The arguments for “NO VIRUS” -- PART 2 -Dr. Mike Yeadon : The alternatives

You decide.

Suavek

and

Dr Mike Yeadon

May 21, 2024

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Foreword

by Dr. Mike Yeadon :

Source : https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/1323

In this post, I propose some alternative mechanisms whereby we might develop acute respiratory illnesses, other than through contagion ( ie “catching it” from someone else, which doesn’t appear to happen, despite our deep programming to believe that it does ).

I repeat my previous point that undermining a previous falsehood places me under no obligation to provide a replacement explanation, though it is no doubt helpful to jump from one belief ( a false one ) to a new hypothesis, rather than to a void ).

Best wishes

Mike

Note from the co-author Suavek :

The new posts are at the top and the older ones are at the bottom. However, exceptions for the purpose of comprehensibility are possible. The article can be expanded a little later. hope you enjoy your new discoveries here.

— Suavek.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 21, 2024 :

Source : https://substack.com/profile/28026013-dr-mike-yeadon/note/c-56926737

The perpetrators don’t try to slip the odd lie in among more palatable truths. No, they make the entire thing up.

Climate change is of the same kind of thing. All lies.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 4, 2024 :

Source : https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/588?single

I’m posting this again, emphasising that this time, I’m attacking the underpinnings of the claimed serological analyses that some use to “prove” that there must have been a spreading pandemic virus.

A high proportion of comments relate to PCR tests. Of course, since they are also mentioned in your article, there is a trigger to revisit PCR. That wasn’t my intention, though.

One thing that repeatedly comes up is this: “If acute respiratory illnesses are not caused by respiratory viruses and aren’t contagious, how do you explain the actual illnesses that people definitely experience from time to time?

Below I share my current thinking, though I do not believe I’m under an obligation to supply an alternative explanation. All I’m doing is invalidating the fraudulent claims.

Best wishes

Mike

[ Linked by Dr. Yeadon : ]

https://open.substack.com/pub/interestofjustice/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time [ Below this article is the comment, which you can also see below ] :

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 4, 2024 :

Source : https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

IOJ, Sasha and anyone else who wishes to quote me, please do. I grant everyone to use, in full or excepted, anything I write or say, providing your intentions are to attempt to wake people up!

Exactly! I find that kind of thing incredibly frustrating. When I point out that there have been many clinical experiments, attempting to demonstrate contagion of acute respiratory illnesses, and all have failed, it is demanded of me that I provide alternative explanations for contagion within, for example, a family. Actually, I have no such responsibility! Pointing out that we’ve been deliberately misled for a very long time is sufficient in my to prompt anyone & everyone to think about the implications & what that means for understanding our own health. Without prejudice, below I chose to offer alternative explanations.

If we believe certain things, we’re apt to interpret events as if those things are true. So if one person in a household, workplace or social group “comes down with a cold” and then, if another person in that group also falls ill shortly afterwards, this is taken as PROOF of contagion.

It’s not, of course, proof of any such thing, it’s merely “consistent with contagion”. Given contagion doesn’t happen, alternative explanations apply. I suggest shared / common environmental triggers for illness, such as changing temperature / humidity or pollutants such as gases, dusts, stressors etc. Also, how often do we notice the obverse, that one member of a group falls acutely unwell with a respiratory malady, and nobody else “catches” it?

Personally, I think these acute respiratory illnesses are the result of disordered equilibrium, probably in airway surface liquid volume, ionic (dissolved salts) and proteinaceous composition, including its volume, mucocilliary escalator function, secretion of surfactant etc etc.

Consider how unwell certain people with cystic fibrosis can be. CF results from mutations in the gene encoding the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Regulator (CFTR) protein product. CFTR controls the concentration of certain ions, such as chloride Cl- ions, in the layer of fluid that sits atop the air-facing airway lining cells, collectively called the respiratory epithelium. Mutations can occur anywhere in the gene & there is remarkable diversity in the specific mutations that a child with CF has. Some mutations result in severe disease, affecting not only the airways, but also the gastrointestinal tract. Other mutations produce much more subtle changes to phenotype.

What this establishes, to my mind anyway, is that quite modest changes in the dynamic equilibrium of airway surface liquid and protecting the airway from malfunction, are plausibly capable of yielding symptoms of the illnesses we call colds and “flu”. Such changes might plausibly occur in many but by no means all people in response to event’s & environments which we routinely encounter.

As seasons & weather oscillate between high and low atmospheric pressure, humidity, temperature, dusts, pollen, pollution with such as nitrogen oxides at sea level, a person who is unable to briskly alter their composition of airway surface liquid might plausibly develop rapid-onset symptoms of respiratory disorder.

