The Arguments for “NO VIRUS”- PART 47. Why is the number of virologists who all claim the same thing irrelevant? The alleged "proof" of the existence of SARS-CoV-2.
Proof based on an unproven assumption is not genuine.
Foreword
Dr. Mike Yeadon, December 12, 2025 :
https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/the-rogers-test-for-vetting-health/comment/186953559
Dear Toby, I’m a sober minded former Biopharma research scientist. I have discovered over the last six years, shockingly, that almost everything that is told to us by officialdom, which cannot be checked by us (because it’s too far away, too small or too complex) is a lie.
Among those lies is the pretence that submicroscopic, infectious particles called “viruses” are among the most important causes of illnesses.
However, the principal way of demonstrating the pathological properties of viruses rests entirely on a single technique. That is, addition of suspect samples to cells in culture, whereupon the cells begin to die, the so-called “cytopathic effect” or CPE.
This next part is so unbelievable that I rejected it for over two years after I was told about it. CPE occurs not because a clinical sample, thought to contain a virus was added, but because the researchers, following a 70 year old recipe, radically reduce the growth factors necessary to keep the cells alive and add high concentrations of antibiotics (ostensibly to retain bacterial sterility).
You may be thinking “This cannot be right because, if it was, the control leg of such a study would report CPE even with no putative pathogen”.
Here’s the shock. None of the papers reporting, for example, “The isolation of SARS-CoV-2” EVER include these controls. What this means is that, uniquely in “virology”, the scientific editors & peer reviewers have become accustomed to NOT expecting to see control legs and results. Obviously this is fraud.
But, does it matter? Over the last couple of years, Jamie Andrews, here on Substack, has gone back to the root of this central method in virology and, using Contract Research Organizations, performed the control studies above. In every case, when he looked at the cells after growth factor dilution and addition of antibiotics, he sees the cells begin to die off, that is, CPE occurs. He’s repeatedly confirmed that it’s the protocol & not the purported “virus” which causes cells to die.
What this shows is that the most important technique for “confirming the cytotoxic effect of viruses” is deliberate fraud and has been since the first time it was reported on in the 1950s. On that occasion a Nobel Prize was awarded for this sloppy science.
This is #1 in the three central lies of virology. Check Jamie’s articles for yourself.
The second lie is to claim that the illnesses misattributed to a virus are contagious. We’ve all been told that you can “catch” these illnesses yourself if transmission (aka contagion) happens. This is simply not true. In my own field of acute respiratory illnesses, typically colds and influenza (aka ‘flu), we’ve been told for decades that they’re “catching”, because these “viruses” hop from the sick person to a well person. You will be unable to find a single published paper demonstrating this simple principle, because it’s not true. I maintain a listing, on my Telegram channel, of every published study on attempted transmission of colds and flu. These papers start in 1918 & continue until 2024. In not a single paper do healthy volunteers develop symptoms, after spending time with a symptomatic person, any more often than when the volunteers spent the same amount of time with a well person. Acute respiratory illnesses are simply not contagious.
This is #2 lie of the trio.
Once it’s realised that ordinary illnesses have been deliberately misattributed to non-existent “viruses” and that such illnesses are not contagious, the entire field of vaccines is destroyed.
I summarise this, in short form, like this:
“The Virus Lie + The Contagion Lie = The Vaccine Lie”.
[ https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/virus-lie-contagion-lie-vaccine-lie ]
This is the most important piece of evil genius sitting at the centre of the totalitarian control grid that is being pushed for by scores of governments today in the form of a biometric, digital ID, updated in real time. We first saw hints of this by an obviously excited Tony Blair, who was going on about Vaccine Passports in 2020, long before there was any “vaccine”.
Based on the Virus Lie + The Contagion Lie, the authorities persuaded 5.5 billion people to roll up their sleeves and get injected.
