The Arguments for “NO VIRUS”-PART 33. The difference between an assumption and a proof. Dr. Mike Yeadon, Allen, Jamie Andrews, Suavek, and others.
The 80 Pseudo-Proofs for the "viruses" by James Hill.
Manu, February 16, probably 2025 :
I concur with the vast majority of the statements made, however I must disagree with the declaration that "acute respiratory illnesses are not contagious". I've made the experiment of subjecting myself to contagion and, even though I didn't fall ill, it was obvious, quite evident that I was being attacked by a bug, a virus, something, and for several days I was almost ill, weak, with a cough and feeling frail. What you state is dangerous because false.
.............................................
Dr Mike Yeadon :
If you care to visit my Telegram channel, I can show you a summary listing of every published attempt to demonstrate symptomatic transmission of colds and flu from 1918-2024. Of the dozens of published studies, exactly zero (0) support the contention that they're contagious.
I too didn't believe it until I reviewed all the evidence. Having done so, I spent months thinking about why it is that the impression of transmission is so strong, and I wrote about this on Substack.
In order to break free of the false certainty you have & that I also had until my nose was shoved into contrary evidence, it's necessary to run the thought experiment that I've been lied to and that there are understandable reasons why the lie works so well.
If false certainty is unmovable, it won't be possible to provide counter evidence. It simply gets rejected. This I've realised based on dozens of conversations, starting with myself.
Best wishes
Mike
Source :
Dr. Mike Yeadon, September 16, 2025 :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/3410
If someone called Manu turns up, please be understanding and guide them to the needed information.
Thank you,
Mike
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Editor’s note:
I think that mentioning alternatives to contagion is very helpful in understanding the problem.
If several people become ill at the same time in a shared room, the temporal connection does not constitute proof of alleged contagion. Sudden changes in the atmosphere, such as air temperature, humidity, air pressure, and other factors, also play a role in the development of the disease. The season and sunlight exposure must also be taken into account. You can find more information on this in this Substack in the article series "The Arguments for NO VIRUS."
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Jamie Andrews, September 12, 2025 :
https://substack.com/@controlstudies/note/c-155115138
The Virology Controls Studies Project
Ultimately a replacement theory is not needed to falsify the old one.
However the replacement theory is very easy: It is the exact cause of diseases offered by the mainstream, without any viruses.
Everyone agrees that disease is caused by poor diet, drugs, chemicals and toxins in our environment and psychological stresses etc etc. VIrology, Big Pharma and the State, lever in a whole layer of nonsense such as genetics, viruses and the immune system so that only they can control it, because only their tests claim to be able to tell how it works.
Take away all of their conjecture, assumptions and for profit charade and you are left with an easy to understand system of disease: what goes in that is unnatural or unnecessary must come back out again.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
“An untreated cold lasts a whole week, whereas one treated with medication only lasts seven days.”
by Suavek
I heard this funny saying from my family as a child in the 1970s. We laughed about it at the time, but none of us knew how profound and serious this scam is. Without thinking, we assume that our flu or cold would have lasted twice as long without the antivirals, but we are hardly able to verify this. Therefore, the only accessible information on which our judgment is based often comes exclusively from years of fearmongering indoctrination.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Christian Thomas, September 12, 2025 :
https://substack.com/@christianthomas172901/note/c-155110314?
I’ve loved how Doc Malik has woken up and I’ve loved watching it. At first I thought “He’s a doctor, he’ll never fully get there. He’s so immersed.” but, since that thought, it has been off to the races! It has been dazzlingly quick. He got to that perspective in record time and has somehow managed to take everything in, seemingly without being overwhelmed by what he saw. I think it’s incredibly impressive, though maybe some of the horrible things that happened to him helped keep him going at points where others might have thought it was a bit much or that something was a bridge too far. Now he’s just one of the gang, and sometimes you can even see him say something so wearily cynical that you know he’s got the full picture!