Depending upon where in the airway “tree” the acute failure of homeostasis occurs, so a person might display mostly upper airway symptoms which we call a cold. In other anatomical locations, such failures of homeopathy in central or lower airways could result in symptoms which are far more severe & we call that “flu”.

In this model of “endogenous” illness, timeline to recovery could vary tremendously from an all but overnight event to something that persists for weeks, leaving person somewhat breathless, even at rest. In the case of a hypothetical episode of flu, the functions of your epithelial cells could become further deranged and cause quite worrisome symptoms. These cells are very large in number (note it’s said that the surface area of your gas-exchanging lungs are large enough to more or less cover a tennis court. It doesn’t take much by way of cytokine / chemokine / inflammatory mediators response of those epithelial cells in order to produce systemic symptoms, such as muscle & joint pain, tremendous fatigue, reduced efficiency gas-exchange etc. on top of this, your healthy epithelial cells normally secrete anti-microbial compounds such as trefoil peptides, which make it difficult for microorganisms such as bacteria and fungi to infect you. When damaged, however, I think it very likely that overgrowth of usually benign bacterial infections could occur and be the aetiological explanation for pneumonias, requiring antibiotics to prevent a spiralling down to death, especially in elderly, already chronically unwell individuals. Even without invoking bacterial infection, the release from airway epithelium of pro-inflammatory chemicals will result in recruitment to the lungs & into the luminal compartment of the lungs of very large numbers of several kinds of inflammatory cells, such as neutrophils, eosinophils and macrophages (the latter themselves are normally found as the dominant surveillance cell type in airway washings, obtained using an unpleasant technique called endoscopic pulmonary lavage). These cells, in large enough numbers, are the cause of production of purulent secretions, coughed up as phlegm.

I’m not pretending that this is all correct & explains every facet of the acute respiratory illnesses called colds and influenza, but it’s a better model than the contagious respiratory virus narrative.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 4, 2024 :

Source : https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

Just a quick comment. Many people are referring to PCR-based clinical diagnostics. These have been thoroughly discussed and concluded to have always been completely unsuitable (which is why they were deployed like they were).

But the entire reason for this Substack article - thanks to IoJ - was to focus bright lights upon the “serology” aspects, specifically the many, mostly unchallenged, papers and discussion which centres on claims to have detected & quantified the antibody responses to the purported virus.

In what is merely an initial “sighter” comment, outlining what’s needed even to set up the detection and measuring systems required to do this, I show that it’s as easy to subvert these tests, if one wanted to do that, as it has been for PCR. It’s not to do with PCR!

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 4, 2024 :

Source :

https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

“ ( … )

It’s so simple to post the definitive evidence for the presence of this novel virus, using sentence construction that a smart ten year old could understand, IF you had it.

( … ).”

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

A statement from Dr. Yeadon regarding his comment published below ( a kind of foreword ) :

Source : https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/572 , February 2, 2024.

Another fine piece from Sasha Latypova :

https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/how-to-fake-pandemics-part-2-i-do

May I direct your attention to the comments?

There’s a very long comment from one gentleman about the PCR tests.

I’ve taken the liberty for the first time of writing a long comment myself on a topic I’ve never seen discussed: the methods used to claim to detect viral proteins and antibodies to said viral proteins in samples from humans.

I outline how such methods could be developed. Its been a considerable period since I last did work like this, but unlike PCR, which didn’t exist, at least as a routine analytical approach for PhD students when I was doing my own PhD research, I did develop & use immunoassays to measure things including circulating antibodies to things, so I know how easily they can be subverted ( usually by accident of course ! ).

I believe that these test methods could easily have been subverted. My assumption is that they have been, just as the PCR based tests were. Why would they not be?

So a claim that “there must have been a spreading virus because viral proteins were detected at such and such a date & location” or “there must have been a contagious new virus because antibodies to parts of the virus have been extremely widely reported” are both nonsense until the methods used to detect the things claimed have been pored over and shown unequivocally to be correctly set up & beyond reproach.

Anyone believe that latter scenario is likely? Or might we again detect the hidden hand of deception?

Best wishes

Mike

[ Here is the comment mentioned above ] :

Dr. Mike Yeadon, February 2, 2024 :

Source :

https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/how-to-fake-pandemics-part-2-i-do/comment/48606835

A comment to article : https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/how-to-fake-pandemics-part-2-i-do

https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/579

I also have not delved into the serology, the purported detection of circulating antibodies. However, unlike PCR-based methods, which didn’t exist when I was doing my PhD, I did develop & use enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISAs). The basic principle is to use the fact that antibodies can be used as components or tools in detection methods for almost anything.

I have to be exquisitely clear that I’m referring to deliberately generated antibodies as tools at this point. I am not talking about the antibodies that you & I might have made in response to some foreign substance, living or dead, that has been somehow introduced into our bodies.

As a second concept, claimed infections by the alleged virus could be supported by either of two methods.

