/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12713318]

When did you realize that germ theory is wrong?

[Anonymous No.12713325]

when tom barnett told me

[Anonymous No.12713343]

>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.12713700]

>>12713318
Reading the studies and realizing Koch’s postulates were never really meat. On very remarkable moment was Max von Pettenkoffer, the professor who build my cities sanitation system, ingesting massive amounts of vibrio cholerae send to him by Koch in front of many people. He allegedly developed very mild symptoms and hence they claim he was lucky because of residual immunity from an earlier infection. While they don’t tell you, he also took a laxative (sodium bicarbonate) to disprove Koch’s claims about acid neutralizing the bacteria. Which certainly explains every “symptom” he developed.

[Anonymous No.12713710]

>>12713318
Good luck with that, this board is full of midwits.
Thank goodness you can find geniuses in /x/ and /pol/

[Anonymous No.12714328]

>>12713325
You will have to be more specific.

[Anonymous No.12714385]

>>12713700
>he also took a laxative (sodium bicarbonate) to disprove Koch’s claims about acid neutralizing the bacteria.
Sodium bicarbonate is a potent antimicrobial.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229979395_Antimicrobial_Activity_of_Sodium_Bicarbonate

[Anonymous No.12714557]

>>12714385
No it isn’t the study is an out layer. The medium they used doesn’t support vibrio cholera. And there was never any effect of SB shown in vivo.

https://earthwormexpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Antimicrobial-Activity-of-Sodium-Bicarbonate.pdf

>To examine the inhibition of bacteria in a liquid system, Brain Heart Infusion broth (BHI, Difco Laboratories, Detroit, MI) was prepared in citrate phosphate buffer at pH 5.6, 6.0, 7.0
Quiet obviously he never got his stomach anywhere close to that level. Also the effect is alleged to be in the range of 10.000 platelets reduction. He took a enough to easily make this reduction irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.12714797]

>>12713318
Hilarious depiction

[Anonymous No.12714853]

>>12713318
Why do you foreign nationals continue to try to spread your obvious lies?
We should just nuke your country and be done with it.

[Anonymous No.12714871]

>>12714557
>No it isn’t the study is an out layer.
No it's not.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02245/full

https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/11524862/Antibacterial_activity_of_baking_soda_

[Anonymous No.12715255]

>>12713318

[Anonymous No.12715739]

>>12714871
>no not an outlier
Yes. It is. There is a reason even the people, who think the bacteria are at the route of all evil aren’t convinced.
>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02245/full
Look at the pH level basically no chance this translates to significant growth inhibitory effects in the digestive tract of humans. Even they just speculate/talk about the respiratory tract.
And the also used BHI, which again isn’t optimal for most bacteria. Hence the sensitivity to other effects will be even higher.
>https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/11524862/Antibacterial_activity_of_baking_soda_
>Short-term exposure assays showed significant killing of bacterial suspensions when baking soda was combined with the detergent sodium dodecylsulfate.
Nah. I don’t see this being supported by much evidence.

[Anonymous No.12715745]

>>12715739
>route
root

[Anonymous No.12716156]

>>12713318
>disease is caused by poor nutrition and toxic substances
And demons. Don't forget the demons.

[Anonymous No.12716412]

>>12716156
>and demons
Today, they call it "invisible viruses"

[Anonymous No.12716954]

>>12716412
And what silly ritual it needs for them to „materialize“. Only within energy and FBS depleted abnormal monolayer cells being bombarded with antibiotics some noice (by PCR) and some vague figures (by electron microscope) allegedly belonging to the virus can be seen.

[Anonymous No.12717059]

>>12714871
You probably also have to know, we terrain theory supporters are agreeing with the scientific mainstream on vibrio cholera for the most part. V. cholera happens to be one of the organisms, that actually was studied reasonably well. Not that there is a lot of data on toxicology and other factors surrounding V. cholera cases, but at least we have somewhat decent data sets on where and when it can be cultured. Most humans from whom V. cholera could be cultured don’t show any symptoms. And only a low single digit amount really has the „classical“ symptoms. Obviously the germ theory folks will come with tons of auxiliary hypothesis about incomplete protective immunity, immunity just against certain proteins associated with pathogenicity islands, dose, microbiome make up and so on, but they already agree it certainly isn’t enough to cause disease.

