I have had this experience. Diagnosed with hyperactive thyroid and seeing both a naturopath, and endocrinologist. As my thyroid improved the endocrinologist had dificulty excepting it, and had no interest in what I did to fix it. Thyroid has been good since and that was 16 yr ago.
I love this letter, and I used to think very much like this, then I realized we're missing the point. You can't expect empathy, care and reciprocation in a transactional experience. The medical paradigm is a business, and empathy is not something you can buy or pay for. Being in relation with a person who will treat you as an equal, with respect, and guide you towards your own healing is NOT something that can happen in that paradigm, which is doing exactly what it's supposed to do: regulate, normalize and induct us into a techological mindset where we "worship" technology and look to it as a saviour, as is centered within our culture. The doctor's office is an indoctrination center into the state religion of technology-worship with the doctor as priest and initiator, and yourself as the supplicant and initiate. If you don't want to be in that role, don't go into that framework, or do it consciously that that is what you're getting when you go there. Empathy *is not possible* in that context.
For the last 5 years and counting, the only thing I have ever gone there for is paperwork that is compatible with my office's reimbursment system. It's the only thing they can give me, so it's the only thing I want from them. I'm not going to try to get blood from a stone!
The Scientific Fraud of Virology — Exposing Layer By Layer
When people imagine a virus, they think scientists "see" a tiny invader under a microscope attacking cells.
But the reality is completely different — and far more deceptive.
Let’s break down the fraud, layer by layer:
Layer 1: No Direct Isolation
In real science, isolation means separating something out alone from everything else — directly from a sick host, without additives.
Virology has never done this.
They do not purify a virus directly from the blood, mucus, or fluids of a sick person.
Instead, they mix patient fluids with animal cells (like monkey or dog kidney cells), add toxic antibiotics, chemicals, and nutrient deprivation — causing massive stress and cellular breakdown.
They then claim whatever particles show up afterward are the "virus."
Key: Without pure isolation from a sick person, they cannot claim a virus caused the sickness.
The cell death (called cytopathic effect) they use as "proof" of viral infection actually comes from starving and poisoning the cells.
Control experiments (such as Dr. Stefan Lanka’s) show that even without "virus material," when you do the same toxic culturing — the cells still die.
Therefore, the method itself causes the effect, not a virus.
Key: If controls get the same result, the method is invalid.
Layer 3: Electron Microscopy Fraud — Artifacts, Not Viruses
After killing the cell culture, they take a still frame with an electron microscope.
What they see are random particles, cell debris, vesicles, exosomes, and artifacts — distortions caused by the sample preparation (chemical staining, freezing, slicing, dehydration).
Artifacts often look like "particles" but are not viruses — just preparation damage.
Key: Virologists interpret what they want to see. It’s not objective observation.
Layer 4: In Silico Fabrication (Computer Fabricated Genomes)
They do not extract a full viral genome directly from a sick person.
Instead, they collect tiny, random bits of genetic material (RNA fragments) from the toxic mix.
Then, they plug these pieces into computer software (called in silico assembly), and stitch them together by algorithm.
They make millions of different possible assemblies and vote on which sequence they will call "the virus."
Key: They never observe an actual intact virus genome in reality. It’s 100% computer-generated fiction.
Layer 5: No Proof of Transmission — Spanish Flu Experiments
In 1918, doctors tried desperately to prove person-to-person transmission of the "Spanish Flu" through:
having sick people cough, sneeze, and breathe on healthy volunteers,
spraying secretions into noses and eyes,
injecting bodily fluids into veins.
None of the healthy volunteers got sick — even after intense exposure.
This destroys the idea that invisible particles flying through the air cause disease.
Key: If viruses were real and contagious, the experiments would have succeeded.
Layer 6: Rooted in Pasteur’s Fraud — Not Honest Science
Louis Pasteur, the so-called "father of germ theory," was exposed even in his own time for faking results, stealing ideas, and lying in his lab notebooks (see "The Private Science of Louis Pasteur" by Gerald Geison).
Pasteur admitted in his own writings that his vaccines and experiments often failed — but publicly he pushed germ theory anyway, protecting his reputation.
Antoine Béchamp, his rival, correctly taught that the terrain (the body's internal environment) determines health — not invisible germs.
Key: Germ theory — and later virology — is based on fraud, not honest science.
Conclusion: Virology is a House of Cards
No pure isolation.
No proof of causation.
No real images — only artifacts.
No real genome — only computer fabrications.
No proof of contagious transmission.
Built on fraud by men like Pasteur.
Sustained by fear, indoctrination, and pharmaceutical profit — not science.
If you critically examine the facts:
"Viruses" as disease-causing invaders have never been scientifically proven to exist.