I knew that these injections couldn’t possibly be as described. It’s simply not possible to invent, evaluate, run toxicity tests, execute the clinical trials claimed, manufacture, gain authorisation and be ready for launch in under one year. It’s like pretending to grow a baby in one month using nine women. It’s a lie and it wasn’t done. Either they did nothing like what we’ve been told or they started before the fraudulent pandemic happened. Neither is good.
Quite separate from all this, as a pharma veteran who trained, among other things, in Mechanistic Toxicology, I warned in writing to the European Medicines Agency, before any of these injections received their fake authorisation, that by the nature of the very design of these products, multiple, independent causes of harm were built into these products. The toxicities I warned about began happening on the first day of mass roll out and continue to today. There were additional harms which I had not spotted (particularly cancers).
Many people (as I did too) initially reject all this out of hand. We feel “sure” that we do indeed “catch colds” from other people. It’s certainly true that, from time to time, the sequencing of illnesses does happen in ways that are consistent with contagion. However, that’s all it is, consistent with contagion. It’s not proof of it. When we actively look for proof, it is never found. This means that other factors account for these patterns of illness.
The breakthrough for me was realising that we form patterns from events. Colds are sufficiently commonplace around us that, almost every time we develop a cold, we can recall somebody who, a short while back, was coughing a spluttering near us and conclude that this near encounter was the cause. What we never do is note the number of occasions where we have such encounters yet do not go on to develop symptoms of our own.
Expectations are crucial, too. Nobody with a migraine asks “From whom did I catch this headache?”. Nor does anyone experiencing angina say “I must have caught this chest pain from somebody”. Of course, you may say, these are not infectious diseases. I agree. However, neither are colds and flu.
Colds and flu are, in my professional opinion, like these other maladies, a consequence of loss of usual, dynamic internal equilibrium. Especially in winter, we’re moving between environments with high or low temperatures and high or low humidity. These and numerous other factors contribute to stressing our ability to tightly regulate our “airway surface liquid” which lines our entire respiratory tree. Loss of control of airway surface liquid prompts symptoms which we call a cold, and more severe disruptions we call flu. It takes days to weeks to regrow our airway lining cells as symptoms gradually subside.
We develop colds and flu. We simply do not catch them.
Why would anyone do this, setting up this complex deception?
First, the fear of illness and death is potent and it gives the authorities a mechanism to scare their citizens and as well as offering a pseudo justification for imposing restrictions upon us, notionally for public health reasons.
More usefully, it provides a pseudo justification for injecting trusting people in their billions. Our bodies normally defend us well against environmental threats. If we eat something that’s rancid, we will probably vomit it out. If we inhale something irritant, we may sneeze and we’ll certainly cough. If something caustic lands on our skin, it may burn & cause pain, prompting us to wash it off. But something injected into our bodies bypasses all of our natural defences.
One last thing. Of all the products of the pharmaceutical industry, only one, vaccines, may not be questioned, let alone challenged. Any doctor so doing will rapidly find their medical license in the balance. But it’s not limited to the medical profession. Any professional, dentist, architect, estate agent, solicitor etc etc who persistently criticises vaccines soon comes to the attention of their regulatory body or professional register. It’s made clear to you that continued criticism of vaccines “may be deemed to be bringing the profession into disrepute. This could have consequences on your continuing ability to practise your profession”. The pattern of extraordinary defence of vaccines extends to all professionals. It’s a very effective way of shutting people up.
I cannot find any other product of pharma where similar criticisms are not tolerated. On the contrary, even doctors may criticise certain drug classes such as anti-cholesterol drugs or even specific drugs in a class such as antidepressants.
I believe the best-fitting interpretation of all these events is that those I call The Perpetrators always envisioned using the fear of infectious & contagious diseases to frighten & control people at scale and subsequently to inject billions of people & most captive animals with covertly manufactured chemicals, obviously for nefarious purposes.
I’d be happy to chat if any of this extraordinary story piques your interest.
Best wishes
Mike
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Why is the number of virologists who all claim the same thing irrelevant?
by Suavek
A comment from Penny10 led to a completely unintended continuation of the following article :
The Arguments for “NO VIRUS”- PART 46. What do the “viruses” have to do with Hitler’s diaries? The AI acknowledges the possibility of validation fraud in the PCR test.