[Anonymous No.12717705]

>>12716954
We can also create them on a computer if needed for more government fundings

[Anonymous No.12718499]

>>12717705
The emergent founding. But that’s a last ditch effort in my opinion. If you look at the headlines on the papers everybody still pretends it’s about Kochs postulates. Them claiming their in silico methods are even remotely related is utterly ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.12718796]

>>12713318
Any studies proving transmission?

[Anonymous No.12718858]

>>12714853
We must save every elderly pensioner from the WuFlu. Social security's insolvency depends on it!

[Anonymous No.12718884]

>>12713318
stop trying to feed normies shit they wont get it and will be confused or angry

[Anonymous No.12718915]

>>12715739
>Look at the pH level
Slightly alkaline? It's very easy to hit a 7 pH with a bit of baking soda. There's a reason people have used it successfully to treat stomach ailments. Likely the change in pH is enough to unsettle things, then the body pumps in more HCI. Bacteria likes a stable pH, so even though baking soda is antimicrobial, the alkalinity is likely only part of the equation when looking at its effect in vivo.

[Anonymous No.12718923]

>>12713318
As soon as you guzzle a vial of "viruses" and not get sick from them
Prove your hypothesis

[Anonymous No.12718931]

>>12717059
A big MEH. Yes, germs are part of the equation, as is the host. Not rocket science. You can make a host as miserable as you want, and yet they won't suffer from infections in a sterile environment. Obviously you should build up the host as much as possible, but the reality is many people have been beaten down for decades, and there's nothing that's going to magically build them back up in a matter of months. Germs are still what sets off the negative events, as we know from experiments with sterile animals.

[Anonymous No.12718962]

>>12718884
Pretty impressive how they go insane, if you even raise questions.
>the studies were inconclusive maybe the sprayed something at these pig farms. They never did serious toxicology studies on the individuals, pigs and areas involved.
>No. You moron it was Nipah. It’s the evil Paramyxoviruses they are everywhere.
>But how can you know? Without the toxicology. We just have some genome fragments from very common RNA sequences.
>shut up you are spreading dangerous misinformation

[Anonymous No.12718967]

>>12713318
Go to your local sewage outlet.
Gather samples
Grow in media
Isolate and grow again to ensure you dilute out any of the natural toxins
Plate
Take streaks and grow in media
Drink media and rub on an open wound

An easy experiment to prove bacteria don't cause disease.

[Anonymous No.12718977]

You people are the definition of brainlets

[Anonymous No.12719036]

>>12718915
>It's very easy to hit a 7 pH with a bit of baking soda.
That’s only for a very short period of time.
In the stomach it will never stay at that level for any relevant amount of time. But I think you agree.
>There's a reason people have used it successfully to treat stomach ailments
True. Because they were at resting values below 3. But if you introduce huge amounts of alkaline substances your body will jump into action like you said.
>the alkalinity is likely only part of the equation when looking at its effect in vivo.
I agree and but there has never been any significant effect shown in vivo. Hence even that is up for debate.
>You can make a host as miserable as you want, and yet they won't suffer from infections in a sterile environment
Well I would say the lab animals aren’t doing fine. The mice with the damaged genome and the next to none existing microbiome are never really healthy. And giving them too much of anything can very easily push them over the edge. Even supposedly beneficial microorganisms can be too much for them depending on the circumstances.
>Germs are still what sets of the negative events.
I mostly disagree. We are talking about conditions that never happen in nature. If you actually read the literature you can see, how the outcome is predetermined by the methodology.
Just look at the original experiments determining SARS-CoV-1 a pathogen/“proving” Koch’s postulates. It was n=4 in non human primates. Not double blinded and obviously no placebo control. What they injected with massive force was the equivalent of 50ml for an adult human. Even if it’s saline and in healthy adults, this injected into the respiratory tract would cause health issues. But it was dying green monkey kidney epithelium cells, antibiotics, medium, FBS and BAL from humans with atypical pneumonia.
Only one was coughing. Which is a surprise and not a single one died due to the illness. They were narcotized using Ketamine multiple times.

