Time and again we are asked whether phage therapy can really work.
In a nutshell: Phages cannot cause negative effects in natural bacteria that have just been isolated from their natural environment, i.e. they cannot destroy them. That is why phage therapy does not work.
The only reason it is often said to have a better therapeutic effect is that the procedure does not poison, but offers bioavailable proteins and nucleic acids. Accordingly, it is not the phages that provide positive effects.
From 1952, phages, the supposed viruses of bacteria, were the godfather for introducing the idea of disease-causing viruses to humans.
The source for the idea of a genetic virus in humans, animals and plants, which started to develop from 1953 onwards, were the so-called bacteria-eaters, called (bacterio)phages, which had drawn the attention of scientists since 1915. From 1938 on, when commercially available electron microscopes were applied in research, these phages could be photographed, isolated as whole particles and all their components could be biochemically determined and characterised. This is real, and cannot be contested. To isolate them, i.e. concentrate the particles and separate them from all other components (=isolation), to photograph them immediately in the isolated state and to biochemically characterise them all in one go – this, however, has never happened with the alleged viruses of humans, animals and plants because these do not exist. The scientists researching bacteria and phages, who worked with actual existing structures, provided a model as to what human, animal and plant viruses could look like. However, the “phage experts” have overlooked by their misinterpre- tation of phages as bacteria eaters that the phenomenon of the formation of these particles is caused by the extreme inbreeding of bacteria. This effect, i.e. the formation and release of phages (bacteria eaters, aka bacteria viruses), doesn’t happen amongst pure bacteria, freshly extracted from an organism or the environment. When their nutri- ents are withdrawn slowly or their living conditions become impossible, normal bacteria – that is: bacteria which are not grown in the lab – create the known survival forms, the spores, which can survive for a long time or even “eternally”. From spores, new bacteria appear as soon as the living con- ditions improve. However, isolated bacteria, when grown in the lab, lose all characteristics and abilities. Many of them do not perish au- tomatically through this in-breeding, but rather turn sudden- ly and completely into small particles, which in the “good versus evil” theory perspective have been misinterpreted as bacteria-eaters. In reality, bacteria originate from these exact “phages” and they turn back again into these life forms when the living conditions are no longer available. Günther Enderlein (1827–1968) described exactly these processes more than a cen- tury ago: how bacteria appear from invisible structures, their development into more complex forms and back again. That is why Enderlein did not agree with the cell theory, according to which life appears from cells and is organised at cellular level.8 As a young student, I myself isolated such a “phage” structure from a sea algae. and believed at that time to have discovered the first harmless virus, the first stable “virus host system”.9
The idea, furthermore, that bacteria exist as single viable or- ganisms, which can exist alone without any other life forms, is incorrect. In isolated form, they automatically die off after some time. This never occurred to the scientists, because after a successful “isolation” of a bacterium, a part of it is frozen and can be worked with in the lab decades later. The idea of bacteria being living independent structures which can survive by themselves is a laboratory artefact, a misin- terpretation. Thus, the claim that is made on the basis of that myth, that bacteria are immortal, is therefore untrue. Bacteria are im- mortal only in symbiosis with a huge number of other bacte- ria, fungi and probably many more unknown life forms which are difficult to characterise, such as for example the amoeba. Amoebae, bacteria and fungi form spores as soon as their living environment disappears and re-emerge once the liv- ing conditions return. If one compares that with humans, we have the same perspective: without a living environment, from and with which we live, nothing can exist. However, these discoveries go much deeper. not only the entire species concept is dissolving, but also the idea and the claim about the alleged existence of dead matter. observations and conclusions about a living “active matter” (as physicists call it) are dismissed as unscientific vitalism. There is considerable ev- idence, however, that all those elements which the “dominant opinion” in “science” does not consider as being alive, actual- ly originate and develop from the membrane of water, i.e. the “Ursubstanz”10, or primordial source of life. These elements then create the nucleic acids, and around the nucleic acids they create the biological life in the form of amoebae, bacte- ria, tardigrades and ever-more complex life forms. We have two distinct confirmations on this perspective. One of them can be observed by every person for himself as well as for other peo- ple, i.e. that biological life in the form of our body is actually a materialisation of the elements of an existing conscience. We can name them and we know the exact way in which our organs and psyche interact and influence each other through informa- tion. It is known, for instance, that a single word can either do damage or solve a conflict. We can verify all these aspects be- cause they are predictable. Thus, the three criteria of scientific research are fulfilled.11 This is important, because these find- ings and the knowledge on how they relate to each other free us from fear as well as from the fear-inducing “good versus evil” mentality and what is even more important: the sick-making behavioural patterns derived from it. These revealing scientific discoveries clarify as well the processes of disease, healing, the “healing crisis”, the suspended healing and the phenomenon of subsequent diseases (aka the old concept of “contagion”). Virus, it’s time to go.12"
“There is a truth to this natural world, that does not say that there are not many ways of living and getting or achieving certain goals in life. All it takes is you need to have and open heart ( and mind to be able to see beyond the falsehoods of a material reality that has been sold as truth for millennia- goes back even 2500 years ago with the fabrication of the atom theory .)
And most critics and alternative circles are also fooling themselves and the public, just the opposite side of the same coin as use the same false concepts .
We all have gone through the indoctrination in BS-ology via mass schooling .
Most people cannot think outside the brainwashing that goes back centuries, a manipulated material understanding of our biology / reality that has become self-destructive through the medicalisation of life and the delusion of merging man with machines eg.neuralink, transhumanism)
“ A thirst for profit and its fatal consequences.
The consequences of our money system’s inherent compulsion to even more growth, to permanent growth even, which generates cyclical catastrophes and brings about
ever more powerful winners and simultaneously a constantly increasing impoverishment and suffering, is interpreted by all the people involved as proof for an independent principle of evil, because these people don’t know the mathematically determined, tenacious inherent mechanisms of the money system.
It appears that the people on the winning side, who are ethically correct, regard the mathematically obligatory generated profit as evidence of their godliness and exceptionality.
This was not just the basis for Manichaeism (Mani was the Babylonian founder of this religion, whose followers are called Manichaens), but has always been the driving force of the dangerous aspects and effects of industrialisation, as Max Weber and others discovered.”
Comments
Corpop
February 15, 2023 - 7:07pm
Permalink
Better success with phage therapy ?
Better success with phage therapy ?
Time and again we are asked whether phage therapy can really work.
In a nutshell:
Phages cannot cause negative effects in natural bacteria that have just been isolated from their natural environment, i.e. they cannot destroy them. That is why phage therapy does not work.
The only reason it is often said to have a better therapeutic effect is that the procedure does not poison, but offers bioavailable proteins and nucleic acids. Accordingly, it is not the phages that provide positive effects.
From 1952, phages, the supposed viruses of bacteria, were the godfather for introducing the idea of disease-causing viruses to humans.
➖➖➖
-NL Contact: @KnowledgeNewThought
-Subscribe channel
Source, deepL translate:
https://t.me/NextLevelOriginal/137
------
"The so-called bacteria-eaters
The source for the idea of a genetic virus in humans, animals and plants, which started to develop from 1953 onwards, were the so-called bacteria-eaters, called (bacterio)phages, which had drawn the attention of scientists since 1915. From 1938 on, when commercially available electron microscopes were applied in research, these phages could be photographed, isolated as whole particles and all their components could be biochemically determined and characterised. This is real, and cannot be contested. To isolate them, i.e. concentrate the particles and separate them from all other components (=isolation), to photograph them immediately in the isolated state and to biochemically characterise them all in one go – this, however, has never happened with the alleged viruses of humans, animals and plants because these do not exist.