I’ve been pro the No Virus position probably since I first saw it suggested. I was curiously awake to the whole AIDS hoax at the time and could see the social engineering implications - not hard with “Don’t Die of Ignorance” stamped on every single item that fell into the letterbox. I say curiously because I wouldn’t begin to wake up until about 15 years later! When I later saw the truth of the maths of testing - that a 99% accurate test didn’t mean that 99% of positives had the disease and it was all about incidence in the population - my scepticism was fully engaged. A lot of this wasn’t even in the curriculum when I did Biology ‘A’ Level in 1979 but I could easily see the huge scope for error just from looking at the micrographs we were shown. And, being static, there’s a big philosophical hurdle as to whether they constituted any evidence at all in a question about causality, which usually needs to show a sequence of events. This is like looking at a snooker table and somehow deducing what the previous shot was; quite impossible except in very special circumstances and, even then it’s only approximate or has multiple solutions - plus it requires additional information like the opening layout to deduce anything at all!
So it’s not hard to dismiss viruses just on the grounds that there isn’t enough (any?) evidence for their existence, and none whatsoever for them doing anything. What stops people quickly agreeing with this aren’t the arguments themselves but the lack of an alternative explanation for how transmissibility occurs! People want a brick to put in the place of the one you’ve just removed, else otherwise they’ll make do with the wall as it is for the time being - and they need their construction to hang together. Explaining that we have never managed to show transmissibility of any disease on the many occasions we’ve tried doesn’t help either. That just makes the hole bigger. In their minds, transmissibility goes from the common cold all the way to extinction level contagion (which is pretty impressive for something we can’t even get to cause a sniffle) and they have first-hand anecdotal evidence of the bottom end of that spectrum. Their personal experience, allied with the lifelong explanation that “it’s caused by germs”, allows them to override and dismiss more rigorously obtained and even indisputable data.
We aren’t logical creatures, as Spock was always so keen to point out. In this instance we have a beautiful example of why we are better than Spock because another, fully justified, instinct kicks in and takes over because this is directly related to survival. No virus and no transmissibility takes away from the survival toolkit and replaces it with nothing. Even a ramshackle and flawed framework to deal with threats is better than no framework at all. We either need to show, convincingly, that transmissibility doesn’t occur and one only has the illusion of transmissibility (so it’s therefore not a threat) or we need a detailed and thorough understanding of what does cause people to “catch a cold”. The first requires an exhaustive list and may turn out not to be entirely true if the real mechanism makes itself known and the second requires a depth of knowledge we just haven’t achieved yet. I can’t see a way forward with it but maybe someone like Bruce Lipton, with his command of the effects of external influences, might have some insight. Or maybe he’s got there already and I just haven’t seen that episode.
Anyway, in smmary, I do think this is the central problem with people accepting No Virus. There’s no problem with the premise whatsoever, it’s the process of accepting it that has the hurdles we have to get over.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
The typical interim solution of NO VIRUS beginners
by Suavek
People struggle to abandon years of indoctrination overnight. When someone learns the facts, they typically tend to initially create a kind of intellectual "intermediate solution," which resembles mental gymnastics. In such cases we often read statements like this:
“My own stance is that viruses do exist, but they do not cause nearly as much harm and illness as we are led to believe. For me, health is 80-90% terrain, your environment, your nutrition, your overall vitality, but I also accept that viruses can sometimes upset that delicate balance and trigger illness.”
( Source : Doc Malik, https://docmalik.substack.com/p/virus-no-virus-debate-with-jamie )
The harmful effects of the alleged "viruses" are typically initially understood as increasingly less relevant, but the old indoctrination persists for some time and cannot be eliminated overnight. However, the evidence for the non-existent contagion cannot be dismissed. At this point, one of the most important epistemological principles, which Dr. Yeadon has discussed several times, should be noted: If the basic assumption is incorrect because it is merely an arbitrary assumption and not a proof, then the entire superstructure is invalid. Any conclusion derived from the unproven assumption should therefore be considered at most a vague hypothesis, not a proven theory.