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-46
In the following I will answer a question based on a statement by AI, which claims that many virologists have supposedly proven the existence of the “SARS-CoV-2 virus.” Certainly, many others could refute this nonsense far better than I can, and they could have done so in wonderful, correct English. Among them are some very eloquent readers of this substack whom I have already quoted several times. They are welcome to complete this article with their desired comments, or simply present their own perspective. Until this has happened, I am the “gap filler” who has to fill the gaps in the necessary argument. I would like to sincerely thank the commenter Penny10, to whom I am replying here, and who provided the impetus for this article. His (or her) statement is as follows :
……………………………………………………
Penny10, February 8, 2026 :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-46/comment/212019764
On the assumption that viruses exist (for the purpose of this exercise) I asked AI how scientists knew they had the correct gene sequence for covid. The reply was:
“When COVID first appeared, different research groups around the world:
Collected patient samples
Extracted viral RNA
Sequenced it using different technologies (Illumina, Oxford Nanopore, etc.)
If independent labs produce the same sequence, that’s a strong confirmation.
Within days of the first release, labs in China, Australia, the US, and Europe all sequenced the virus and got matching genomes.”
Ai continued to explain at great length how the process worked but it didn’t seem to confirm that the sequence was thoroughly tested to ensure it was correct. So I asked how labs in Australia etc were able to get the samples to do this confirmation.
This was the reply:
“By mid‑January 2020, travelers who had been in Wuhan were already showing symptoms in other countries. The first confirmed cases outside China appeared in:
Thailand (Jan 13, 2020)
Japan (Jan 15)
South Korea (Jan 20)
United States (Jan 21)
Australia (Jan 25)
France (Jan 24)
These patients provided local samples — no need to import anything from China.
Once a country had even one infected patient, scientists could extract viral RNA and sequence it themselves.”
Apparently these viral sequences matched the original one so they knew it was correct. It all just seems very unlikely to me!
……………………………………………….
Suavek answers
The question we should be asking ourselves is: How did the Australian, or Thai virologists know that the genetic sequence they “isolated” from the arrivals, following the WHO’s exact instructions (!), came specifically from “SARS-CoV-2”? Jamie Andrews has shown in one of his articles that the isolation process itself is a fraud. He is very familiar with this matter. Here is a relevant article by Jamie Andrews:
SARS COV 2 ISOLATION PROTOCOL CONTROL EXPERIMENTS
Vero Cell Line
Sep 27, 2025
https://controlstudies.substack.com/p/controls2
Jamie Andrews’ article makes history, answers many questions, and is of course very much worth reading. But I would like to answer the question posed to me completely in the following.
I suspect that the scientists mentioned by the AI compared” the sequence found (following the WHO’s instructions) with virus databases, just as the German graphologist compared the alleged Hitler signature with the one he found in a museum. However, both signatures were forgeries, so the “proof” of the authenticity of Hitler’s diaries was based on false assumptions and was therefore false. The AI’s claim that it is proof provided by many virologists can also be understood as a kind of belief based on false assumptions. The number of scientists who have compared one genetic sequence with another is irrelevant. The crucial question is: who determined that comparing similar sequences would reveal no other biological material than the “virus”? It could have been any sequence present in many people. Who decided it was specifically a “virus”?
