The Big Pharma & Deep State Scam About Viruses & The Germ Theory
Written By Philosopher Newport – The Furious One
Could it be possible that the Deep State & Big Pharma have been around since at least the days of John D. Rockefeller?
John D. Rockefeller Sr.
John Davison Rockefeller Sr. (July 8, 1839 – May 23, 1937) was an American business magnate and philanthropist. He has been widely considered the wealthiest American of all time and the richest person in modern history.
His fortune was mainly used to create foundations that had a major effect on medicine, education, and scientific research.
He became one of the first rich, white men to give huge sums of money to Germ Theory-based medical science.
In 1901, he founded the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in New York City.
To help change the minds of other doctors and scientists who did not subscribe to the Germ Theory, John D. Rockefeller gave many millions of dollars to colleges, hospitals, and scientific institutes, and founded a philanthropic front group called the "General Education Board“.
He and Andrew Carnegie funded the work of Abraham Flexner, who wrote and published The Flexner Report. It is a book-length report of medical education in the United States and Canada. It was published in 1910 under the aegis of the Carnegie Foundation. Many aspects of the present-day American medical profession stem from The Flexner Report and its aftermath. The Flexner Report has been criticized for introducing policies that encouraged systemic racism.
The Flexner Report
Along with his adherence to the Germ Theory, Flexner argued that, if not properly trained and treated, the African-Americans posed a health threat to middle and upper-class white people.
He wrote (and I am paraphrasing):
‘The practice of the Negro doctor will be limited to his own race, which in its turn will be cared for better by good Negro doctors rather than by poor white doctors. Not only does the Negro himself suffer from hookworm and tuberculosis; he infects his low class white neighbors with them, precisely as the ignorant and lower class whites infect him. The protection of the entire human race requires that only Negro doctors diagnose & treat the Negroes.
The Negro must be educated not only for his own sake, but for the entire white race. He is, as far as the white human eye can see, never going to be eradicated from the USA.’
When Flexner researched his report, modern Allopathic Toxic Medicine faced vigorous competition from several other kinds of non-toxic, nature-based medicines & medical ideas, including osteopathic medicine, chiropractic medicine, naturopathic medicine and homeopathic medicine.
Flexner clearly doubted the scientific validity of all forms of medicine other than Allopathic Toxic Medicine, claiming any approach to medical treatments that did not advocate the use of toxic or potentially harmful treatments such as synthetic drugs, radiation, invasive surgery, cancer chemotherapies and experimental vaccines, as being equivalent to quackery and fraud.
Medical schools that offered training in various disciplines including chiropractic, naturopathic, and homeopathic medicines, were told either to drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and funding from the likes of Rockefeller & Carnegie.
Most of the alternative medical schools listed in Flexner's report that refused to teach Allopathic Toxic Medicine, were closed.
The Germ Theory
The Germ Theory of disease & illness is the currently accepted scientific theory for many diseases & illnesses. It states that microorganisms known as pathogens or "germs" can lead to disease or sickness. Pathogens supposedly pass from one individual to another, both in humans and animals. These small organisms, too small to see without magnification, allegedly invade humans, animals, and plants.
Their supposed growth and reproduction within their hosts allegedly cause disease & sickness. The "Germ" may refer to not just bacteria but to any type of microorganism, such as fungus, or even disproven non-living pathogens such as “viruses” or “prions”. Diseases supposedly caused by pathogens are called infectious diseases.
Koch’s Postulates
Robert Koch is known for developing four basic criteria (known as Koch’s Postulates) for demonstrating, in a scientifically sound manner, that a disease or illness is caused by a particular germ.
Koch’s Postulates were developed in 1884 as general guidelines to identify germs that could potentially be isolated & purified from the bodily fluids of sick humans or animals or plants .
Here Are The Postulates
#1 -- The germ must be found in abundance in all humans or animals suffering from a disease or illness, but should not be found in healthy humans or animals.
#2 --The germ must be isolated from a diseased or sick human or animal and grown in pure culture – a petri dish culture with nothing in it that could harm or change the culture or germ.
#3 --The cultured germ should cause disease or illness when introduced into a healthy human or animal.
#4 -- The germ must then be isolated from the formerly healthy human or animal who has been made sick or diseased so it can be shown as being identical to the original germ given to them.
