Have “Numerous Controlled Transmission Studies” Proven Viral Contagion? The claim that they have is often repeated, but when scrutinized, many of the most-cited studies fall short of meeting rigorous scientific standards for proving viral transmission.
· The U.S. Navy and Public Health Service conducted multiple experiments trying to transmit influenza:
o Healthy volunteers were exposed to mucus, breath, and even injected blood of flu victims.
o Not one case of illness was successfully induced, even with close contact.
· These studies failed to prove human-to-human transmission, despite their best efforts. This is largely ignored today.
· Much of what is labeled “transmission proof” involves:
o PCR tests (which detect genetic material—not infectious particles)
o Animal studies with forced inoculation (intranasal drops, injection into lungs—not natural exposure)
o Computer simulations and contact-tracing assumptions.
Problem:
No modern study has demonstrated clean, reproducible infection from a purified, isolated virus introduced naturally (e.g., via breath or contact) in humans.
Even studies in animals (e.g., ferrets, hamsters) involve:
· Use of lab-enhanced viral suspensions
· Additives (e.g., trypsin)
· Cell cultures that do not mimic real-world conditions.
These are proxy methods, not proof of natural airborne contagion.
What About Koch’s Postulates?
Koch's postulates were the gold standard for proving causality between a pathogen and disease. Here's a refresher:
Koch’s Postulate | Challenge with Viruses |
1. Pathogen must be found in all cases | SARS-CoV-2 detected via PCR, not isolated from every sick person |
2. Must be isolated and grown in pure culture | Viruses aren’t grown in pure culture—they require host cells |
3. Must cause disease when introduced to healthy host | Ethical limits prevent this in humans; animal proxies are flawed |
4. Re-isolated and shown to be same | Re-isolation often based on PCR—not full virus particles |
Modern virology claims to have “updated” these postulates using molecular biology, but this introduces new issues:
· PCR detects snippets of RNA, not whole viruses.
· Genetic sequences are often assembled in silico (digitally) rather than from whole purified virions.
· No visual confirmation of isolated, infectious SARS-CoV-2 presented in studies meeting all isolation criteria without contamination.
To truly prove a virus causes disease via natural transmission, you would need:
1. Purified virus (not cultured with antibiotics, trypsin, monkey cells, or genetic guesswork)
2. Introduced to a healthy host via natural means (e.g., breathing, skin contact)
3. Induction of identical symptoms
4. Re-isolation of the same virus from the sick host
5. Consistent reproduction of results across multiple independent trials
This standard has not been met for SARS-CoV-2, influenza, or HIV. Instead, what is called “proof” often relies on synthetic gene sequences, contaminated cultures, and circular logic (“we assume it’s contagious because people got sick”).
· People get sick, yes—but is it transmission of a germ, or shared exposure to toxins, fear, EMFs, poor air, or bad food?
· Illness often spreads in families or cities, but so do environmental factors.
· Could what we label "flu season" be seasonal detox cycles triggered by temperature, stress, and nutrient deficiencies?
Terrain theorists argue: When you clean the terrain, illness disappears—even when surrounded by the “sick.”
So when public health officials say:
“Controlled studies prove viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and influenza are contagious…”
They are typically referring to:
· Synthetic experiments
· Non-natural exposure methods
· PCR-based correlations, not direct causation
When rigorously examined, these do not meet the burden of proof for demonstrating viral contagion in real-world, human-to-human contact.
caring is sharing
Comments
Post a Comment