Youâve published an blog titled âYes, SARS-CoV-2 Is a Real Virusâ.
One of the sources you relied most heavily on for this claim is a recent blog by Steve Kirsch, which is really interesting because in that blog Steve admitted right off the top that he actually has no idea whether or not the alleged virus has even been isolated and that he relies on other peopleâs opinions.
I wrote an educational Open Letter to Steve Kirsch in response to that blog and strongly suggest you and your readers review it.
Now in your blog you state that: âSARS-CoV-2 has been isolated, photographed, genetically sequenced, and exists as a pathogenic entity.â
I hope we can agree that a specific thing must be known to exist in order to know that âitâ is pathogenic. Not believed, imagined, assumed, or wanted to exist, but known. Because otherwise itâs impossible to establish even a correlation, let alone prove causation of anything.
Yet nowhere in your blog did you present or cite any proof that that the alleged RNA genome of 30,000 base pairs surrounded by a spikey protein shell actually exists.
Iâll briefly review some of the sources youâve cited to explain why I say this.
You start out with a video that features Jeremy Hammond insisting that âthe virusâ is real, has been isolated, and is a necessary factor in âCOVID-19â.
(For the record, I had an extensive email exchange with Jeremy on this topic, between October 25 and November 14, 2020. I encourage you and your readers to review it.)
In this video, Jeremy made bold claims indeed. But despite stating that the âvirusâ existence issue is âprobablyâ his âbiggest pet peeveâ, he came to this interview armed with zero sources showing that the alleged virus does exist. In fact Jeremy cited no studies of any kind. Just unsubstantiated claims, and reliance on the beliefs of others. They could do this, they could do that. They canât do this, they canât do that. So-and-so says this, so-and-so says that.
Instead, Jeremy insisted that the following is the âgold standardâ for âisolationâ of a disease spreading âvirusâ: irrational and unscientific interpretation of cytopathic effects in a cell culture â typically malnourished monkey kidney cells to which toxic drugs have been added, and further contamination in the form of fetal bovine serum is added as food for the cells, along with a patient sample (not a purified sample of anything).
This, in Jeremyâs mind, establishes the existence and presence of a virus. Which is why heâd make a great virologist. Jeremy doesnât think like a scientist, and as I always point out, âvirology is not a scienceâ.
And Jeremy lied through his teeth when he went along with the naĂŻve (Iâm giving her the benefit of the doubt) comment from his interviewer that virologists then pull âthe virusâ from the cell culture. âIt really is that simple.â (I challenge Jeremy or you, Dr. Mercola, to cite any study where a specific thing was âpulledâ, even from a monkey/cow/human mixture aka cell culture, and shown scientifically to be a disease-spreading âvirusâ.)
And according to Jeremy, we just âknowâ what âcoronavirusesâ look like, despite the fact that no specific thing alleged to be a âcoronavirusâ has ever been purified from any patient sample (or even from a cell culture) so that it could be studied logically and scientifically. Who needs science? We just know these things.
Jeremy insists that the CDC has isolated âSARS-COV-2â. Well, yes they have according to the meaningless, antiscientific approach to âisolationâ used by Jeremy and virologists.
But did the CDC researchers apply even a modicum of logic or scientific method and actually establish the existence of the alleged virus? Thatâs an entirely different matter and the answer is a resounding âNoâ.
The CDCâs âSARS-COV-2 isolationâ study is just another example of the typical fraudulent monkey business (literally) that plagues our world. I have addressed the CDCâs study previously, and will address this same issue of virologyâs blatantly bogus âisolationâ methods below.
Jeremy carried on with more bizarre claims: that scientists never isolate/purify anything, and donât have the technology to purify things like alleged viruses.
Jeremy also strangely implied that people (such as myself) who say that proof of a disease-spreading âvirusâ requires purification actually demand that the alleged virus be floating in a vacuum.
Dr. Mercola, Iâve been involved in this issue for almost 2 years now and donât know a single man or woman who defines isolation/purification as âfloating in a vacuumâ.
