How the theory of the deadly microbes seized power in medicine and society

Undefined
0
No votes yet
How the theory of the deadly microbes seized power in medicine and society 
 
The fact that the microbe-killer theory has been able to establish itself widely over the last hundred years would not have been possible in this way without deception and fraud in research, without corruption in the government health authorities, without the lavish money of the upstart pharmaceutical companies and, not to forget, without the supporting unscrupulous media.
 
This article is another fact-based piece of the puzzle to finally usher in the necessary paradigm shift in medicine that is long overdue.
 
deepL translate:
 
———-
 
How the theory of deadly microbes took power in medicine and society
23 July 2020
 
deepL translate
 
 
The medical theories about bacilli and viruses as external pathogens of various infectious diseases have been afflicted with serious scientific-methodological deficiencies from the very beginning.1 
Hypotheses very quickly became dogmatic truths without really being proven to date. However, addiction to fame, money and the interests of the emerging pharmaceutical industry did not make researchers shy away from deception in order to give general validity to their enemy-image theories of the deadly microbes that attack humans and animals like swarms of locusts.
 
Scientific fraud was already in the beginning 
 
Even the founders of medical microbiology, Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, could not resist fraudulent machinations, as Torsten Engelbrecht and Dr. Claus Köhnlein describe in their book "Virus-Wahn". Pasteur was "not a role model with a divinely clean slate, but a researcher addicted to rest, who started from false basic assumptions and fooled the whole world with 'his two most important experiments', as the scientific journal The Lancet, for example, wrote in 2004." (S. 47)
 
In an almost fanatical hatred of microbes, Pasteur started from the belief that bacteria flying through the air were responsible for all kinds of diseases and that there were no bacteria in a healthy body, i.e. that it was germ-free. But the organism relies on many bacteria and Pasteur's claim has long been disproved by experiments with animals that were kept from birth in microbe-free cages with sterile food, whereupon they all died after a few days.
 
"Moreover, 'Tricky Louis' had deliberately lied even in his vaccination experiments, which had seen him ascend to the Olympus of the research gods." For example, he had claimed to have successfully vaccinated sheep against anthrax. But the process was not publicly documented, and the vaccine mixture, as it later turned out, he had secretly copied from fellow researcher Jean-Joseph Toussaint, whose career he had previously ruined through public verbal attacks, and sold it as his own great discovery.
He also presented a rabies vaccine after supposedly successful, in reality unscientific experiments, amid much praise, which later turned out to be unsuitable and which "may have triggered rabies rather than prevented it", according to science historian Horace Judson.
 
"Robert Koch was also, in truth, an enterprising swindler. Thus, in 1890, at the 10th International Medical Congress in Berlin, the microbe hunter 'with an oversized ego' announced full-bodiedly that he had developed a miracle cure for tuberculosis. And in the Deutsche Medizinische Wochenzeitschrift he went even further: Experiments on guinea pigs had proved that it was possible to 'bring the disease to a complete standstill without harming the body in any other way'. That sounded like a miracle."
 
 
And so the reaction of the world's public to the miracle drug "tuberculin" was so overwhelming that sick people from all over the world went on pilgrimages to Berlin, Koch's place of work, to the pulmonary sanatoriums that were springing up like mushrooms. But the tuberculin failed catastrophically. "Long-term cures did not occur, instead one hearse after another pulled up in front of the lung sanatoriums."
Everyone on whom the concoction had previously been tested or who received it as a supposed cure reacted with chills and high fever or death. 
"Robert Koch was forced to reveal the composition of his secret remedy, and it turned out that he himself did not know exactly what it contained. It was an extract of tubercle bacilli in glycerine; dead tubercle bacilli could also be detected." (Wikipedia) And critics of Koch, including Rudolf Virchow, also scientifically proved that tuberculin was not capable of stopping tuberculosis, rather it was feared that it made the disease worse. "Koch was asked to produce evidence for his famous guinea pig experiments - but he could not," the authors say.
 