The alleged evidence for the existence of “Covid”, obtained through PCR tests, also failed. The PCR test was developed in Berlin, although the scientists responsible for it, Drosten and Corman, did not receive either a real tissue sample from the Chinese patient (who showed all the symptoms of pneumonia) or a “virus” isolate.They only had a fragment of genetic code at their disposal. This German article lists the problems associated with the PCR test. The authors are presumably conventional medical practitioners, so not everything here may be accurate, but it is still useful:
https://ruhrkultour.de/zehn-schwerwiegende-probleme-im-corman-drosten-papier/
Conclusion
The question of how many physicians and scientists have confirmed the novel virus is irrelevant. It would be a mistake to be impressed by this. A question that could help us further is: What did the virologists compare the gene sequence they found to? And: Was the alleged “virus” actually isolated during the isolation process? On what basis do these people claim to have found the alleged “deadly virus”? At this point, we see that a high number of virologists all claiming the same thing proves absolutely nothing, but can only impress those who haven’t bothered to dig deeper. The procedure for isolating the alleged “virus” follows the exact instructions of the WHO, and the comparison of a genetic sequence is done automatically in the database. No one is responsible for the accuracy of the comparison result in the “virus” database, and no one knows who designed the testing software. We cannot name a single person responsible for the virus databases who could answer our crucial questions. Because the alleged “proof” is based on assumptions that the databases provide accurate comparative results, and a virologist never conducts their “proof” from start to finish themselves, they must rely on the database. However, a simple control test can show that the same supposed “virus” (a gene sequence of something) can also be found in perfectly healthy individuals. If a virologist relies on the corrupt medical system and doesn’t conduct genuine control tests themselves for fear of suspension or losing research funding, then their findings can never be taken seriously.
The “evidence” mentioned by AI is based on assumptions that the medical system is not corrupt but reliable. No virologist publicly asks sensitive questions that might be contrary to their interests.
If the underlying assumption is false, then the entire chain of evidence built upon it is also false. The AI is obviously trying to impress us with the large number of virologists. At the same time, it obscures the basis for the alleged “numerous pieces of evidence.”
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Allen, February 11, 2026 :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-47/comment/212850027
Mike’s comment has been edited out of Toby’s existence. Why has it been erased- someone should ask Toby this. I would but I was banned from his substack for not just challenging him on the Wuhan lab leak fairy tale but doing so with his own statements that proved the absurdity of that part of the covid propaganda. As for the ever elusive Sars-CoV-2 it is another in a long list of hyper-reality fictional characters cooked up by the bio-security apparatus in service to the desires to the supranational investment firms that dictate policy.
The “genomic sequencing” for SARS-CoV-2 is the quintessential example of how this fraud works.
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.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Allen is angry !
…………………………………
Allen, February 11, 2026 :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-47/comment/212835247
They are all on the same payroll.
The vast majority of physicians and scientists are bought off charlatans and extremely arrogant to boot which is an essential feature of their character as they are quite insecure as they traffic in one phony study piled on top of the other.
There is no question whatsoever that if the majority of grant money shifted in such a way that these quacks were now required to pump out papers that established the moon was made of cheese they would do exactly that. I know these people in abundance, at length and have more first hand experience with them than you can imagine. They are nearly all professional liars and their careers are built on becoming “experts” in and perpetuating the fraudulent catechism of the ruling class and will defend such positions to the bitter end. Anyone who thinks they can reason with such people is fooling themselves.
Demonstrating their ignorance on any number of these matters is quite simple and these ignorant “High Priests of the Academy” always run off like frightened cockroaches when someone who can challenge and blow holes in their bullshit comes along.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Afterword
by Rider
Rider, February 2, 2026 :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-47/comment/212858674
Thank you Suavek for your republishing Dr Yeadon’s great article explaining three basic logical problems around which post modernists have invented viruses and vaccines and the malignant implications of the pre-known toxicity of the shots. Thank you also for writing about the nonsense at the base of viral genonmic sequencing, the unknown sources of any dna or rna taken from cell cultures or even from any human sample, and the facts that computer modeling, the nature of the data bases, the inventors and talkers involved, and more are all unknowns.