The scientists researching bacteria and phages, who worked with actual existing structures, provided a model as to what human, animal and plant viruses could look like. However, the “phage experts” have overlooked by their misinterpre- tation of phages as bacteria eaters that the phenomenon of the formation of these particles is caused by the extreme inbreeding of bacteria. This effect, i.e. the formation and release of phages (bacteria eaters, aka bacteria viruses), doesn’t happen amongst pure bacteria, freshly extracted from an organism or the environment. When their nutri- ents are withdrawn slowly or their living conditions become impossible, normal bacteria – that is: bacteria which are not grown in the lab – create the known survival forms, the spores, which can survive for a long time or even “eternally”. From spores, new bacteria appear as soon as the living con- ditions improve.
However, isolated bacteria, when grown in the lab, lose all characteristics and abilities. Many of them do not perish au- tomatically through this in-breeding, but rather turn sudden- ly and completely into small particles, which in the “good versus evil” theory perspective have been misinterpreted as bacteria-eaters. In reality, bacteria originate from these exact “phages” and they turn back again into these life forms when the living conditions are no longer available. Günther Enderlein (1827–1968) described exactly these processes more than a cen- tury ago: how bacteria appear from invisible structures, their development into more complex forms and back again. That is why Enderlein did not agree with the cell theory, according to which life appears from cells and is organised at cellular level.8 As a young student, I myself isolated such a “phage” structure from a sea algae. and believed at that time to have discovered the first harmless virus, the first stable “virus host system”.9
The idea, furthermore, that bacteria exist as single viable or- ganisms, which can exist alone without any other life forms, is incorrect. In isolated form, they automatically die off after some time. This never occurred to the scientists, because after a successful “isolation” of a bacterium, a part of it is frozen and can be worked with in the lab decades later. The idea of bacteria being living independent structures which can survive by themselves is a laboratory artefact, a misin- terpretation.
Thus, the claim that is made on the basis of that myth, that bacteria are immortal, is therefore untrue. Bacteria are im- mortal only in symbiosis with a huge number of other bacte- ria, fungi and probably many more unknown life forms which are difficult to characterise, such as for example the amoeba. Amoebae, bacteria and fungi form spores as soon as their living environment disappears and re-emerge once the liv- ing conditions return. If one compares that with humans, we have the same perspective: without a living environment, from and with which we live, nothing can exist.
However, these discoveries go much deeper. not only the entire species concept is dissolving, but also the idea and the claim about the alleged existence of dead matter. observations and conclusions about a living “active matter” (as physicists call it) are dismissed as unscientific vitalism. There is considerable ev- idence, however, that all those elements which the “dominant opinion” in “science” does not consider as being alive, actual- ly originate and develop from the membrane of water, i.e. the “Ursubstanz”10, or primordial source of life. These elements then create the nucleic acids, and around the nucleic acids they create the biological life in the form of amoebae, bacte- ria, tardigrades and ever-more complex life forms. We have two distinct confirmations on this perspective. One of them can be observed by every person for himself as well as for other peo- ple, i.e. that biological life in the form of our body is actually a materialisation of the elements of an existing conscience. We can name them and we know the exact way in which our organs and psyche interact and influence each other through informa- tion. It is known, for instance, that a single word can either do damage or solve a conflict. We can verify all these aspects be- cause they are predictable. Thus, the three criteria of scientific research are fulfilled.11 This is important, because these find- ings and the knowledge on how they relate to each other free us from fear as well as from the fear-inducing “good versus evil” mentality and what is even more important: the sick-making behavioural patterns derived from it. These revealing scientific discoveries clarify as well the processes of disease, healing, the “healing crisis”, the suspended healing and the phenomenon of subsequent diseases (aka the old concept of “contagion”). Virus, it’s time to go.12"
Soirce:
http://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/wissenschafftplus-the-virus-misconception-part-1.pdf
<p>CP</p>
Corpop
February 15, 2023 - 9:56pm
Permalink
Refutation of Cell Theory
<p>CP</p>