According to experts such as the Heidelberg historian Chr. Gradmann, Koch had skilfully orchestrated the market launch of tuberculin and prepared it long in advance. His publication in the Deutsche Medizinische Wochenzeitschrift (German Medical Weekly) was simultaneously flanked with extremely positive reports on the experiences of his confidants. "The expected profit was calculated by the professor of a 'daily production of 500 portions of tuberculin at 4.5 million marks annually'." In 1891 Koch became director of the newly founded Royal Prussian Institute for Infectious Diseases, now the Robert Koch Institute. In 1905, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of the bacillus believed to cause tuberculosis.
 
Typically, Koch himself never admitted that his tuberculin was a failure. And Farbwerke Höchst, which was looking for a low-cost entry into pharmaceutical research, had entered into tuberculin production, with Koch's student Libbertz supervising production. This had driven the close cooperation of Koch's institute with the emerging pharmaceutical industry.
 
Fraud runs through the wider history of science. "For example, as a 2005 survey of scientists published in the journal 'Nature' found, a third of researchers admitted they would not shy away from fraudulent activities, such as simply brushing aside data that did not suit them."
"Just as in politics and business, so in research we are bombarded, soaked and tormented with fraud," the authors quote renowned historian of science Horace Judson, followed by the anti-corruption organisation Transparency International in its 2006 annual report: "Globally, corruption exists at all levels of health care from the Ministry of Health to the patient - and there is little limit to the criminal imagination."
 
Problem of lack of openness and verifiability
 
Trust in science thrives on openness and the possibility that other researchers can verify the results presented. But much is done in secret, without independent checks and verifications, so that the temptations to cheat are very great. The "community of science", writes Horace Judson, is "animated by the belief that it is entitled to lavish government funding for research - and at the same time to be exempt from public scrutiny."  Established research, the authors conclude, has thus actually managed to largely seal off its scientific edifice.
 
"It starts with the fact that ultimately no one is able to look directly over the shoulders of the researchers as they work and see whether the data is being recorded in an honest way. So you just have to trust that they are being truthful."
And virtually no one still bothers to check the data and results presented by fellow researchers for their truthfulness. Such quality checks are equated with a waste of time and money and are therefore not funded. Instead, they are fully occupied with chasing the new and thus that which promises high profits. Especially nowadays, many experiments are so complicated that they cannot be reproduced and thus checked exactly.
 
While one might think that the so-called peer review system largely weeds out fraud. It is still commonly regarded as a sacred pillar of the scientific temple, promising adherence to quality standards. But in the form in which this peer reviewing has been practised for decades, the worm is in it. All you have to do is understand how it works: experts (peers), who remain anonymous, review the applications for research projects and articles submitted by their scientific competitors - and then decide whether the applications are granted or the articles are printed in a scientific journal. There are said to be around 50,000 such 'peer-reviewed journals' now, and all the well-known journals such as Nature, Science, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, The Lancet etc. are 'peer-reviewed'."
 
But Richard Smith, chief executive of the British Medical Journal from 1991 to 2004, said of this from his experience: "Peer reviewing is easy to abuse, ineffective at exposing gross flaws and almost useless at exposing fraud."
No wonder, then, that all the fraud cases described by the historian of science Judson in his 2004 book "The Great Betrayal. Fraud in Science", published in 2004, were not uncovered by the peer review system at all, but by pure chance.
 
The monocausal scheme of thought
 
The authors of "Virus Delusion" state that at the end of the 19th century, when Pasteur and Koch became celebrities despite their frauds, the general public hardly had a chance to resist the microbe propaganda. The medical authorities, who adhered too firmly to the simple theory of microbes as mortal enemies, together with the emerging pharmaceutical industry, held the reins of power and public opinion. This set the decisive course for the establishment of experimental animal medicine with the aim of developing (alleged) miracle pills (or injections) specifically against very specific diseases.
 
From then on, attempts were made to squeeze just about everything into the monocausal model of "one disease - one pathogen - one (chemical) miracle cure". Many blatant errors and failures had to be admitted, but the course was held steadfastly. "For example, for a long time, the prevailing medical science claimed with verve that diseases such as scurvy (seafarers' disease), pellagra (rough skin) or beriberi (miners' and prisoners' disease) were diseases caused by germs. Until orthodoxy finally had to grudgingly admit that vitamin deficiency was the real cause."
 
