The Spike protein doesn't exist - Dr. Luis Marcelo Martínez


Argentine doctor Luis Marcelo Martínez has read the entire virology literature and is sure that the Spike protein has never existed. He also explains why it's unlikely that a vaccinated person is contagious and suggest to all those who express pseudo-magnetism to avoid taking more doses.

Orwell City offers the subtitled video for you.

"Many people are afraid: and the vaccinated person is contagious? First of all, I don't know. We can't prove it and from the mechanics of biology, I don't see it possible because... Let's see. Let's assume that really the vaccine, the mRNA, gives the instruction... Let's assume this, okay? If they instruct the cell to produce the famous protein S. Guys, think about it. That protein is produced by the cells inside our organism, it is processed, it is processed. And how is it going to be excreted to the outside? In other words, how is it that it arrives intact when you cough it up and the other person catches it and you infect him? In other words, what are they thinking? 

How? How? How? How do many people who are in the line of protein S and the contagion of the vaccinated realize this? I mean, you have to think for two minutes. The cells in your body, which ones would produce protein S? The ones in the immune system? No. No. I mean, all the cells, but mostly the ones that have a high turnover. So what happens to the protein once it's released? It's processed. It's processed. So, can it go outside intact? No, certainly not. And besides all of this has to be absolutely shot down, because I'm going to say in plain English, that given that no coronavirus has ever been isolated, no coronavirus has ever been purified. And it's the truth because to know that you have to go through the entire virological literature. And I did that. That is why I speak as I speak and then I meet Lanka, who comes to ratify everything I had seen.

"We have taken a protein S, we put it inside monkey kidney cells, let's see what we catch. Ah, look! It is ACE2 that we got!" They did a little test by comparing fragments by weight, by mass spectroscopy, not by nucleotide sequence, and by functional analysis of the fragments. I'm talking tough so that those who have to listen can hear me. 

And again for the "checkers", because I have become disgusted and sympathetic to the "checkers", sympathetic because they even deny me personal audios. Gentlemen, they start denying leaked audios. And all the kids that you name today, who I do not even know who they are, I google them and they do not exist. Come to debate if you want to be "checked", take a seat and debate with me and with all my colleagues. Checkers, Chequeado, and AFT Factual and all that bunch of motherfuckers. So bring those guys into a debate. Okay? 

Protein S has never existed. Let's stop fucking around with protein S and contagion to the vaccinated. Now, if a vaccinated person generates some sort of electromagnetic distortion in his environment for some time, some sort of effect in the very near environment could be expected. We strongly recommend to the vaccinated that they become aware of their situation and first of all, try to do as much grounding as possible and then appeal to different tools to try to start purifying. The body is being purified, gentlemen, everyone just relax, you will not remain magnetic forever.

If you have become aware of this, do not take the second dose. Respect your body, do not get vaccinated ever again. And your body will be purified. Don't be afraid, don't be frightened by magnetism. In a moment you can generate some distortion by the electromagnetic field in the near environment and maybe you can. Remember that we are facing unprecedented situations. We do not have the answer to everything. We are deducing and we are reasoning in the most logical way possible. Remember first of all: do not be afraid of anything. Do not be afraid of anything, of anything at all, of anything, because our organism is very strong, very tough. There is no machine with adaptive capacity, malleability, capacity for renewal. Eh... Sophisticated as the human-machine. You have no idea of the natural technology that we are. We marvel at a cell phone: "Look at all the applications it has", "Look at this car, the number of things it has". 

You know what? The number 1 machine in the universe is us. The number 1 machine in the universe, as I say, the best of the best. In some books, it says that we are made in the image and likeness of God. And it is true because if there is someone who is thinking this whole scenario with us, he sent the ultimate work. We are an absolutely perfect machine. I say this as a doctor and as a person who looks in awe at what we are, and why? Because I have seen the whole process from the time we were two separate cells until we formed an egg and until we die."

―Dr. Luis Marcelo Martínez, Genetist.

Average: 10 (1 vote)


Martin's picture

Spike does not exists, virus does not exists... Calm down guys, this is ideology not science... Where do you see some "in silico" virtual reality?

No description available.