And I make explicitly clear in my Freedom of Information requests that this is not how I define isolation/purification. Below is a screenshot from a recent FOIA request to the CDC. They have no records, like all 164 other institutions in roughly 30 countries, that have been asked by people around the world. No one on the planet has purified a sample of the alleged âvirusâ from a disease human, or knows of anyone who has, even though supposedly millions and millions of people are infected and spewing this âvirusâ every time they breath.
And no, contrary to Jeremyâs claim, it is not people such as Dr. Andrew Kaufman, or Jon Rappoport, or Drs. Sam and Mark Bailey, who bizarrely redefined the word âisolationâ. Itâs virologists who redefined it, to mean mixing various complicated substances together and drawing wild conclusions â quite the opposite of its historical meaning.
Itâs funny how everyone knows that âisolateâ means âseparateâ when it comes to isolating humans and the âconfusionâ only arises when it comes to theoretical âvirusesâ. And how a virologistâs use of the word âisolateâ gives the impression of legitimate science when nothing could be further from the truth.
Dr. Mercola, I couldnât help but notice the unicorn in the background over the shoulder of Jeremyâs interviewer. Was this video inserted into your blog as someoneâs idea of a joke? I mean, these people proved a virus no more than a unicorn, and unicorns are a popular analogy for imaginary viruses these days, thanks to Dr. Tom Cowan, and I canât for the life of me imagine why you would have purposely included this video when itâs completely useless to anyone looking for proof of a virus.
And no Dr. Mercola, we are not confused. Weâre quite familiar with what virologists have been getting away with.
As distressing as it is to do so, since you have chosen to rehash Steve Kirschâs summary of the curious âscienceâ of Sabine Hazan, I will briefly address it once again, here, as I did in my educational Open Letter to Steve.
To put it bluntly, Sabine Hazanâs study is 100% useless and fraudulent. The RNA used in her âsequencingâ was a genetic soup from various sources, including patients, and not shown to involve any alleged âvirusâ.
She fabricated meaningless codes on a computer that have never been shown to correspond to anything in the physical realm and falsely passed these off a âviral genomesâ.
Sabine compared her meaningless âsequencingâ results to the results of her utterly meaningless and fraudulent PCR tests (that she is quite secretive about, at least with me) that also have never been shown to have anything to do with a âvirusâ.
Sabine comes unhinged when directly challenged on the validity of her so-called âscienceâ. I encourage your readers to try this themselves and see what happens (and send me the results at cmssyc@gmail.com).
Dr. Mercola, I also already addressed ATCCâs very expensive and fraudulent âvirusâ product that you are now promoting as well, in my educational Open Letter to Steve Kirsch. Please be sure to review that section. It includes a  Buyer Beware! from Dr. Saeed A. Qureshi, PhD, who spent 30+ years as a scientist (as opposed to a virologist) with Health Canada.
Dr. Mercola, I challenge you to track down the origin and contents of any ATCC âSARS-COV-2â product, as I did last year for the so-called âSARS-COV-2 isolateâ that is referred to as âMUC-IMB1â aka âBavPat1â and sold by companies like EVA for 2 000,00 âŹÂ per vial, and report back to your readers what you learn. Report the detailed methods that were used to allegedly verify that the product contains any disease-causing âvirusâ whatsoever.
Regarding your claim that âGerm Theory and Terrain Theory Both Have Meritâ, can you prove with science that virology has any merit whatsoever?
Please prove the existence of a specific physical thing alleged to be a disease-spreading âCOVID-19 virus/variantâ aka âSARS-COV-2â and prove that that specific thing spreads disease from host to host via natural modes of exposure in animals or humans.
I challenge you to publish a study proving that such a thing exists. Show with science that only subjects that are exposed to that specific thing get âCOVID-19â respiratory disease, as claimed by Jeremy, whose wild unsubstantiated claims you are now disseminating.