[Anonymous No.12719043]

>>12718967
You get that most bacteria do accumulate toxins? You need to purify it. Which isn’t easy and you need to do toxicology analysis on it.
Sewage is obviously contaminated with almost every chemical in the book. And even getting the bacteria clean is really hard work. But you probably didn’t know that.

[Anonymous No.12719145]

>>12713318
>thinks autism is contagious

[Anonymous No.12719353]

>>12718796
Well, it wouldn't be ethical to try such things on humans, but back then, when we didn't give a fuck, we could see it wasn't so obvious.
A simple example is that in certain household, some get sick and some don't even if they share the same bed.

[Anonymous No.12719380]

>>12715739
Vibrio grows on BHI just fine. It's a nonselective agar that supports the growth of almost any non-fastidious organism, including Vibrio. That said, you're right that bacteriologists don't buy the study. Enough sodium bicarbonate to actually neutralize the stomach would fuck someone's blood up, not to mention it takes a fuckton of Vibrio cholerae to cause disease, and the vast majority of the time infections don't cause disease. The disease is caused by toxins, not by the bacteria itself.

Also remember when reading anything about killing organisms in vitro, "so does a handgun."

[Anonymous No.12719403]

>>12718931
>sterile animals

[Anonymous No.12720252]

>>12719380
>Vibrio grows on BHI just fine
I was under the impression you see growth, but it’s not really much. Never heard of it being used. Like in TTG, DHI or TCBS. And if you want to simulate a fight against bacteria halfway realistically (as far as it’s possible in vitro) you need to use the medium providing optimal conditions for a bacterium.

[Anonymous No.12720272]

>>12719380
>The disease is caused by toxins, not by the bacteria itself.
But you think it’s exotoxin (formerly believed to be an endotoxin)? So you think the bacteria only sometimes produces the toxin or relevant amounts of it. Because most, who have it don’t show any signs and report no symptoms.
>Also remember when reading anything about killing organisms in vitro, "so does a handgun."
Yep that’s basically, what I think.

[Anonymous No.12721118]

>>12719036
>In the stomach it will never stay at that level for any relevant amount of time. But I think you agree.
I made that point already. Bacteria tend to thrive at particular pH levels (the level depends on the bacteria). Major fluctuations are not good for bacteria, so shifting quickly with sodium bicarbonate and then HCI will have a profound antimicrobial effect.

>The mice with the damaged genome and the next to none existing microbiome are never really healthy.
Wait, now you're saying it's not the "terrain"? If the microbiome and probiotics are important for immunity, then that's giving importance to germs. The way I had the terrain theory described to me was through strep throat. The tissue is damaged, the strep is simply invading the damaged tissue to induce a healing effect, and antibiotics interfere with the process. Yet strep throat can be prevented/eliminated in many people simply by altering the oral biome. That damaged tissue isn't being removed, the strep is simply unable to become a major player in the biome. The oral biome is easy to alter. Once bacteria has infiltrated the blood stream or lungs or an abscess, more extreme measures are needed.

>What they injected with massive force was the equivalent of 50ml for an adult human. Even if it’s saline and in healthy adults, this injected into the respiratory tract would cause health issues.
Then it's a miracle that the Moderna vaccine was able to prevent SARS-CoV-2 in primates, yes?

[Anonymous No.12724893]

>>12721118
>I made that point already. Bacteria tend to thrive at particular pH levels (the level depends on the bacteria). Major fluctuations are not good for bacteria, so shifting quickly with sodium bicarbonate and then HCI will have a profound antimicrobial effect.
There is no good indication that SB really has any effect in vivo. We agree to disagree.
>Wait, now you're saying it's not the "terrain“
It’s still the terrain. Animals which are in the lab don’t prove anything. Even the people doing this stuff freely admit it. As their saying goes mice lie. The animals are genetically unhealthy, don’t have a natural environment, get bad nutrition and are subjected to all kinds of unhealthy procedures.
>Yet strep throat can be prevented/eliminated in many people simply by altering the oral biome
Yes and by eating healthy and removing bad environmental effects. The bacteria are there for a reason, if you remove the reasons or organisms better at the task are introduced, they tend to be relived of the task.
>Then it's a miracle that the Moderna vaccine was able to prevent SARS-CoV-2 in primates
We can go through that study, if you want. I already. Looked at it. And no it doesn’t prove it prevents SARS-CoV-2.