To the best of my critical & intensive research, and despite the long-held declarations by mainstream, Big Pharma-funded scientists & doctors, Koch’s Postulates have never been fulfilled. I say this knowing full well that most published, peer-reviewed scientific papers claiming to have discovered a virus or bacteria said to cause an illness or disease, claim in their paper that Koch’s Postulates have been fulfilled.
But if you look at the papers, which are available online at PubMed and the CDC, and you locate the section titled Methodology, you will read that bodily fluid obtained from a sick human or animal has been placed upon a culture of monkey kidney cells to see if the cells will be killed by the bodily fluid. However, the scientists also add bovine serum to the culture. Bovine serum is made from the fetus of a cow. They also add antibiotics, one of which is known to be toxic to kidneys.
When the scientists observe the death of the kidney cells, they see the cells disintegrate into many smaller particles, and they call these particles viruses. They are then supposed to isolate & purify these particles and give them to a healthy human or animal to see what happens. It is anticipated the human or animal will become sick, but the papers do not describe the scientists giving these isolated & purified particles to humans or animals. The papers do not describe any isolation or purification of these particles.
Furthermore, why did the kidney cells die? The scientists claim they died because there was a virus or disease-causing bacteria in the bodily fluid placed onto the kidney cells. And yet, how do they know something in the bovine serum didn’t kill the cells? And how do they know the antibiotics didn’t kill the kidney cells -- especially since one of the antibiotics they use is known to be toxic to kidneys?
Adding bovine serum and antibiotics to the kidney cells means explicitly the culture of kidney cells is no longer PURE. This is a clear violation of Koch’s Postulates #2. How can you prove something in the bodily fluid killed the kidney cells when you have other ingredients that could kill those cells? You are not supposed to use other ingredients in a PURE culture so that, if the cells die, you can safely assume something in the bodily fluids killed those kidney cells.
(BTW » Bacteria do not attack living cells or tissue. They are scavengers and janitors who remove dead cells & tissue.)
The scientists are supposed to use bodily fluid from a sick human or animal and place it onto a PURE cell culture, and if that cell culture dies, then they are supposed to find the virus responsible and separate it from all the ingredients in the cell culture, and this is called isolation.
They are then supposed to give that isolated virus all on its own without any other ingredients to a healthy human or animal and see if that human or animal becomes sick. But the papers do not declare they have done this. This is not something that is supposed to be taken for granted. A scientific paper is supposed to describe every single step of the method.
However, when it comes to virus papers about animals, the scientists do not describe isolating a virus from the cell culture and giving it to a healthy animal. Instead, the papers describe injecting the entire contents of the cell culture into the BRAINS or EYE BALLS or LUNGS of the animals. And so I ask you: If animals supposedly pass viruses or disease-causing bacteria to one another through the air – like at a dog or cat kennel – then how does injecting stuff into their brains or eyeballs or lungs even remotely resemble that type of “natural” transmission?
If you were a scientist, and you believed viruses or disease-causing bacteria spread from humans to humans and animals to animals from coughing or sneezing or barking or meowing or speaking or even just touching one another, then wouldn’t you try an experiment whereby you exposed healthy humans or animals to sick humans or animals by placing them close together in the same room or cage?
Well, it just so happens, reputable scientists, as well as the United States Public Health Service, in conjunction with the United States Navy, tried this experiment numerous times in the first half of the 20th century, and they failed to reproduce any illness or disease. They FAILED to make any healthy human sick by simply exposing them closely to sick humans.
They had sick humans who supposedly had the Spanish Flu cough into the faces of healthy humans. They took snot from sick humans and swabbed the noses, eyes and throats of healthy humans. They even went so far as to INJECT bodily fluids from sick humans into healthy humans, and no healthy humans became sick with any form of flu from those methods.
Rosenau Study 1918 Failure To Transmit Spanish Flu
So can you understand why they changed their procedures from simply exposing healthy humans to sick humans to the method of using cell culture experiments? They could not make healthy humans sick by putting them, without masks on, close to sick humans, less than 6 feet apart, in the same room. They could not make them sick by being coughed into their faces by sick humans. They could not make them sick by smearing snot into their faces from sick humans, nor could they make them sick by injecting them with bodily fluids from sick humans.
So they gave up trying to make healthy humans sick by the supposedly natural ways that humans are said to spread their illnesses & diseases to each other.