Thank you so much we appreciate being reminded that we do have a voice. May God continue to bless your life and the lives of your readers who are seeking truth and justice and life full of joy! Have a wonderful day.
PS
Always ask questions, question everything we’ve been countlessly lied to since the very beginning…. Pray one for another ❤️❤️❤️
It is not merely that "viruses don't exist" in the manner presumed by conventional medicine, but rather that the conceptual apparatus by which viruses have been defined, isolated, and invoked as causal agents of disease is itself methodologically unsound and philosophically incoherent. The so-called viral paradigm relies on a set of assumptions—about contagion, isolation, and pathogenicity—that dissolve under critical scrutiny. Electron micrographs, cytopathic effects in vitro, and PCR amplification are not ontological proofs. They are technical outputs susceptible to misinterpretation within an epistemic framework already committed to exogenous causality.
On this fragile foundation rests the global “get-your-vaccine” imperative: a biopolitical script that weaponizes fear, standardizes human biology, and renders the population a perpetual market for intervention. But if the virological premise is illegitimate—if no viral entities have ever been truly isolated in the classical sense, purified, and shown to cause disease in accordance with Koch’s or even Rivers’ postulates—then the entire edifice collapses into performative scientism. What is paraded as urgent care becomes instead a ritual of compliance, a theatre of inoculative control.
The crisis, then, is not just biomedical but civilizational. Western medicine, having built its empire on the doctrine of invisible invaders and the technologization of human health, now faces epistemological unmooring. The ideology of exogenous risk—of the body as perpetually vulnerable and in need of surveillance, enhancement, and prophylaxis—is increasingly untenable. Like all edifices erected on conceptual quicksand, this one is beginning to buckle. Its collapse may not be sudden, but it will be systemic. Once the metaphysics of contagion is dislodged, the expansive, lucrative, and authoritarian interventionalist model will follow.
In its place will arise not only a new medicine, but a new metaphysic of health: one that honors endogenous coherence, environmental attunement, psychological salubrity, and the irreducible singularity of the human organism—not as an object of perpetual pharmacological modulation but as a living totality. The pseudopathogenic worldview is not merely mistaken; it is megalopathogenic, self-reinforcing delusion whose greatest symptom is the very institutional gigantism that sustains it.
I have had this experience. Diagnosed with hyperactive thyroid and seeing both a naturopath, and endocrinologist. As my thyroid improved the endocrinologist had dificulty excepting it, and had no interest in what I did to fix it. Thyroid has been good since and that was 16 yr ago.
👏🏽🫶🏽⚡️
I love this letter, and I used to think very much like this, then I realized we're missing the point. You can't expect empathy, care and reciprocation in a transactional experience. The medical paradigm is a business, and empathy is not something you can buy or pay for. Being in relation with a person who will treat you as an equal, with respect, and guide you towards your own healing is NOT something that can happen in that paradigm, which is doing exactly what it's supposed to do: regulate, normalize and induct us into a techological mindset where we "worship" technology and look to it as a saviour, as is centered within our culture. The doctor's office is an indoctrination center into the state religion of technology-worship with the doctor as priest and initiator, and yourself as the supplicant and initiate. If you don't want to be in that role, don't go into that framework, or do it consciously that that is what you're getting when you go there. Empathy *is not possible* in that context.
For the last 5 years and counting, the only thing I have ever gone there for is paperwork that is compatible with my office's reimbursment system. It's the only thing they can give me, so it's the only thing I want from them. I'm not going to try to get blood from a stone!
The Scientific Fraud of Virology — Exposing Layer By Layer
When people imagine a virus, they think scientists "see" a tiny invader under a microscope attacking cells.
But the reality is completely different — and far more deceptive.
Let’s break down the fraud, layer by layer:
Layer 1: No Direct Isolation
In real science, isolation means separating something out alone from everything else — directly from a sick host, without additives.
Virology has never done this.
They do not purify a virus directly from the blood, mucus, or fluids of a sick person.
Instead, they mix patient fluids with animal cells (like monkey or dog kidney cells), add toxic antibiotics, chemicals, and nutrient deprivation — causing massive stress and cellular breakdown.
They then claim whatever particles show up afterward are the "virus."
Key: Without pure isolation from a sick person, they cannot claim a virus caused the sickness.
Layer 2: Toxic Cell Culturing (Not Natural Infection)
The cell death (called cytopathic effect) they use as "proof" of viral infection actually comes from starving and poisoning the cells.
Control experiments (such as Dr. Stefan Lanka’s) show that even without "virus material," when you do the same toxic culturing — the cells still die.
Therefore, the method itself causes the effect, not a virus.
Key: If controls get the same result, the method is invalid.
Layer 3: Electron Microscopy Fraud — Artifacts, Not Viruses
After killing the cell culture, they take a still frame with an electron microscope.
