Simply give the best proof, and demo, for following theory:
MODERN VIRUS THEORY
1) inactive ‘virus’ enters passageway
2) pulled through cell membrane
3) virus activates, hijacks cell function
4) cell replicates gazillion viruses
5) cell bursts
6) repeat 2-5 qazillion times
Please, let us bypass the history of vaccines, like polio and measles, a great topic but only a diversion for finding out how virus theory developed and is supposedly demonstrated. If you really need counterpoint on the vaccines, we can discuss that separately.Virus Theory - when did it begin - how is it supposedly demonstrated
Let us start with the beginnings of virus theory applied to human health.
Can you find anybody proposing this theory before, say, 1950?
Try not to dance around.
From the 2008 paper,:
Pathology, Molecular Biology, and Pathogenesis of Avian Influenza A (H5N1) Infection in Humans
Christine Korteweg, M.D. Jiang Gu, M.D., Ph.D.
=================lots of circularity and equivocation:
Why would one small virus be smart enough to infect and hijack the wide variety of cells mentioned?"On the molecular level, several viral genes and gene products have been identified that may be responsible for the high pathogenicity of H5N1 influenza viruses. "
", it may be difficult to distinguish diffuse alveolar damage caused by H5N1 virus infections from diffuse alveolar damage caused by other microorganisms such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (SARS-CoV) or by other factors such as aspiration or oxygen toxicity."
" The available studies of human H5N1 autopsies have a number of limitations in terms of pathological findings. "
"human H5N1 influenza. Aside from the respiratory tract, other organs such as the intestines, the brain, and the placenta appear to be infection targets of the virus."
All sorts of vague stuff. Circularity.
No gold standard genome for the 'virus'
Burst cells not even mentioned, nor entrance through cell membrane.
Again and again .. this MAY do that, and POSSIBLY the other. and APPEARS TO BE and, HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED
and requires further exploration and conflicting results.
As for the pictures, they prove the existence of some particles, or exosomes, or various somethings, they do not remotely prove the existence of viruses as described in virus theory. That was a humorous claim.
Stephen, if you actually believe the pics prove something about virus theory, please explain why.
Here is the opening back and forth.
==========================Aaron Ginn - Nov 23.
"No study detected live virus beyond day 9 of illness, despite persistently high viral loads. SCoV2 viral load in the upper respiratory tract appeared to peak in the first week of illness, whereas that of SCoV1 peaked at 10–14 and MCoV peaked at 7–10."
And I would read this as an acknowledgement of the falsity of virus theory - that ‘viruses’ are hijacking cell mechanisms to force massive replications, bursting cells, and then being captured by other cells, replication, burst, etc. Never proven, lacking evidence. The virus myth.
That has been determined experimentally. Where’d you get the idea that it hasn’t? It’s also the mechanism that many (successful) vaccines rely on
Specific experiment, please. Thanks.
‘Principles of Viral Pathogenesis’ by Michael B.A Oldstone is a good minireview. Read it, and look at the cited papers, and you’ll find plenty of proof that viruses are not a “myth”. Given that this is readily available and easily accessible, I would hope that you might take.
This beginning was also put on Facebook:
Terrain Model Refutes Germ Theory
Principles of Viral Pathogenesis (1996)
Michael B.A Oldstone, M. D.
Viruses, Plagues, and History: Past, Present, and Future (2020)Patho is derived from the Greek πάθos, meaning suffering or disease, and genesis from the Greek γέvεσis, which translates “to come into being or origin.” Viral pathogenesis, then, is defined as “how viruses produce disease in the host.” The portrait of viral pathogenesis is the sum of functions through which a virus causes disease (virulence) and the host resists or is susceptible. ... our understanding of how viruses cause disease is scanty. As an example, for poliovirus ... our knowledge of how poliovirus actually causes poliomyelitis is limited. Considering the number of persons infected with the virus, few develop poliomyelitis. ... the determinants that control viral virulence or host susceptibility (or resistance) in the natural host are far from being understood in terms of molecules or genes involved. ... This ignorance of pathogenic mechanisms is not unique to poliovirus. Equally obscure is how HIV causes dementia and immunosuppression and why measles virus promotes generalized immunosuppression, and so on.
Michael B.A Oldstone