As for the cell culture experiments:
They must have tried using a PURE culture with ONLY bodily fluids from sick humans or animals and NO BOVINE SERUM OR ANTIBIOTICS, and they must have observed NO DEATH OF THE CELL CULTURE, so that’s when they started adding bovine serum -- and antibiotics KNOWN TO BE TOXIC TO KIDNEY CELLS -- and that’s when they observed the death of the kidney cells in the IMPURE culture.
But even then, they were supposed to isolate what they thought were viruses or disease-causing bacteria and give only those particles (“germs”) to healthy humans, and yet, their papers do not describe them doing this.
Furthermore, most of the cell culture experiments did not employ any controls. An example of a control would be having one petri dish of pure cell culture that receives bodily fluid from a sick human or animal, and one petri dish of pure cell culture that does NOT receive any bodily fluid from anyone whatsoever.
This is supposed to be done in case the cell culture that received NO BODILY FLUID ends up producing the same results as the cell culture that DID receive bodily fluid. If said result occurred, then how can you scientifically & logically conclude that the bodily fluid killed the cells when the cell culture that DID NOT receive any bodily fluid also produced a petri dish full of dead cells?
When it comes to experiments attempting to prove an animal virus (parvo, rabies, kennel cough, etc.) the experiments ONLY show the scientists injecting healthy animals with the contents of the cell culture (monkey kidney cells, bovine serum & antibiotics) rather than a lone viral or bacterial particle, and they inject that SOUP into the brains or eyeballs or into the lungs of the animals. How does that replicate "natural transmission" by close contact?
These days, in the 21st century, the scientists claim they do not need to isolate the viruses or disease-causing bacteria and give them to healthy humans or animals, but only have to find genetic material, genetic sequences, in the bodily fluid of sick humans or animals. These genetic sequences are supposed to resemble genetic sequences on file from genetic sequences obtained from isolated viruses or disease-causing bacteria in the past, and yet, we can see clearly THEY HAVE NEVER ISOLATED ANY VIRUSES OR DISEASE-CAUSING BACTERIA FROM ANY LIVING CREATURE EVER!
Since they have never isolated any viruses or disease-causing bacteria, then how does it make scientific sense that they have found genetic materials, genetic sequences, that resemble viruses or disease-causing bacteria they have never proven to exist?
Since the scientists have never truly found any viruses or disease-causing bacteria, then what the hell have they been putting into the vaccines? We were told that the vaccines either contain living or dead or partial viruses, and yet, the experiments show us in black & white that no viruses or disease-causing bacteria have ever been found. Not one of the published experiments has ever fulfilled Koch’s Postulates. So what’s in the vaccines?
The scientists were never able to fulfill Koch’s Postulates; they were never able to make healthy humans or animals sick with any isolated viruses or disease-causing bacteria; and so is it any surprise that they decided to say that “advancements in medical science” have rendered Koch’s Postulates unnecessary & meaningless?
Debates About The Existence of Viruses
I have only been able to find a few debates about viruses, and frankly, the debates went on too long – they went beyond a threshold, an unresolved sticking point they should not have crossed. They ignored the fundamental crux of the issue concerning the validity & logical soundness of Koch’s Postulates. They didn’t even argue about the subject. They just glossed over it.
If I had been the referee, I would have established that the parties had reached a stalemate and shut down the debate based on the fact that they did not agree about the validity and irrefutable logical soundness of Koch’s Postulates. The virus-denier subscribes to the Postulates and the virus-advocate claims they are irrelevant. The Postulates are the Gold Standard of proving the existence of a germ that causes illness or disease.
The gist of the Postulates require you to remove a causative agent of illness or disease from the bodily fluid of a sick human or animal and to give that agent to a healthy human or animal which is supposed to make that healthy human or animal sick. If they don’t get sick, then you have not given them a causative agent of sickness.
In a civilized & intelligent society you are required to pass a driving test in order to obtain a driver’s license. The test requires that you stop at a red light and wait for it to turn green before proceeding. If whilst taking your test you run through a red light and run over a mother and her child who are legally crossing the street, you automatically FAIL the test.
So, those who say Koch’s Postulates do not apply to viruses are basically saying that you should not be judged as FAILING THE TEST if you run through a red light and run someone over. They are explicitly saying that if you fail to make someone sick with an isolated virus or disease-causing bacteria, then you have not failed to fulfill the Postulates. They are saying that it is NOT NECESSARY TO MAKE ANYONE SICK IN ORDER TO PROVE THEY HAVE FOUND A GERM THAT MAKES HUMANS OR ANIMALS SICK!