What they see are random particles, cell debris, vesicles, exosomes, and artifacts — distortions caused by the sample preparation (chemical staining, freezing, slicing, dehydration).
Artifacts often look like "particles" but are not viruses — just preparation damage.
Key: Virologists interpret what they want to see. It’s not objective observation.
Layer 4: In Silico Fabrication (Computer Fabricated Genomes)
They do not extract a full viral genome directly from a sick person.
Instead, they collect tiny, random bits of genetic material (RNA fragments) from the toxic mix.
Then, they plug these pieces into computer software (called in silico assembly), and stitch them together by algorithm.
They make millions of different possible assemblies and vote on which sequence they will call "the virus."
Key: They never observe an actual intact virus genome in reality. It’s 100% computer-generated fiction.
Layer 5: No Proof of Transmission — Spanish Flu Experiments
In 1918, doctors tried desperately to prove person-to-person transmission of the "Spanish Flu" through:
having sick people cough, sneeze, and breathe on healthy volunteers,
spraying secretions into noses and eyes,
injecting bodily fluids into veins.
None of the healthy volunteers got sick — even after intense exposure.
This destroys the idea that invisible particles flying through the air cause disease.
Key: If viruses were real and contagious, the experiments would have succeeded.
Layer 6: Rooted in Pasteur’s Fraud — Not Honest Science
Louis Pasteur, the so-called "father of germ theory," was exposed even in his own time for faking results, stealing ideas, and lying in his lab notebooks (see "The Private Science of Louis Pasteur" by Gerald Geison).
Pasteur admitted in his own writings that his vaccines and experiments often failed — but publicly he pushed germ theory anyway, protecting his reputation.
Antoine Béchamp, his rival, correctly taught that the terrain (the body's internal environment) determines health — not invisible germs.
Key: Germ theory — and later virology — is based on fraud, not honest science.
Conclusion: Virology is a House of Cards
No pure isolation.
No proof of causation.
No real images — only artifacts.
No real genome — only computer fabrications.
No proof of contagious transmission.
Built on fraud by men like Pasteur.
Sustained by fear, indoctrination, and pharmaceutical profit — not science.
If you critically examine the facts:
"Viruses" as disease-causing invaders have never been scientifically proven to exist.
Thank you so much we appreciate being reminded that we do have a voice. May God continue to bless your life and the lives of your readers who are seeking truth and justice and life full of joy! Have a wonderful day.
PS
Always ask questions, question everything we’ve been countlessly lied to since the very beginning…. Pray one for another ❤️❤️❤️
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
It is not merely that "viruses don't exist" in the manner presumed by conventional medicine, but rather that the conceptual apparatus by which viruses have been defined, isolated, and invoked as causal agents of disease is itself methodologically unsound and philosophically incoherent. The so-called viral paradigm relies on a set of assumptions—about contagion, isolation, and pathogenicity—that dissolve under critical scrutiny. Electron micrographs, cytopathic effects in vitro, and PCR amplification are not ontological proofs. They are technical outputs susceptible to misinterpretation within an epistemic framework already committed to exogenous causality.
On this fragile foundation rests the global “get-your-vaccine” imperative: a biopolitical script that weaponizes fear, standardizes human biology, and renders the population a perpetual market for intervention. But if the virological premise is illegitimate—if no viral entities have ever been truly isolated in the classical sense, purified, and shown to cause disease in accordance with Koch’s or even Rivers’ postulates—then the entire edifice collapses into performative scientism. What is paraded as urgent care becomes instead a ritual of compliance, a theatre of inoculative control.
The crisis, then, is not just biomedical but civilizational. Western medicine, having built its empire on the doctrine of invisible invaders and the technologization of human health, now faces epistemological unmooring. The ideology of exogenous risk—of the body as perpetually vulnerable and in need of surveillance, enhancement, and prophylaxis—is increasingly untenable. Like all edifices erected on conceptual quicksand, this one is beginning to buckle. Its collapse may not be sudden, but it will be systemic. Once the metaphysics of contagion is dislodged, the expansive, lucrative, and authoritarian interventionalist model will follow.
In its place will arise not only a new medicine, but a new metaphysic of health: one that honors endogenous coherence, environmental attunement, psychological salubrity, and the irreducible singularity of the human organism—not as an object of perpetual pharmacological modulation but as a living totality. The pseudopathogenic worldview is not merely mistaken; it is megalopathogenic, self-reinforcing delusion whose greatest symptom is the very institutional gigantism that sustains it.
Thank you for stating what I have recently discovered with my primary care doctor. Seeking an osteopathic doctor.
Best wishes. Unfortunately many DOs nowadays are indistinguishable from MDs. I hope you find a good one!
If one is "in the know"...then yes, it IS out of disdain.
Even contempt!!