1. Detection in blood of the virus or a viral protein such as spike.

2. Detection in blood of circulating antibodies to spike.

Completely different concepts.

To do 1, using ELISAs or a fundamentally similar approach to detect something, first you need the something that you wish to develop a method to detect.

That’s very important. You cannot create a tool to detect something without a sample of the thing to be detected.

So when we’re told, “We have detected viral infection because we’ve measured spike protein in blood samples”, ask where they got the original spike from in order to develop the test method. Obviously, they never have had it. However, they could make part of it, using the genetic sequence. But if the origins of that genetic sequence are shrouded, everything that follows from it is likewise mysterious. To measure spike in a sample, you need deliberately created antibodies to spike, which you can accomplish by injecting, say, a donkey, with your polypeptide which it is claimed is part of authentic spike. A couple of weeks later, you draw blood from the donkey and create serum by allowing it to clot & drawing up the clear serum, which contains any antibodies. Now you stick the antibodies to a plate, add a biological sample such as plasma from a human, and if there’s spike in it, that spike sticks to the donkey anti-spike antibody on the plate. You can detect that spike by using a second anti-spike antibody, classically from a different species, such as a sheep (that had also been injected with spike & serum collected). That second antibody would have had a colour-creating enzyme chemically bound to it, so that when you add your colourless starting material, colour develops in your plate only if your second antibody finds the spike bound to the first antibody, the latter itself previously stuck to the plate. So that’s one way to develop a test for eg spike protein. Do note though that we’ve only got liars word for it that what they inoculated the donkey with really was a piece of spike, itself synthesised using the dubious genetic sequence. I’ve no way to know what it is that they’re really detecting in this test. In order to qualify the test, it’s necessary to show what it doesn’t respond to & this “cross reactivity testing” has to be very thorough. If it’s not done well enough, the test will be positive, but it might be because something other than spike, circulating in your blood, stuck to the original donkey antibody. You can I think see how complicated this all is and how readily it could be deliberately subverted. Does anybody think it would NOT have been subverted in order to yield the kinds of results the perpetrators wanted to see?Note that commercial reagents could then be sold to hundreds of labs around the world. Scientists using it who are not involved in the fraud use it at face value to knock out thousands of scientific papers. The thicket of lies accumulates rapidly.

The second use is to develop methods purporting to detect antibodies to the virus, in this case viral spike protein.

Again, when we’re told “We have detected (naturally created, in your body) antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein”, a very good question is “How did you develop a test for antibodies which you say are directed to this viral protein?”

Just as with detecting spike protein itself, you need authentic spike or a part of it in order to detect circulating antibodies to spike. The purported spike this time is first stuck to the plate. Then the serum sample from a human you think might have been “infected by the virus” is added. If there are anti-spike antibodies in the sample, they’ll adhere to the spike you stuck to the plate. You then wash the plate and detect human antibodies by using a second reagent, something like enzyme labelled sheep anti-human serum (generated by inoculating sheep with any human antibody, bleeding the sheep, then labelling their antibodies).

But the claim that you’ve detected circulating antibodies in human blood samples turns exquisitely on how well you set up the method & generated the tools you’ve used. If the so-called partial viral spike protein actually contains domains to something that humans routinely encounter and might raise antibodies to, well, your “test for antibodies to spike protein” is completely subverted. Again, I ask the rhetorical question about whether there’s any chance that the liars working for the perpetrators did what they claimed is worth asking.

Personally, I do not trust the claimed methods for detecting ANY of the purported viral proteins OR claimed methods for detecting antibodies to the purported virus or viral proteins in human samples.

I think it’s naive in the extreme to read any of those papers, thinking they are measuring what is claimed to be being measured.

Now, I might have wrongly & harshly misjudged the scientists who honestly & diligently worked very carefully to develop the methods to detect various alleged viral proteins and antibodies to same.

I hope they’ll contact me, hotly to explain how there’s no doubt whatsoever that what’s being detected using those commercial kits is anything but what they say, and here are the dozens of control experiments, making that unequivocally clear, at which point I’ll prostrate myself in a grovelling apology.

Or, tumbleweed. You decide.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Dr. Tom Cowan

Dr. Mike Yeadon about Dr. Tom Cowan, February 2, 2024 :

Source : https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

A very good person and witness.

There’s a small, very well briefed group but my assumption is they’re all subjected to heavy duty censorship too.

Unfortunately, even providing compelling arguments that viruses don’t exist moves nor a single person in my experience.

This battle isn’t won or lost on logic.

I’ve restricted myself to the large mass of evidence showing lack of contagion in relation to acute respiratory illnesses.

Nobody believes it or alters their beliefs having been told it, with a long list of citations.

Wish it wasn’t so. I recall saying that I thought that would be the (lack of) effect even if true when (I think it was) Tom first outlined the evidence that’s so famiiiar to him, I believe in 2020.