Furthermore, they are saying that because they have demonstrably failed to fulfill the Postulates that the Postulates therefore are irrelevant and should not exist. They are saying that just because they ran through a red light and ran over someone, then the driver’s test should not be required in order to prove they can operate a motor vehicle in a safe manner. They are saying that because the rock they are holding has failed the acid test used to prove whether or not it is gold, then the acid test should not be used as a means of proving whether or not a rock is gold.
The Ethics of Making A Volunteer Sick
I will keep this short. When pharmaceutical companies want to test a new drug for humans, they conduct clinical trials using human volunteers. Those volunteers are required to sign a waiver that they acknowledge the drug may cause “side effects” that are life-threatening, such as severe bleeding or irreversible damage to the liver or kidneys. By signing the waiver they are acknowledging they are participating in the trial with “informed consent”. They are acknowledging that they are volunteering to participate in a potentially dangerous and life-threatening activity.
So, if it is considered legally ethical to participate in potentially life-threatening clinical drug trials, then how is it unethical to participate in experiments regarding illness & disease?
So-Called Sexually Transmitted Diseases:
We have been told for over 100 years that when we are sick or diseased, we spread our germs from our breath or our touch or through sexual activity. We have never been told that we spread our germs by hypodermically injecting each other with our bodily fluids nor with the contents of an IMPURE cell culture.
Scientists have tried to find viruses or disease-causing bacteria in sexual fluids, and yet they have never isolated any virus or disease-causing bacteria from sexual fluids and given ONLY that virus or disease-causing bacteria all on its own to a healthy human who then became sick with a sexually transmitted disease.
As with all other forms of illness & disease, so-called sexual-related diseases have never been scientifically proven to be caused by any virus or disease-causing bacteria. Reputable doctors & scientists have numerous ideas & hypotheses as to the causes of so-called sexual-related diseases, and none of them involve microscopic organisms such as germs or viruses or disease-causing bacteria.
Bacteria
Bacteria have unfairly been given a bad reputation by Big Pharma and the chemical companies that make antibiotics & antibacterial cleansers. They have been given this unjustified bad reputation merely to scare humans into buying & consuming antibiotics & antibacterial cleansers. In short, bacteria are scavengers. They do not attack living cells or tissue. They only eat dead cells or tissue and break them down into their original molecules for either elimination or recycling.
Bacteria do not float in the air nor sit upon surfaces waiting to attack living cells or tissue, nor do they wait to attack dead cells or tissue. It is this author’s best guess that bacteria actually come from within the dead or dying cells & tissue. That’s just how miraculously engineered biological bodies are: They contain their own clean-up & recycling crews. The bacteria are released or generated from the dying or dead cells & tissues themselves.
Can Bacteria Be Problematic?
Bacteria are living organisms and all living organisms eat & poop. It’s just a fact of biological life. And apparently the poop from bacteria can cause inflammation in humans & animals. So, when you hear the term Bacterial Meningitis, bacteria have caused the inflammation but they did not cause the death of the cells or tissue that spawned the bacteria.
The cause of the disease was not the bacteria. In all likelihood a toxin or injury or nutritional deficiency caused the disease which then spawned the bacteria – the clean-up crew – to eliminate or recycle the dead cells or tissue.
Antibiotics:
Since bacteria are the biological body’s way of eliminating or recycling dead cells & tissue, then it makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER to attack the bacteria with antibiotics. Antibiotics mean >> ANTI = AGAINST, and BIO = LIFE, so antibiotics mean AGAINST LIFE, KILLER OF LIFE, KILLER OF LIVING THINGS, and in the case of health, antibiotics mean KILLER OF THE CLEAN-UP CREW.
Yes, of course I am aware of how it seems antibiotics have fixed our sinus “infections” or “sexually transmitted” diseases, but all they have really done is to eliminate the clean-up crew that was causing the inflammation or the rash. As far as I know, the antibiotics have not addressed what caused the death of the cells that spawned the bacteria. The antibiotics have simply interrupted the body’s process of healing itself. All symptoms are an expression of the body’s healing process. When you attack and stop the symptoms, you have interfered with and interrupted the body’s natural healing mechanism.