For people who want a clear explanation of why viruses are not just unproven, and why the idea is fraught with contradictions that virus enthusiasts studiously ignore, all in one easy to read and understand booklet, here is a 29,000 word essay by Mark Bailey, former practicing MD of New Zealand. I recommend this highly. https://drsambailey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/A-FAREWELL-TO-VIROLOGY-Expert-Edition-V1.2.pdf
Another book written by Mark Bailey that illuminates the shadowy methods and meaning of official claims of genomic sequencing of some imagined-to-exist virus is entitled also, “https://drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert-edition/ But the book explains much more than the essay and devotes a lot of explanation to the mystery surrounding virus genomic sequencing, the data bases, how viral sequencing requires computer modeling with software versions, how this procedure turns up not one or a half dozen but 100,000 possibilities! How do viology sequencing artists select the correct ‘possibility”? They apply arbitray standards based on a template derived from the data base for ‘that kind of virus’ that was itself based on aa prior template going back...back...back...to the first virus. Mark Bailey exxplains this far more cogently and with vastly more understanding than I bring to this. But his book is excellent. I will have to read it two more times to commit 80% of it to understanding and memory.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………..
The “AIDS virus” mentioned here, meaning HIV, certainly does not exist. But the phenomenon of the destruction of the immune system in “vaccinated” individuals does indeed exist.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Related articles:
…………………………………….
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/the-arguments-for-no-virus-part-28
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
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
…………………………………..
Dr. Mike Yeadon, December 21 ( update Dec. 23 ), 2025 :
Source : https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/scorpions-in-the-dock
Consider subscribing to my friend Suavek s publication an essential move please. There you can find many posts from my Telegram channel collated with other material in a skilful way. Fraud Prevention Hotline
Best
Mike
……………………………………………………
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. Any support is especially welcome at this time, and is VERY appreciated, but of course is not mandatory, as this Substack is free. I extend my sincere thanks to those who have supported me so far.
You can either do something against or for something :
 | A guest post by
|
They are all on the same payroll.
The vast majority of physicians and scientists are bought off charlatans and extremely arrogant to boot which is an essential feature of their character as they are quite insecure as they traffic in one phony study piled on top of the other.
There is no question whatsoever that if the majority of grant money shifted in such a way that these quacks were now required to pump out papers that established the moon was made of cheese they would do exactly that. I know these people in abundance, at length and have more first hand experience with them than you can imagine. They are nearly all professional liars and their careers are built on becoming "experts" in and perpetuating the fraudulent catechism of the ruling class and will defend such positions to the bitter end. Anyone who thinks they can reason with such people is fooling themselves.
Demonstrating their ignorance on any number of these matters is quite simple and these ignorant "High Priests of the Academy" always run off like frightened cockroaches when someone who can challenge and blow holes in their bullshit comes along.
Thank you Suavek for your republishing Dr Yeadon's great article explaining three basic logical problems around which post modernists have invented viruses and vaccines and the malignant implications of the pre-known toxicity of the shots. Thank you also for writing about the nonsense at the base of viral genonmic sequencing, the unknown sources of any dna or rna taken from cell cultures or even from any human sample, and the facts that computer modeling, the nature of the data bases, the inventors and talkers involved, and more are all unknowns.
For people who want a clear explanation of why viruses are not just unproven, and why the idea is fraught with contradictions that virus enthusiasts studiously ignore, all in one easy to read and understand booklet, here is a 29,000 word essay by Mark Bailey, former practicing MD of New Zealand. I recommend this highly. https://drsambailey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/A-FAREWELL-TO-VIROLOGY-Expert-Edition-V1.2.pdf
Another book written by Mark Bailey that illuminates the shadowy methods and meaning of official claims of genomic sequencing of some imagined-to-exist virus is entitled also, "https://drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert-edition/ But the book explains much more than the essay and devotes a lot of explanation to the mystery surrounding virus genomic sequencing, the data bases, how viral sequencing requires computer modeling with software versions, how this procedure turns up not one or a half dozen but 100,000 possibilities! How do viology sequencing artists select the correct 'possibility"? They apply arbitray standards based on a template derived from the data base for 'that kind of virus' that was itself based on aa prior template going back...back...back...to the first virus. Mark Bailey exxplains this far more cogently and with vastly more understanding than I bring to this. But his book is excellent. I will have to read it two more times to commit 80% of it to understanding and memory.