There is no evidence that the submicroscopic particles observed under an electron microscope are "viruses," and what these alleged "viruses" actually do has never been observed in a living body. When cartel-controlled "science" claims that the small, often round particles are "viruses," it is an unproven assumption that cannot be reconciled with the clear evidence that rules out contagion. This is actually not difficult to understand. There are two other aspects that are important in the persuasion process. The first is the lack of control experiments, about which much has already been written on this Substack. The second aspect is the ominous databases that can supposedly determine the type of virus based on a small genetic fragment from biological material. No public has access to such a database because it is not subject to public oversight. Software provides the information about which virus the small genetic fragment should be assigned to. This leaves the door wide open for all kinds of fraud, similar to the PCR test.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Editor’s note / Suavek :
Jamie Andrews links below to an article by James Hill, MD, who went to great lengths to compile 80 pieces of alleged evidence for the existence of "viruses." Please note what I wrote above, and what Dr. Yeadon indirectly recommended, namely the careful distinction between an assumption underlying a scientific study and proof. James Hill's article can only be very convincing to those who fail to realize that all the evidence presented is based on an unproven assumption. This means that all "evidence" and conclusions beyond it, rooted in this assumption, are null and void.
……………………………………………
Jamie Andrews, August 18, 2025 :
https://substack.com/@controlstudies/note/c-146689096
The Virology Controls Studies Project
Still waiting for this guy to offer a rebuttal to the unanimous experimental science conducted by 30 yr accredited independent Microbiology Labs.
Instead they just wander off into a fantasy land of conjecture and assumptions and think that if they just ignore the mounting counter claims, it’ll just disappear.
Linked :
( Editor’s note : Please note that the author notes a tremendous increase in the number of scientists who have delved into the topic and no longer believe in "viruses." This is no coincidence, but has very good reasons. )
Top 80 ways to know viruses are real
Debunking "virology is fraud” arguments (Updated 9/1/25)
Aug 16, 2025
https://hillmd.substack.com/p/top-80-ways-to-know-viruses-are-real
…………………………………
UPDATE :
……………………..
Dr. Mike Yeadon, September 22, 2025 :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannelChat/204421
Apparently, a Dr James Hill published an article claiming viral transmission in mammals.
Mathew North here dismantles that false claim in a thorough manner.
It’s important to become aware of the flaky basis some people use to try to convince the unwary of false claims.
Best wishes
Mike
Linked :
Do Viruses Really Transmit Between Mammals?
A critical review of James Hill’s 12 cited studies using the Transmission Credibility Metric
Sep 21, 2025
https://mathewnorth.substack.com/p/do-viruses-really-transmit-between
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Allen, March 27, 2025 :
Editor’s note : Allen is a university professor from the USA who wishes to remain anonymous.
https://merylnass.substack.com/p/i-explained-why-the-deep-state-loves/comment/103866203
Virologists operate on the level of ancient superstitions. Snatching at imaginary dybbuk's that can only be seen through the lens of super techno-marvel machines that are pre-programmed to point towards motes and mites as evidence of the haunting.
Perpetuating this primitive superstition that submicroscopic invisible particles floating through the air make people sick requires loads of jargon, increasingly obscure language to mystify the quackery. Not to mention a non-stop multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns and legions of hired priests in white robes who claim the mantle of "science" to hoodwink the unsuspecting public. Pretty amazing to think people believe this voodoo garbage. Excellent means of social control.
And then they create magical elixirs (that in a sane world would be understood for what they are- industrial poisons) that allegedly exorcise these submicroscopic demons from the mortal body. Makes for a good show and big business, but has nothing to do with biological reality.
It's rather fitting that the pinnacle of the dangerous religious cults of virology and vaccinology is the malignant belief that injecting synthetic chemicals made by habitually criminal companies that profit from perpetual disease somehow produces health.
Germ theory and gene theory are both reductionist, primitive superstitions that only remain viable due to massive propaganda and massive funding from the ruling interests that birthed and benefit from them at the expense of humanity.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
A conversation from March/April 2025 :
………………………………………………………………………………………….
Allen, March 31, 2025 :
https://www.usmortality.com/p/are-viral-genomics-evidence-of-spread/comment/104780067
The entirety of meta-genomics and gene sequencing/assemblage are fraudulent.
People have been convinced through years of social engineering to believe that the things they see on screens represent biological reality.