In the case of beriberi, a degenerative nerve disease, the turning point came only after a few decades, when in 1911 it was possible to isolate vitamin B1 (thiamine), which is mainly lacking in refined foods such as white rice. Robert M. Williams, one of the discoverers of thiamine, wrote that through the work of Pasteur and Koch, "all medical men became so fascinated with the idea of (microbial) infections as the cause of disease that it soon became virtually an axiom (incontrovertible truth) that disease could have no other cause (than microbes)". This focus of the medical profession on infections as the cause of disease was undoubtedly responsible for the fact that nutrition was not considered as a possible cause of beriberi."
 
Even in the 1950s, the monocausal microbial theory had little support. One of the most important medical authorities at the time, Max von Pettenkofer (1818-1901), still sought to grasp things in their entirety and always included various possible causes of disease in his considerations, including individual lifestyle and social aspects. The simple monocausal model of thinking of the microbe theorists seemed to him to be completely out of touch with reality.
Thus, he energetically intervened in the discussion about the fight against cholera, which became so typical in the 19th century in countries with rapidly growing industrialisation. He took the same standpoint as the famous doctor Francois Magendie (1783-1855): cholera was neither imported nor contagious, but caused by excessive filth resulting from the most catastrophic living conditions. Accordingly, in industrial centres like London, the poorest neighbourhoods were usually the most affected by cholera.
 
"Von Pettenkofer identified drinking water as the main cause, which, because it lacked sewage treatment plants, was often so visibly and violently contaminated that people regularly complained about the stench and discolouration of the cloaca, which was riddled with industrial chemicals and excrement. And so studies also showed that there were hardly any, if any, cholera cases in the households that received connections with clean water. Yet von Pettenkofer did not deny the presence of microbes in this cesspool at all; rather, he argued that these organisms could contribute to the course of the disease, but only if they were given the breeding ground to thrive."
 
But even von Pettenkofer's authority could not ultimately prevent the supporters of the microbe theory from taking the reins at the end of the 19th century and also pressing cholera into their monocausal explanatory assertion. Thus, the bacterium "Vibrio Cholerae" or its excretions were labelled the sole culprit and the measures taken in accordance with this microbial theory were wrongly given the medal for having suppressed cholera. "But in fact the credit should have gone to the improvement in living conditions, which has progressed markedly since the mid-19th century."
 
Clustering
 
After World War II, tuberculosis, measles, diphtheria or pneumonia no longer caused mass deaths in industrialised countries like the USA. According to the authors, this became a huge problem for institutions such as the US CDC, which corresponds to the RKI in Germany, as it threatened to become superfluous. In 1949, it was even to be dissolved. But the CDC did not want to stand idly by and went in search of epidemics. "But how do you find epidemics where there simply aren't any? You do 'clustering'."
 
This is the term used to describe an analysis to discover similarity structures. So you look around and settle for finding a few people who have the same or similar disease symptoms. "This is quite sufficient for virus searchers to declare an imminent epidemic. It also does not matter whether the patients had ever been in contact with each other in any way, or whether they had become ill in intervals of weeks or even months. This makes it clear that these clusters cannot provide conclusive evidence or proof of an existing or impending microbial epidemic. Especially since the fact that some people have the same clinical picture need not mean at all that a virus is at work." Assuming that viruses could be detected at all, which has not been done to date.
 
Those affected could have the same disease-causing diet, have to deal with the same disease-causing environmental conditions (chemical toxins, etc.) and much more. And even if one were to assume that an infectious germ is at work, one could at best say that a certain group of people is susceptible to a certain disease, while many others remain healthy. Therefore, epidemics would simply not occur in affluent societies because they offer conditions (sufficient food, clean drinking water, etc.) that enable the vast majority of people to keep their immune systems so fit that such diseases and microbes in their wake simply do not stand a chance.
 