google translate

On the virus proof: “Wrong. The virus theory was proven in the early 1900s. "
[from other commentary] For example, if I inject the filtered juice of a diseased plant into a healthy plant, it will also become diseased. By filtering, I can rule out bacterial origin. By diluting it, I can also rule out that it is a toxin. By re-infecting other plants, I can conclude that whatever is being transmitted is multiplying in a plant. The whole thing is called a virus, even without a picture with an electron microscope or genetic analysis. "
You are alluding to the tobacco mosaic virus. The first virus that has supposedly been scientifically proven. The necessary control attempts were clearly NOT made here!
And this attempt to use filtered sap, which you mentioned in one of your comments, to present actual evidence of a virus is simply unscientific.
1.) Control experiments should serve to check the methods used. So you make sure that it is not the methods that are responsible for the result, but a decisive factor, such as some alleged pathogen. If this had been done with the tobacco mosaic virus, one would have had to repeat exactly the same experiment with sap from healthy plants that were not “infected” to see whether the treated plants actually had no symptoms. That was NOT done! Without such controls to conclude that when symptoms occur, some parasite is being transmitted and increased is pure speculation.
One can say that the attempts that were made with the tobacco mosaic virus, and also those that were made with SARS-CoV-2, are not controls, but basically (unintentionally) only served to confirm the initial idea through additional inspection.
In the video "Are there viruses" on Gunnar Kaiser's channel, Dr. Lanka with another biologist who, like you, cites the tobacco mosaic virus and early virology as supposed evidence of the scientifically proven existence of viruses. There Dr. Lanka also that and why the necessary control attempts were not made with the tobacco mosaic virus. [from min. 53:55]
And he recommends work that we can only recommend to you. "On the history of early virus research" by Karlheinz Lüdtke. Can be found freely available as a PDF at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science:
It describes how the original virology refuted itself before the 1950s, e.g. when clean controls in animal experiments proved that the (cruel) procedures caused the symptoms and not some assumed pathogen.
2.) If I claim an alleged parasite - no matter how small it is - as the cause of ailments, I must (logically!) Also prove that this parasite physically exists and that it is actually the cause. Otherwise, any claim is and remains an unfounded interpretation of observations and is no more valuable than the claim that disease is caused by demonic possession.
This means that I first have to systematically rule out other causes of complaints and illnesses through intensive examinations. Especially with SARS-CoV-2 you can see that this was clearly NOT done. Atypical pneumonia can have a number of different causes. Including a lot of physico-chemical causes. In none of the fundamental scientific work on SARS-CoV-2 were such investigations carried out, as we have already mentioned in the video.
Then (if I could actually rule out other causes) I have to isolate the alleged pathogen from the diseased organism, i.e. show that there is an independent, stable structure that can exist outside the (host) body and that does not occur in healthy organisms . And then of course I also have to prove that this pathogen, when it affects a healthy organism, triggers exactly the symptoms that were diagnosed in the originally diseased organism. So NO isolation and biochemical characterization can definitely NOT be dispensed with!
On scientific work: “The essential point is the question of what exactly is a“ proof ”in natural science. Proof is a term from deduction, i.e. the logical derivation from assumed facts (e.g. measured numbers). In science, however, one also uses induction, i.e. I derive a general concept from a series of observations.
[from another comment] "[...] The data situation is always unclear, regardless of the area of ​​natural science. Here someone is confusing science with mathematics or law. "
They accuse us of confusing science with mathematics or law. We, on the other hand, have the impression that you are confusing science with philosophy, as can be seen from many of your arguments. And you are not alone in this. Many critics of the official Corona narrative also make some completely nonsensical statements about scientific principles. For example, that serious science consists of "thesis, antithesis, synthesis". These are purely philosophical terms and principles that have nothing to do with natural science.
And if you argue with the more philosophical question of what is scientific proof at all: natural science must be verifiable for everyone! Logical, comprehensible and verifiable. These are the most important criteria in natural science and the most important prerequisites for scientific proof! Not probabilities, philosophical approaches and interpretations.
A scientist has to document his own procedures very precisely, has to check them by means of clean control tests, and he has to consistently question his own theories and results!
This can also be read in Section 2 of the Charité's statutes, where Mr. Drosten comes from.


Martin's picture

it´s simple, empirical science expriment should be repeatable...proof or disproof, not philosophy... Presence of pathogen in tissue DOES NOT automatically mean, IT MUST trigger or induce disease. This is misinterprtation.




Google translate.



There are no viral spike proteins. It is and will remain a misinterpretation


ACE-2 was found in 2000; ACE-2 is practically absent from the upper airways. In 2003 it was claimed ad hoc, without any evidence, that this enzyme was the receptor for corona viruses in the lungs.


The substrate for this enzyme is a protein, which is formed in high concentrations when the egg cell nests and the placenta is formed, i.e. it plays a role.

This protein was previously interpreted into the model of the corona virus as a spike protein.

In other words: ACE-2 is the receptor to which the “spike protein” attaches.

In 2000 the “ACE-2” receptor was found. When coronaviruses were then claimed in 2003, which have not yet been scientifically proven, the protein that was discovered when docking to the ACE-2 was mistakenly declared as a virus protein, despite the fact that it was in the lungs this receptor does not even occur.


It is only a model, in reality there is a similar protein whose function is not known and the fear that the vaccination could affect this real protein is unjustified, since the immune models together with the cell theory are without exception refuted.

Note : The protein that normally exists in the body, which is passed off as a viral protein, has been changed significantly by “virologists” in the sequence in order to sell it as a viral protein.

In the real nature of humans, however, this does not exist, only a construct is shown.



- Dr. Tipnis – A human homolog of angiotensin-converting enzyme. Cloning and functional expression as a captopril-insensitive carboxypeptidase

-Power plant – entry into the refutation of the virus claim

- Virus misinterpretation – how genome analysis creates fictitious viruses