Dr. Mercola, as evidence that âthe virusâ has been isolated and sequenced, you are citing studies that rely in part on PCR âtestsâ. Without bothering to go into all the well documented fatal flaws with these so-called tests, a little logic is in order.
- It is impossible to validate any âtestâ without a gold standard.
- It is impossible to validate any âtestâ claimed to âconfirmâ the presence of a âvirusâ (or a âviral infectionâ) before the alleged âvirusâ has been proven to exist.
- It is impossible to validate any âtestâ claimed to âconfirmâ a âviral diseaseâ before the alleged âvirusâ has been a) proven to exist and b) proven to cause the disease.
Obviously an indirect test for a âvirusâ cannot logically be used to prove the existence of the alleged âvirusâ. The test is what it is. In the case of PCR, in the very best case scenario, it is evidence of the presence of the very tiny target genetic sequence. Nothing more. Not a virus, not a genome, just a tiny little sequence.
And cytopathic effects on a cell culture, any cell culture, are just that â effects. An effect is not the cause of the effect. And wild assumptions about the cause of the effect are just that â wild assumptions, not science. This is especially true when the cells in question have been malnourished by lowering the level of food for the cells (typically fetal bovine serum) and poisoning the cells with toxic drugs.
Dr. Mercola, I am shocked that you actually published this quote from the sketchy, brief Letter from Italy that you cited, as evidence that a âvirusâ has been sequenced:
â[Vero E6 aka monkey kidney] Cell culture supernatants from passage 1 (P1) of four isolates were collected, and RNA was extractedâŠâ
First of all, as you seem to understand and as should be clear by now, âisolatesâ do not mean purified, isolated specimens in virology. Quite the opposite. In the case of âSARS-COV-2â studies, they are monkey/cow/human mixtures. And the authors are telling you in plain language that they extracted the RNA from the cell culture supernatants. Not from a purified specimen of an alleged virus.
These authors are telling the world that they have a soup of genetic material, and are going to concoct on their computer a so-called âviral genomeâ out of the zillions of sequences that they (kinda, maybe, sorta) detect therein. Because this is virology, not science.
Do we really need to discuss this any further?
Dr. Mercola, fabricated âgenomesâ, meaningless, impossible-to-validate PCR âtestsâ, wild assumptions about the cause of effects on a malnourished/poisoned cell line, and arrows added to EM images and pointing at particles that were never purified, never sequenced, never characterized, never studied with controlled experiments does not add up to science.
Virology is not a science.
Dr. Mercola, it is very distressing to see you promoting blatant pseudoscience that has been used for decades to fool and coerce people around the world in myriad ways, not limited to the utterly useless and harmful injections that have fraudulently been passed off as âimmunizationsâ.
Every time you (or someone like Peter McCullough) do this, people such as myself have to spend hours clearing up all the confusion you have caused with the public.
You need to do your due diligence, find and share the âmissingâ scientific proof of viruses, or retract your blog, apologize to your readers, and get on the right side of history. Youâve had 2 years already to figure this out.
Hopefully the public will soon tire of relying on âexpertsâ and simply read the ridiculous âvirus isolationâ studies for themselves. When that happens, this pseudoscience (which is really too generous a word) is finished forever.
Best wishes,
Christine Massey, M.Sc.
Peterborough, Ontario, Canada
Pdf of my Jan. 18, 2022 email to Dr. Mercola:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Open-Letter-to-Dr.-Mercola-January-17-2022.pdf
Connect with Christine Massey, M.Sc.
See related:
156 Responses From 25 Countries: FOI Requests Affirm That No Record of SARS-Cov-2 Isolation Exists Anywhere
Virus Isolation…Is It Real? Andrew Kaufman, MD Responds to Jeremy Hammond
The Non-Existent Virus; an Explosive Interview With Christine Massey
Christine Massey Interviewed by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky: On FOIA Requests & Responses to the Question — Has SARS-CoV-2 Ever Been Isolated? Does the “Virus” Exist?
The Treatments
.jpg){kind=link}