NEWSFLASH ABOUT HEALTH
It is absolutely preposterous to believe or insist that mankind can figure out all the causes of illness & disease. Mankind did not create the human or animal body. But because Big Pharma wants to sell vaccines & medicines, it has tricked us into believing scientists have it all figured out. And yet nothing could be further from the truth. Mankind will NEVER have it all figured out. Mankind will NEVER figure out what all those microscopic wiggly-squiggly things in our bodily fluids do and don’t do. They will never figure out how those things depend on each other – especially if they remove them from their natural environment to study them!
So the good skeptic may ask: Why would Big Pharma-funded scientists pretend to have found viruses or disease-causing bacteria or genetic materials said to have come from viruses or disease-causing bacteria? Why would they LIE to us? Would the truth ruin Big Pharma? Doesn’t Big Pharma make billions or even trillions of dollars every year by selling vaccines & medicines intended to cure or treat or even prevent illnesses & diseases said to be caused by GERMS?
And the good skeptic may further ask: If there are no viruses or disease-causing bacteria, then why do humans & animals get sick? What makes them ill or diseased? And that’s a VERY smart question, but it is also VERY loaded. The answer is not as simple as the scientifically disproven Germ Theory.
The upshot is: No virus or pathogenic bacteria has ever actually been scientifically proven to exist. Big Pharma has been running this scam of fear-based propaganda funded by John D. Rockefeller since the very early 1900s.
They have psyched us out by using the illusion of illnesses & diseases appearing to be contagious. There are other ideas for the causes of symptoms & illness & diseases besides the Germ Theory. (It is actually a refuted hypothesis and never made it to the status of a theory.)
Many symptoms & diseases seem to be caused by agricultural & industrial toxins & pollution in our environments, toxic medicines & vaccines, insecticides, pesticides, and toxic household cleaners.
Many illnesses & diseases seem to be caused by nutritional deficiencies and psychological trauma & stress, poor diets, and bad lifestyles (not enough exercise, not enough sleep, too much alcohol or smoking, and recreational drugs like heroin & meth, uppers & downers).
If you do not investigate this, dear skeptic, if you do not comprehend the FACT that there are NO viruses or disease-causing bacteria, then the vaccine-scam will continue to harm & kill our children and our animals and our loved ones.
The Spanish Flu of 1918 was not a flu at all. Those 50+ million deaths worldwide were caused by primitive & brutal vaccines against TB & Typhoid.
Could it be possible that mankind has been lied to by Big Pharma since the release of The Flexner Report in 1910?
Sources Used to Write this Essay:
I outright copied and/or modified some passages from these Wikipedia pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Rockefeller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch%27s_postulates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease
I absorbed numerous hours of videos starring: Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, Amandha Vollmer, Dr. Stefan Lanka, Jon Rappoport, and the late, great Liam Scheff.
I read books & published papers by: Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dawn Lester & David Parker, Herbert M. Shelton, and Eleanor McBean.
I read numerous published “virus papers” at PubMed & CDC and the following scientific paper in its entirety: Experiments Upon Volunteers to Determine the Cause and Mode of Spread of Influenza, Boston, November and December, 1918 M. J. Rosenau Treasury Department: United States Public Health Service February, 1921, p. 5 -41
The Big Pharma & Deep State Scam About Viruses & The Germ Theory
Written By Philosopher Newport – The Furious One
Copyright 2022 Alexander T. Newport
List of Those Not Reporting These Facts
I made this presentation especially for the following individuals & video channels who present themselves as members of the “Truther Movement” but still seem unaware of or are otherwise NOT reporting the facts in this presentation:
LT – And We Know
X22 Report
The Mel K Show
Styxhexenhammer
The Corbett Report
SGT Report
Stroppy
Pastor David Scarlett
Prophet Robin D. Bullock
OAN -- One America News
Just Informed Talk
Tracy Beanz
John Solomon -- Just The News
The David Knight Show
Paul Joseph Watson
Veritas Visuals
Dave Cullen -- Computing Forever
Mark Dice
Nicholas Veniamin
Scott Adam Says
Dr. Suzanne Humphries
David Nino Rodriguez
FOR ALL YOU TLDR CROWD > > The Big Pharma & Deep State Scam About Viruses & The Germ Theory