I stumbled into the work of the Perth Group around 25 years ago. Despite their complete takedown of 'HIV', it never dawned on me to question all of virology. However, there are hints that they questioned virology in general. During their long debate with various HIV protagonists, one tried to trap Eleni by bringing up work done on FIV. She wouldn't have any of it and pushed back hard on it. I remember being kind of stunned as she took apart their so-called evidence for FIV and its supposed transmission.
I have yet to be alerted to any study that demonstrates transmissibility of a "viral infection" after proper controls are in place. In Can You Catch a cold, fully half of ther 204 reviewed studies of "contagion" had null results. A huge percentage of positive results were ;produced by, as I recall, 2 studies, which suggested fraud. The nocebo effect accounts for a lot of so-called positive findings. Virology is a bunch of nonsense: virions never isolated and proven to exist, dogma riddled with contradictions, peddled by science-y cheerleaders with vested interests to defend.
Is it surprising that non-existent "viruses" can't produce findings of "contagion"?
I stumbled into the work of the Perth Group around 25 years ago. Despite their complete takedown of 'HIV', it never dawned on me to question all of virology. However, there are hints that they questioned virology in general. During their long debate with various HIV protagonists, one tried to trap Eleni by bringing up work done on FIV. She wouldn't have any of it and pushed back hard on it. I remember being kind of stunned as she took apart their so-called evidence for FIV and its supposed transmission.
I have yet to be alerted to any study that demonstrates transmissibility of a "viral infection" after proper controls are in place. In Can You Catch a cold, fully half of ther 204 reviewed studies of "contagion" had null results. A huge percentage of positive results were ;produced by, as I recall, 2 studies, which suggested fraud. The nocebo effect accounts for a lot of so-called positive findings. Virology is a bunch of nonsense: virions never isolated and proven to exist, dogma riddled with contradictions, peddled by science-y cheerleaders with vested interests to defend.
Is it surprising that non-existent "viruses" can't produce findings of "contagion"?
Dr Mary’s monkeys baby