PCR is worse than useless for diagnostics as are antigen tests. These tests are weaponized to manipulate public perceptions and invent "diseases."
The “genomic sequencing” for SARS-CoV-2 is yet another example of this fraud. The Corman-Drosten team developed the test for Covid-19 based on an In-silico Genetic Sequence (from a computer simulation).
They did not have any Viral Isolates of Covid-19 available, nor any clinical samples of anyone sick with the alleged new disease. Simply based on that, the test is invalid.
A new medical test must be validated against a 'Gold Standard", that is, a test which is 100% accurate.
The Corman-Drosten team, used the SARS sequence from 2003 (which itself was never properly purified or isolated), they then used the PCR primer related to that sequence, amplified it using PCR, sequenced that they amplified (they did this multiple times) and used the sequences that were different from the SARS sequence to develop primers for their diagnostic test. As there were no purified samples or Isolates of any kind, this entire experiment was made up.
It turns out, when you input the sequences that are being tested for, to show a positive case, the sequences show up 93 times in the human genome, and approx. 91 times from Bacteria/Fungi (Microbes). These supposed "New" sequences show up in nature and are not new at all.
Never mind, you cannot possibly say these sequences are coming from a "new virus" if you don't have the virus in the first place.
The team then sent this test to China, to test for this "Novel" virus that they created a test for, with none of the "Novel" virus at their disposal.
The Chinese scientists, who work for the WEF/Pharma Cartel BTW, "found" these sequences in their 'Atypical Pneumonia" patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms, (obviously being that these sequences show up in humans), and they create an entire "Genome" based off of 1 Clinical Sample.
In order to create a Genome correctly, you would need hundreds upon thousands of samples to develop an actual accurate "Viral Genome", they took 1 person that tested positive with a PCR test created without any virus.
They then took a clinical sample from a PCR + person's lung fluid, with symptoms consistent with "Atypical Pneumonia". They take only the short RNA strands from the clinical sample, and put them into computer programs- Megahit and Trinity.
These two programs assembled a bunch of Contigs (Possible Genome structures) made up of all the short RNA strands from the person, which number 56 Million.
The Trinity computer came up with 1,329,960 Contigs ranging from 201-11,760 base pairs, the Megahit computer came up with 384,096 Contigs ranging from 200-30,474 base pairs. In layman terms, the computer generated almost 2 million possible Genome Structures.
The longest Contig (30,474 base pairs) was chosen, simply because it was the longest one. Upon further investigation, this genome was only 80% similar to SARS-COV 1 bat-like sequence. They then add some Sars 1 sequences to make it look more like a SARS virus.
Can anyone not see at this point they are simply making shit up as they go to reach their pre-ordained conclusion?
80% is less similar than what humans are to house cats. The claim was the Genome totaled 29,903 bases long, which negates 571 bases from the Contig. If those weren't valid how do we know this entire Contig is valid?
The Contig chosen, was created out of 123,613 different pieces of short RNA from the clinical genetic sample.
They don't know where these sequences are coming from, they don't know if the genome is real, they don't know the amount of error in the process, they don't know how many "reads" were correct, this entire thing is theoretical and computer generated.
Then come thousands of papers and studies and reports all based on the original in-silico sorcery and deceptions...Turtles All The Way Down.
It's all fraud piled on top of fraud.
………………………………..
Walking Disease Vector, March 31, 2025 :
https://www.usmortality.com/p/are-viral-genomics-evidence-of-spread/comment/104817958
Or, as I like to say, when one digs down to the ultimate source of the claims with regard to “viruses”, there’s no “there” there. What do you call a “theory” built on air?
………………………………………………………………
Allen, March 31, 2025 :
https://www.usmortality.com/p/are-viral-genomics-evidence-of-spread/comment/104821532
Isn't it stupefying to watch people talk about this garbage as if it is real.
Meanwhile everything not strapped down is being stolen by the ghouls who are running this operation.
……………………………………………..
Corona Studies, March 31, 2025 :
https://www.usmortality.com/p/are-viral-genomics-evidence-of-spread/comment/104893289
( … )
In the analog world (the world of snot, hugging, French kissing etc) we already have 200+ studies which have consistently failed to make people sick by exposing them to sick people and their bodily fluids.