[Anonymous No.12725056]

>>12721118
I assume we are talking about this study
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2024671?query=RP
And no it doesn’t show it protects. There is no information on the symptoms and nothing on overall pathology. They didn’t publish weight or anything. And that’s not even what they claim. They say they measure statistical parameters they define as representative of immune response. The study isn’t double blinded and there is reason to question even that. Because one of the control group monkeys had issues with the sedation, which is indication of something going wrong with the sedation in the control group and/or health of the control group animals.

[Anonymous No.12725072]

>>12713318
exosome model for viruses make a lot of sense. Sort of an interesting chicken or the egg hypothetical

[Anonymous No.12725222]

>>12713318
Really interesting how much John Hopkins did in the last years. The Event201 larp, https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2017/spars-pandemic-scenario.pdf
and how they conveniently had the case tracker at hand. Nobody ever isolated and purified the alleged causative agent. No genome was ever found intact. And yet some sequences fragments in people with atypical pneumonia are enough reason to destroy the middle class and small/medium sized cooperations.

[Anonymous No.12725295]

>>12725072
It’s not just exosomes it’s EVs and other apoptotic bodies. In the time before it was even more wild. Interestingly electron microscopy pictures of variola major look identical to adiposomes and HIV-1 and HIV-2 look exactly like mitochondria, if you look at them from the direction of the longer axis and not like it is usually displayed from the side in the text books.

[Anonymous No.12726371]

>>12724893
How are germs part of the terrain? If that's terrain, then there is no terrain theory. Terrain theory is that germs are only an issue in damaged tissues, but that's a load of bunk because you can change the flora without changing the cells and completely avoid infection. If you're going to start with the good germs and bad germs, then at that point you're just agreeing with modern medicine's view of germs, since it's big on probiotics now.

>Yes and by eating healthy and removing bad environmental effects.
No, by changing nothing but adding some probiotics. Not terrain, "germs." The person's health hasn't improved, the health of their cells haven't improved, they've simply suppressed the pathogenic bacteria with other bacteria that doesn't produce harmful substances. Oral flora is primarily determined by the mother's flora, you're not changing it simply through exercise or healthy eating, you need to supply probiotics or add something that's selective against certain types of bacteria, like xylitol.

>>12725056
>There is no information on the symptoms and nothing on overall pathology.
There's no symptoms or pathology where there's no infection.

[Anonymous No.12726415]

>>12726371
>Terrain theory is that germs are only an issue in damaged tissues, but that's a load of bunk because you can change the flora without changing the cells and completely avoid infection. If you're going to start with the good germs and bad germs, then at that point you're just agreeing with modern medicine's view of germs, since it's big on probiotics now.
I think there is only good and better organisms. The body will use what’s available to deal with the issues at hand. And if you introduce something better to deal with something the body will make use of it, if it’s possible. And yes modern medicine in cutting edge research is mostly agreeing with terrain theory.
>No, by changing nothing but adding some probiotics. Not terrain, "germs." The person's health hasn't improved, the health of their cells haven't improved, they've simply suppressed the pathogenic bacteria with other bacteria that doesn't produce harmful substances. Oral flora is primarily determined by the mother's flora, you're not changing it simply through exercise or healthy eating, you need to supply probiotics or add something that's selective against certain types of bacteria, like xylitol
I’m not sure, if you got my point. I’m saying even the supposedly harmful organism is there for a reason. But if you introduce organisms better at the task it’s possible to make symptoms or signs disappear.
>There's no symptoms or pathology where there's no infection.
If the verum group animals were much more healthy, why didn’t they tell us. There was a placebo group. So this would be the most interesting thing. Measuring some parameters in the blood that are believed to be relevant doesn’t mean anything. How healthy are the animals.

[Anonymous No.12726452]

>>12726415
>I’m not sure, if you got my point. I’m saying even the supposedly harmful organism is there for a reason. But if you introduce organisms better at the task it’s possible to make symptoms or signs disappear.
But that's not terrain theory.

"The terrain is everything, the germ is nothing." - Claude Bernard

Looking strictly at the terrain, if shouldn't matter whether a person has "good" or "bad" bacteria, if they're healthy, it wouldn't matter, yet I would suspect even a very healthy person will not have a good time after ingesting cholerae.

