7.4 C
Canberra
Thursday, September 26, 2024

It’s official: No records of the “COVID virus”

Before 2020, I had no reason to question the existence of viruses. The possibility that viruses had not been shown to exist had only fleetingly crossed my mind in 2017 when I stumbled across a German biologist named Dr Stefan Lanka. Trained as a virologist, Dr Lanka stunningly revealed in the 1990s that the methodologies employed in his chosen field were often unscientific and the entire virus model was flawed.

By the time the COVID-19 hype was underway I briefly forgot about this incredible revelation. However, what did capture my attention in 2020 was that there were fewer “confirmed COVID-19 cases” than “confirmed influenza cases”. Obviously, no one had panicked and told us to stay home because of the new flu viruses that we supposedly encounter each year so what was going on?…

The first fact I established, by checking the claims on the website of my local “health authority”, was that the PCR “tests” do not actually test for a virus. Or for a viral illness. Or for any illness at all.

I was stunned to learn that these tests only provide, at best, indirect evidence of a tiny genetic sequence. Not an infection, not even one copy of an intact “virion” (a single virus). Just a tiny sequence claimed to be a marker for “the virus”. And yet, Public Health Ontario had decided that samples testing positive for the tiny sequence would be, “reported as COVID-19 virus detected, which is sufficient for laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 infection.

In July 2020, investigative journalist Jon Rappoport pointed out that the CDC had conceded that detection of so-called “viral” RNA “may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms”. This was logical, because finding a tiny part of a (supposed) thing is not the same as finding the (supposed) thing intact. So, the test did not necessarily relate to illness and according to the official definition, the “COVID-19 symptoms” were not even new or specific. In fact, “cases” required no symptoms at all.

This meant that the statements on the website of my “health authority” were actually a confession of medical fraud – right there in plain sight. The non-diagnostic tests were being passed off as confirmation of a “viral infection” and a “coronavirus disease”.

It became more interesting when I was sent a presentation featuring the United States physician Dr Andrew Kaufman. Like Dr Lanka, Dr Kaufman discussed the methodologies employed by virologists when claiming to have “isolated a virus”. He walked through the logical steps that are required to isolate a particle (if it exists), contrasting those with what was done by those who “found SARS-CoV-2” such as the Australian team of Leon Caly. The difference was clear and the implications were stunning – the virologists had not actually identified a virus, old or new. Could this be true?

I carefully read the methods section of each study. It wasn’t easy at first, but with time, patience, a good dictionary, and the internet, it is something that even laypeople can manage. Anyone who does this research will see that Dr Lanka and Dr Kaufman are correct. Virologists do not isolate a particle (as claimed in their studies) and show that it causes disease.

Instead, they create a brew of monkey cells, cow serum and toxic drugs, observe the monkey cells breaking down and declare that “the virus” is to blame and has been “isolated”. The experiments are nonsensical and do not adhere to the scientific method. The “logic” of a virologist is on par with claiming that Santa was shown to exist and was isolated in your house based on observing presents under the Christmas tree.

“Well, surely someone has found this supposed particle and shown that it’s a virus” you might be thinking. And I would not blame you, because what I am claiming may sound outlandish. However, I encourage you to really look into this for yourself and put aside what you assumed were facts. 

Another line of evidence might surprise you. After verifying the facts laid out by Dr Kaufman, I started filing freedom of information (FOI) requests to Canadian health and science institutions. (Australia similarly facilitates these requests through its FOI Act.) I asked for all studies held by the institutions, from anywhere, that found and purified alleged virus particles from any human – because if that had not been done, then no one could have followed up with valid scientific experiments to show that the supposed virus existed and caused COVID-19.

Many people around the world helped with this project and we now have official responses from 224 institutions in 40 different countries. Not one of them was able to provide or cite such a study, hence none have scientific evidence of the alleged virus. It is clear that there is no valid independent variable to study in their experiments, which means that virology is based in pseudoscience.

We eventually expanded our investigation to other alleged viruses. No matter which institution is asked or which alleged virus we ask about, the results are always the same: no records. Put simply, this means that the “viruses” were imagined to exist but have never been found.

The old saying is correct when it comes to virology: the devil is in the details. It seems just a matter of time until more people realise that the COVID “virus” never was. Then comes the sickening reality that there was absolutely no need for any of the “responses” that devastated our world. 

Christine Massey is an independent researcher from Canada with a background in biostatistics. Since 2020 she has coordinated the Freedom of Information Act project that has exposed the lack of evidence for ‘SARS-CoV-2’, other alleged viruses and “pathogenic” microbes.

Subscribe and follow her on Substack.

More Stories

Putting the pieces together for ACT’s first puzzle competition

For some, doing a puzzle is a relaxing but sometimes frustrating activity to do at home, but for others, they like to complete them in a competitive setting.
 
 

 

Latest