Clustering is completely unsuitable for detecting epidemics. According to the authors, this was already evident in the search for the causes of scurvy, beriberi and pellagra at the beginning of the 20th century, where clustering was applied in a completely misleading way.
They cite the HIV=AIDS dogma as the most important example from more recent times, because it laid the foundation for the total Corona/COVID-19 delusion. In the early 1980s, they say, attempts were made to create a viral epidemic out of a few patients who showed similar symptoms of the disease after they had all lived an immune-destroying lifestyle for years. We will come back to this in more detail in another article. In any case, CDC official Bruce Evatt admitted, the CDC had gone public with statements "for which there was almost no evidence - it was conjecture rather than evidence. We had no evidence that an infectious (AIDS) agent was involved." (In "Virus Delusion" p. 57)
 
In 1995, the CDC raised the alarm about an impending Ebola virus pandemic. With the help of the cluster method, some cases of fever patients were sorted out in Kikwit, a town in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and this was declared an outbreak of Ebola. The US Time magazine had shown spectacular pictures of "CDC detectives" in germ-impermeable spacesuits and colourful photos supposedly showing the dangerous pathogen. But "a publication in which the Ebola virus is characterised (with its complete genetic material and viral envelope) and shown photographed under an electron microscope still cannot be found."
 
In the current Corona hype, the pithy Bavarian prince Söder also revealed his knowledge of the cluster method. On 6.7.2020, he said by way of justification not to abolish the mask requirement (against the non-existent virus) under any circumstances. As before, he said, the only strategy is to "test extensively to quickly identify regional clusters and then dry up chains of infection." (here from min. 43) It is so utterly nonsensical and ridiculous, if it were not so tragically serious for society.
 
For example polio
 
The so-called polio only appeared in the 19th century in the course of industrialisation and only spread like bushfire in the first half of the 20th century in the industrialised West - but not in the developing countries. As with most diseases, various factors are possible causes. Some experts, the authors describe, see one factor in the high consumption of refined foods such as granulated sugar. Others cite mass vaccination, and indeed paralysis has often occurred on the side of the body that was vaccinated. Also, the declining number of polio cases increased dramatically in the 1940s after mass vaccination against diphtheria and whooping cough.
 
But negative environmental influences such as poisoning from industrial and agricultural pollution are particularly pressing. Toxic heavy metals such as lead, arsenic or mercury were suspected of causing polio early on. "And the first accumulation of polio cases occurred in Sweden in 1887 - 13 years after the invention of the nerve agent DDT in Germany and 14 years after the invention of the first mechanical atomiser, which sprayed a mixture of water, paraffin, soap and arsenic on crops.
Barely ten years earlier, the neuropathologist Alfred Vulpian substantiated the poisoning thesis, as he found that dogs that had been poisoned with lead suffered from the same symptoms as human polio victims. While the Russian Popov showed in 1883 that the same paralysis symptoms could also be produced with arsenic - study results that should have shaken up the world, considering that the arsenic-based pesticide Paris Green had been widely used in agriculture since 1870 to fight 'pests' such as the moth caterpillar."
 
But instead of banning it, it was replaced in Massachusetts in 1892, for example, by the even more toxic pesticide lead arsenate. And only two years later, the first recorded polio epidemic occurred there and Dr. Charles Caverly, who led the investigation, stated that the cause was more likely to be a toxin and less likely to be a virus: "Almost certainly this is not a contagious disease."
Nevertheless, Lead Arsenate had become the most important pesticide in fruit cultivation in the industrialised world within a short time. In 1907, calcium arsenate was added to the list in Massachusetts, where it was used in cotton fields and factories. Months later, 69 healthy children suffered from paralysis.
But the microbe hunters, in their narrow-minded tunnel vision, wanted to know nothing of all this and instead set out to find a responsible virus.
 
"The foundation for the theory of the polio virus was laid in 1908 by two scientists working in Austria, Karl Landsteiner and Erwin Popper, with experiments that the WHO still calls one of the 'milestones in the eradication of polio'." However, a renewed polio epidemic in the same year, again involving toxic pesticides, did not lead to following up the evidence. The medical authorities, thinking only in chemical terms, conversely even used the pesticides as a means of still administering it to children suffering from paralysis symptoms to alleviate the poisoning.
 