And in the digital realm we have the absolutely terrifying model of digital contagion which was created by the BBC, LSHTM and Cambridge University in 2017 using 30,000 smartphones and a specially commissioned app. This experiment used GPS and the special apps to simulate a 'digital pathogen' in an experiment involving no biology whatsoever. The data set from this experiment became (in their words) the new "gold standard for pandemic modelling" and it was used in 2020 to set lockdown policy. We also have the digital virus and its 50 billion variants thanks to 12th generation, megaflange, dolby C genomic sequencing software.
( … )
Perhaps because I'm not clever enough, but I really don't care if a smartphone app informs me I must 'identify' as an asymptomatic case of variant 48923093283 of some digital genome of some digital virus......
( … )
All the abstract, convoluted digital stuff feels like just another variant of modern day woke ideology and identity-based politics. In the event of a power cut, it all ceases to be... and we are left standing in the analog realm again, where over 200 experiments involving buckets of analog snot and phlegm failed to demonstrate contagion of anything.
…………………………………………………
Steven Johnson, April 1, 2025 :
https://www.usmortality.com/p/are-viral-genomics-evidence-of-spread/comment/105035860
Genome sequencing is just made up science. So the discussion ends there.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Afterword
by Florian
Florian, September 16, 2025 :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannelChat/202932
For a doctor, accepting the no-virus argument must be very difficult. It means demolishing one's deeply held beliefs about science, the medical profession, studies and trainjng, institutions, politics, commerce, the reality of everyday work and relationships... It also comes with a heavy bag of guilt for having vaccinated or asked to vaccinate innocent people. And for having participated in a giant and monstrous scam, even if unwittingly. Finally, it strips one of authority and a profession... Some major upheavals here. It is easier to keep on believing the lies and decide that "a few studies can't prove the world wrong".
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
'Call me that one more time and you can find yourself another doctor!'
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Related articles :
………………………………………
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/but-i-was-ill-what-else-could-it
………………………………………………
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/virus-lie-contagion-lie-vaccine-lie
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The most reliable information on the “Covid” hoax and the deceptions of the system can be found in the statements of Dr. Mike Yeadon, at the links below :
Dr. Mike Yeadon's Substack #1 :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/
( Notes : https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/notes )
The Telegram channel of Dr. Mike Yeadon ( other Telegram channels with his name are fake ! ) :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel
A collaborative Substack by Dr. Yeadon and Suavek ( Dr. Mike Yeadon's Substack #2 ) :
Fraud Prevention Hotline / suavek1.substack.com
DEAR FRIENDS,
The two Substacks, Dr. Yeadon's and Suavek's, have merged into a single, highly informative entity. The Fraud Prevention Hotline is now officially Dr. Yeadon's Substack No. 2. You can find his statement on this at the following link :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/my-other-substack
We urge you, if possible, to add both Substacks to your recommended list in your Substack. Thank you very much in advance,
Mike & Suavek
………………………………
The possible support goes to Suavek.
You can either do something against or for something :
I added this note to the article a little too late:
Editor’s note:
I think that mentioning alternatives to contagion is very helpful in understanding the problem.
If several people become ill at the same time in a shared room, the temporal connection does not constitute proof of alleged contagion. Sudden changes in the atmosphere, such as air temperature, humidity, air pressure, and other factors, also play a role in the development of the disease. The season and sunlight exposure must also be taken into account. You can find more information on this in this Substack in the article series "The Arguments for NO VIRUS."
P.S.
The afterword was also added later.
If a bacterium is a little animal then I guess it can do what some animals do. I've experienced a certain skin parasite here in the Australian bush. It attacks like any hungry animal that's eager to breed and multiply. The health of the attacked person seems immaterial. I couldn't catch a cold or flu if you paid me big dollars, but I can certainly suffer from this parasite.
While I doubt the very existence of viruses and don't feel threatened by bacteria, I don't see why some bacteria wouldn't have the ability to attack even the healthy. Mind you, as with any animal attack, I'd rather face it in good general health.