizon is very limited. Exhausting. But necessary.
I watched acquaintances in the 90s who tested positive for HIV get put on AZT and within a year they were dead. Some of these guys had symptoms (not Karposis or any cancer) like weight loss, mouth sores, tiredness and high white cell counts....BUT they were meth users, so what would they expect. Once they started on the AZT cocktail, their health rapidly declined. I did not know back then that HIV doesn't even exist, that no virus has been found to exist, but I realized that the drugs were toxic, just like chemo for cancer. But then cancer and viruses are the two biggest cash cows for the medical cartel. I continue to learn more and more as those who have done the heavy lifting in this no-virus movement continue to learn more about what makes us sick. I am learning how so many diseases are being blamed for the very same symptoms. Big Pharma creating new names/diseases for the very same symptoms so that new diagnoses with their corresponding new drug "cures" can be prescribed. Once you see it, you just see it for what it is. However, I do realize that we must stick to actual evidence we can use to refute the claims of the medical narratives. ALSO...Because of the ubiquitous propaganda over the decades, having a no-virus position puts us in the "nut job" camp with so many people and to make our struggle more difficult, we also have push back from the gatekeepers...those who at least are aware of the missing virus provenance yet say it doesn't matter and is too divisive to bring up. And AIDs is now front and center with the PREP drugs that young people with their hormones raging are buying into and taking with no sickness, no symptoms...just so they can feel safe having sex. Our young are in trouble and when the young are in trouble the future of human sovereignty is threatened.
The Judy Mikovitz camp believes much as Megan does. Mikovitz once declared at a talk that the human genome is 8-10% viral in origin. If you google it you will find that it is a somewhat common position.
It very much confuses things, which may be why it is promoted. If humans are about 10% viral in nature then when one detects a "virus" is one detecting something human or something exogenous? It seems like Megan is confused by this.
The confusion is from the definition itself: if humans and virus are indistinguishable, then every human will be "infected."
It's just another example of the nonsense in the field of virology.
Continuation. Implantation to monitor terrain. We could constantly take temperature sample blood urine faeces and sweat but because there are not many people ore that diligent they will implant indtead.
Henry Bauer, in his book "The Origin, Persistence and Failings of the HIV/AIDS Theory," points out many things that show that HIV-positivity is not related to incidence of AIDS.
HIV-positivity (not an indicator of a virus, just a test result) has always been about 0.3% of the population. Picture a graph that is a straight line over time, from the beginning of testing to the current time.
Incidence of AIDS, of course, has varied greatly over the same time period. Picture a curve that goes up dramatically in the 1980's and then slowly down since then.
Now imagine the two curves juxtaposed on the same graph: one is a horizontal line and the other has a sharp peak before going down. Once you see that, it is clear, that whatever the "test" might mean, it has nothing to do with HIV.
The mindless repeating of terms without acknowledgement of the lack of logic seems to be one major tactics of virus pushers. They stubbornly stay in their tunnel view. And when nothing helps anymore, they come up with anecdotes (Kirsch) or ad hominem attacks (Couey). They never answer question, they repeat them with counter questions in order to get out of the debate (Kirsch). Not to mention those who are still deeply trapped in not only the virus lie but also in the believe that there was a pandemic. Hysterical. That french guy with the strong accent in the podcast was a master example for this. We need to walk them through "the papers" word by word, but even then most of them won't get it, i'm afraid. Their horizon is very limited. Exhausting. But necessary.
Megan is hilarious
I watched acquaintances in the 90s who tested positive for HIV get put on AZT and within a year they were dead. Some of these guys had symptoms (not Karposis or any cancer) like weight loss, mouth sores, tiredness and high white cell counts....BUT they were meth users, so what would they expect. Once they started on the AZT cocktail, their health rapidly declined. I did not know back then that HIV doesn't even exist, that no virus has been found to exist, but I realized that the drugs were toxic, just like chemo for cancer. But then cancer and viruses are the two biggest cash cows for the medical cartel. I continue to learn more and more as those who have done the heavy lifting in this no-virus movement continue to learn more about what makes us sick. I am learning how so many diseases are being blamed for the very same symptoms. Big Pharma creating new names/diseases for the very same symptoms so that new diagnoses with their corresponding new drug "cures" can be prescribed. Once you see it, you just see it for what it is. However, I do realize that we must stick to actual evidence we can use to refute the claims of the medical narratives. ALSO...Because of the ubiquitous propaganda over the decades, having a no-virus position puts us in the "nut job" camp with so many people and to make our struggle more difficult, we also have push back from the gatekeepers...those who at least are aware of the missing virus provenance yet say it doesn't matter and is too divisive to bring up. And AIDs is now front and center with the PREP drugs that young people with their hormones raging are buying into and taking with no sickness, no symptoms...just so they can feel safe having sex. Our young are in trouble and when the young are in trouble the future of human sovereignty is threatened.
Regarding the debate with Megan:
The Judy Mikovitz camp believes much as Megan does. Mikovitz once declared at a talk that the human genome is 8-10% viral in origin. If you google it you will find that it is a somewhat common position.
It very much confuses things, which may be why it is promoted. If humans are about 10% viral in nature then when one detects a "virus" is one detecting something human or something exogenous? It seems like Megan is confused by this.
The confusion is from the definition itself: if humans and virus are indistinguishable, then every human will be "infected."
It's just another example of the nonsense in the field of virology.
Just discovered your stack.
Do you discuss herpes in any of your posts? (Not sure how to do a search within an individual stack.)
Continuation. Implantation to monitor terrain. We could constantly take temperature sample blood urine faeces and sweat but because there are not many people ore that diligent they will implant indtead.
Maybe I need to clarify. Contagion exists terrain exists. What concerns me are we opening the door to AI im.
Contagious disease are real experience tells us so. How do you think they can monitor our ‘terrain’ with AI of course.
This whole terrain theory could be a way of getting AI into our bodies; resist wherever possible!
Here is my book review of the Bauer book I mentioned in the previous post:
https://www.covid19reader.com/the-origin-persistence-and-failings-of-hiv-aids-theory-a-book-review/
Henry Bauer, in his book "The Origin, Persistence and Failings of the HIV/AIDS Theory," points out many things that show that HIV-positivity is not related to incidence of AIDS.
HIV-positivity (not an indicator of a virus, just a test result) has always been about 0.3% of the population. Picture a graph that is a straight line over time, from the beginning of testing to the current time.
Incidence of AIDS, of course, has varied greatly over the same time period. Picture a curve that goes up dramatically in the 1980's and then slowly down since then.
Now imagine the two curves juxtaposed on the same graph: one is a horizontal line and the other has a sharp peak before going down. Once you see that, it is clear, that whatever the "test" might mean, it has nothing to do with HIV.