>The body will use what’s available to deal with the issues at hand. And if you introduce something better to deal with something the body will make use of it, if it’s possible.
The body's making use of nothing (the exception being some of the byproducts of bacterial metabolism in the intestines). Bacteria will grow where there's sources of food, and the body has few means to deal with it. That bacteria can be harmful or benign. The terrain isn't changing, only the bacteria is.

Really, you're just re-hashing what modern theory is, which is neither strictly the terrain or germ theory. The overall health of the organism matters, a healthy biome matters that can prevent a pathogen from gaining a foothold, and sometimes the pathogens take over and need to be dealt with.

I look at it like this. If someone is wearing a bullet proof vest, and a bullet hits the vest, they may be fine. Take the vest away, and they could die. The organism hasn't physically changed, their skin isn't harder. If you crowd out pathogenic bacteria, you're not changing the organism, you're simply blocking any entry point for the pathogen.

[Anonymous No.12727391]

>>12726452
>Looking strictly at the The overall health of the organism matters, a healthy biome matters that can prevent a pathogen from gaining a foothold, and sometimes the pathogens take over and need to be dealt with terrain, if shouldn't matter whether a person has "good" or "bad" bacteria, if they're healthy, it wouldn't matter, yet I would suspect even a very healthy person will not have a good time after ingesting cholerae
Yes. It’s still terrain theory, because if the terrain was right the issue wouldn’t be there. And since most people with vibrio cholera are fine you are disputing mainstream.
>Bacteria will grow where there's sources of food, and the body has few means to deal with it. That bacteria can be harmful or benign. The terrain isn't changing, only the bacteria is.
>The overall health of the organism matters, a healthy biome matters that can prevent a pathogen from gaining a foothold, and sometimes the pathogens take over and need to be dealt with.
If the terrain is right the “healthy” microbiome will be there. You don’t call in the rough guys, if it’s about a small repair and not about dismantling something. And your view of organisms showing up everywhere resources are is flat out disputed by modern science. Species communicate and organize across different kingdoms.

[Anonymous No.12727392]

>>12727391
>are disputing mainstream.
the mainstream

[Anonymous No.12728243]

>>12713325
>tom barnett
Never heard of him. I will look him up. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.12729242]

>>12713318
>loves his mask

[Anonymous No.12729325]

>>12716156
>>12716412
Coronavirus is caused by a real microscopic virus that was carefully planned into existence by demons.

[Anonymous No.12729444]

>>12713318
>Chlamydia is due to poor diet, not a sexually transmitted bacteria

[Anonymous No.12729924]

>>12729444
>Chlamydia
You are probably talking about Chlamydia trachomatis Serovars? Do you have a study in mind in couldn’t find anything satisfying Koch’s postulates?

[Anonymous No.12729999]

>>12729924
Addendum
I want to spare you a lot of false positives. Jokes aside. Modern day Koch’s postulates means it’s bovine faeces not FBS. Same goes for molecular or metagenomics Koch’s postulates.

[Anonymous No.12730471]

>>12713318
So incredibly based.

[Anonymous No.12730513]

>>12719043
That's the dilution and regrowth steps. You dilute plate and regrow with like 3 or 4 serial dilutions and grow on "clean" media a handful of times. Statistically speaking you can have such a dilution of whatever original toxins were present that it would be akin to a drop in the entire ocean. That won't take long at all.

Unless of course bacteria happen to be producing their own toxins which would cause problems. But it's not like we have identified bacterial toxins genetically and physically.

[Anonymous No.12730577]

>>12730513
>You dilute plate and regrow with like 3 or 4 serial dilutions and grow on "clean" media a handful of times. Statistically speaking you can have such a dilution of whatever original toxins were present that it would be akin to a drop in the entire ocean. That won't take long at all.
Which isn’t true. Dilution is often useless. I’m know how you can transfer bacteria etc. However there are materials, which the bacteria can’t really get rid of and hence it will stay in there until it dies, hence it will end up where ever it dies. Our sewage water is horrible. And even in the offspring from these toxic bacteria the toxin will stay. But yes I would be okay with such a trial, if the bacteria is passaged in my own body fluids a couple of times and an independent laboratory does toxicology on it; there is no reason why I wouldn’t drink it for science. Same goes for SARS-CoV-2, if they pull it out isolate and purify it directly ex vivo (ultra centrifugation/ ultrasound/French press/ liquid nitrogen). Don’t put it in some dubious monolayers and create a toxic brew with antibiotics. I would do it. Send it to one or two independent laboratories and check it for toxins and I will inhale it. I know it and I’m certain. I would do it for science. But the thing is we fail to isolate and purify viruses directly ex vivo.