Bottom line is it’s not the magic bullet some have hoped. No single thing is.

Challenging Beliefs About What Makes Us Sick w/ Dr. Tom Cowan | Rooted In Resilience Podcast #10

Source : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPr4Knu-6pY

BitChute Advertisement

In this webinar, Dr. Cowan discusses and reviews some clips from Dr. Sam Bailey's most recent video & article, titled "The Follies of Peter McCullough"
the link can be found here :

https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/the-follies-of-peter-mccullough?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

Dr. Cowan also provides a response to Dr. McCullough.

Here are some important papers Dr. Cowan wants to share:
A Farewell to Virology by Dr. Mark Bailey: https://drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert-edition/

HIV- A virus like no other, by the Perth Group:
https://brandfolder.com/s/f7c9wcwfjvp859qqw8b4tz

We also do a tour of Tom's garden and he discusses some gardening suggestions.

Websites :

https://drtomcowan.com/

https://www.drcowansgarden.com/

https://newbiologyclinic.com/

https://newbiologycurriculum.com/

Video Platforms :

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzxdc2o0Q_XZIPwo07XCrNg
Backup YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh4jE8jPfd9H02FCAtR0muw
Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CivTSuEjw6Qp/
Odysee https://odysee.com/@Dr.TomCowan:8
Rumble https://rumble.com/c/DrTomCowan
Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/drtomcowan

Social Media :

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/DrTomCowan/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/drcowansgarden/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/newbiologyclinic
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/newbiologycurriculum
X https://twitter.com/drtomcowan
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/talkinturkeywithtom/
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/drcowanspowders/
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/newbiologyclinic
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/newbiologycurriculum
Pinterest https://www.pinterest.com/drcowansgarden/
Telegram https://t.me/DrTomCowanChannel
Telegram https://t.me/DrTomCowan
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/drtomcowan/
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/dr-cowan-s-garden/
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/new-biology-clinic/
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/new-biology-curriculum/
SubscribeStar Community https://www.subscribestar.com/dr-tom-cowan

Podcast :

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-with-dr-cowan-friends/id166667436

Become an Affiliate :

https://affiliates.drtomcowan.com/

https://drcowansgarden.goaffpro.com/

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

david horn, August 25, 2023 :

Source : https://t.me/robinmggroup/1269559

We detox seasonally usual winter if necessary, it depends if we high level of toxins. Although we can detox anytime of the year due toxicity levels. The toxins get in to our bday through air, food, water and radiation and medicine / vaccine. If a family or a larger community sharing the same toxic air, food, water radiation then there is likely that some will get ill. There will always be more ill during winter due to seasonal detox like the trees shed leaves every year. There was a time they though scurvy was a virus, how is it possible a group at sea could all get sick at the same time, it must be a virus as we now know it was due to vitamin c difficency.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Question and answer, February 3, 2024 :

https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

……………..

Question / Piotr Bein :

Dear Dr. Yeadon. Kudos for your early stance against the criminal plandemic.

A non-expert observer of the technical, social and systemic phenomena around the c19 bio-weapon assault, fraudulent from A to Z as you keep reminding, I'd like to know how the intelligent, moral people fall into situations that violate rational inquiry, scientific judgement and ethics. What is it that assures succes for fraudulent rockefeller "medicine" paradigm -- from general brainwashing via mass propaganda since coscious age, thru a student's loss of critical thinking, to mammon-corrupted disregard for the truth and natural law principles.

I've observed the erosion process of guiding principles on my son, a resident medical doctor. In 20020, he promised to provide ref's on the PCR test veracity and existence of the virus. I presented to him counter-argument from independents. He has not rebuked it to date. Tragically, he (and my nurse daughter) got "vaxed" by prevalence of his "authority" in the family.. As a teen, he was a promising, remarkable, well-informed and involved anti-system boy.

………………..

Answer / Dr. Mike Yeadon :

I have observed numerous instances of what looks to me to be unreconcilable cognitive dissonance without obvious strain.

I have no insights on why this happens to readily.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

A comment from Helen Seymour, February 5, 2024 :

Source : https://interestofjustice.substack.com/p/dr-yeadon-explains-for-first-time/comments

Thank you Dr. Mike Yeadon for your scientific explanation of various possible reasons for the symptoms which lead to perception of contagion. As you rightly say it has never been proven, but many find that hard to believe . The virus hoax has been with us so long we were all taught it and most believed it, the Covid lies opened our eyes.

I have relearned everything I was previously taught. You have been my main mentor, in the medical field.

As a true scientist you are constantly seeking the truth,unlike others who just follow the playbook. We are all indebted to you, the strength and resilience you have shown, have inspired many people all over the world to keep fighting. We can never thank you enough. ❤️