And in order to prove the pathogenic effect of the imaginary virus, the authors say, they proceeded to feed diseased parts of the spinal cord of paralysed patients to monkeys and other animals or to inject them into the extremities, abdomen or brain. A few became paralysed, others died, many fell ill elsewhere or remained healthy. - But this "gruel" can absolutely not be called a scientifically isolated virus, apart from the fact that nobody could have seen a virus at all, because the electron microscope, with which it could only be made visible according to today's opinion, was only invented in 1931.
"And even as late as 1948, it was still not known 'how the polio virus enters man,' as expert John Paul of Yale University stated at an international poliomyelitis congress in New York City." (S. 62)
 
Although everything pointed against polio being a contagious viral disease, these studies became the starting point of a decades-long battle focused exclusively on an imaginary polio virus. "And where the virus hunters worked, the vaccine manufacturers were not far behind." And despite evidence that the pamphlet produced paralysis in monkeys not by mouth but only by injection into the brain, and despite evidence that no animal gets the disease from another, so no virus causes infection - the virus and vaccine hunters did not dignify anything outside their narrow virus path with so much as a glance. Researcher Jonas Salk announced in the mid-20th century that he had found the polio virus and a vaccine that would defeat it, which was hailed in the US as one of the greatest discoveries of the 20th century.
 
But the polio vaccine had already caused severe paralysis in experiments with monkeys. And children who were vaccinated also developed symptoms of polio in increasing numbers. Finally, experts in the USA stated in one region that only children vaccinated against polio contracted polio. In nine out of ten cases, the paralysis occurred in the arm into which the vaccine had been injected.
"On 8 May 1955, the US government stopped all vaccine production. Shortly afterwards, another 2,000 cases of polio were reported in Boston, where thousands had been vaccinated. In 'vaccinated' New York, the number of polio cases doubled. In Rhode Island and Wisconsin, it actually quintupled."
Wikipedia says the Salk vaccine "had an inadequate effect, however." This is not only trivialising, but deliberately distorting the truth.
 
In any case, the Salk vaccine was not the big winner of the supposed polio virus. According to the statistics, by 1953, when the vaccine was introduced, the number of polio victims had already fallen drastically on its own, by 47% in the USA and 55% in England. Nor is it the vaccine, which was later defused, that will have brought about the further sharp decline in polio, but rather the successive bans on the highly toxic pesticides, of which DDT was one. But this cannot be elaborated on here. (See p. 67 f. in "Virus Delusion".)
 
 
Conclusion
 
The outlined fundamental undesirable development in modern medicine is based on the adoption of monocausal thinking from inorganic nature, where it is justified, into the human living organism. This was favoured by a materialistic thinking that can only see the cause of physical diseases in the influence of again physically material things, even if they are so small that they are no longer even perceptible. But here one leaves the ground of exact science and rises into the windy air of scientifically disguised speculation.2
But even if viruses were perceptible in the same way as bacilli and fungi, there is no scientifically exact proof that they are the pathogen and cause of infectious diseases. This is only conjecture and assertion. The simultaneous occurrence of harmful microbes with certain diseases rather shows that they need the breeding ground of the disease in order to be able to develop, i.e. that these are conversely causative for the occurrence of these microbes. Only this clears the way. To focus on the actual causes of disease.
 
The fact that the microbe-killer theory has been able to establish itself on a broad scale over the last hundred years would not have been possible in this way without deception and fraud in research, without corruption in the state health authorities, without the lavish money of the up-and-coming pharmaceutical companies and, not to be forgotten, without the supporting unscrupulous media.
Even virus researcher Luc Montagnier fears "that the scientific community is increasingly losing public trust because of its corrupt entanglements with government and corporate interests." These corrupt spheres would "hide scientific truths from the public whenever they might run counter to economic interests."
 
It is often countered that the criticised one-dimensional microbiological model of thought has, after all, achieved great healing successes. But what is the overall picture? According to relevant studies, the authors of "Virus Delusion" say, "the whole thing goes so far that, for example, the American 'health' industry with its pill mania is responsible for around 800,000 deaths a year - more than any disease (including cancer and heart attacks). And in Germany, too, an estimated ten thousand die from mistreatment and the wrong use of medication. 'In the US and Europe, prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer,' says Peter C. Gotzsche, professor of medicine and co-founder of the prestigious Cochrane Corporation." (S. 15)
 
What kind of medicine is this?