[Anonymous No.12730622]

>>12730577
I take samples from the sewage. I plate them and collect a bunch of samples from each and dilute them in clean media. I plate ~100 bacteria per plate and have them grow into millions of bacteria. Passaging it twice means that based on sheer volume measurements there is statistically none of the original sewage sample inside of any of the bacteria grown. This takes very little time. If you sent out the samples for toxicology you would get told not to intake it because they literally generate exo and endo toxins as part of their biology. Why is the idea that bacteria can and do create toxins as a way to kill their prey such a foreign idea to you? Some bacteria are symbiotes and live with and on us. Some try to eat us. That's like every other part of biology.

>Failed to isolate
We literally do AFM on viruses and their binding events to cell membranes. I don't know what you mean about not being able to isolate viruses. For characterization and understanding. Moreso what are the LD50 on these toxins that the dose needed to induce infection would give you an illness that results in you making a bunch more viruses?
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-14741-9_8

[Anonymous No.12730754]

>>12730622
>in clean media
Yes. I’m fine if it’s maybe 5 times just to be sure and with my own cells without anything else other than basic nutrients, minerals, vitamins, trace minerals and buffer.
>Why is the idea that bacteria can and do create toxins as a way to kill their prey such a foreign idea to you?
>prey
You get prey and host are something different?
Because why would the bacteria kill the host. In the end a bacteria being tolerated by the host and feed is many times more successful. E.g. The literature is full of people being bewildered, why bacterial infections reoccur. But it’s very simple, if you think of the bacteria as a helping organism. If your body wants to do something it can’t do, it will summon bacteria. I bet even the very scary bacteria are everywhere. If you are careful and precise enough you can catch them everywhere. The toxins are only there, if the bacteria are decomposing bodies or if the body uses this mechanism.
I didn’t read it, but let me guess it’s about bacteriophages or giant viruses? Which are misunderstood. But you get that it’s not about human viruses. I bet you can’t give me a single publication with virions being directly (ex vivo) pulled out of a human. It doesn’t exist. I tell you, how the game goes it’s always with abnormal cell lines, antibiotics, FBS and medium they just use the supernatant(always in vitro). But never directly. You would need to pull out the sample and purify it. Then you do gel electrophoresis, biochemically analysis it, use restriction enzymes and do the sequencing. Only after you made sure you had the full length genome. But that’s never done with human viruses. Only with phages and giant viruses.

[Anonymous No.12730862]

>>12730622
>If you sent out the samples for toxicology you would get told not to intake it because they literally generate exo and endo toxins as part of their biology.
Well. Than you have to find away to get rid of the toxins. I fully expect that. Because in virtro is something else than in vivo. And if the bacteria is digesting something that’s not really a living organism. I’m fully aware bacteria do behave differently in petri dishes and tissue of dead organisms.

[Anonymous No.12731038]

>>12730862
>Because in virtro is something else than in vivo. And if the bacteria is digesting something that’s not really a living organism.
Like glucose? They output the same stuff in a petri dish that they do in the human body. The body can deal with moderate amounts, but large amounts cause sickness.

[Anonymous No.12731062]

>>12731038
No bacteria don’t behave the same in different environments. But don’t trust me and check the literature on it.

[Anonymous No.12731073]

>>12731062
>bacteria consumes glucose in petri dish
>bacteria consumes glucose in intestines
They have access to the same food sources.

[Anonymous No.12731114]

>>12731073
No. It’s not the same just because some part of the metabolism behaves similarly. Bacteria do change their metabolism depending on circumstances.

[Anonymous No.12731154]

>>12731114
Sure, that doesn't mean they still won't produce the same toxins. Gram-negative bacteria are always toxic by their very nature because they have lipopolysaccharides in their cell wall, and lipopolysaccharides are always a toxin. The body can tolerate it so long as the amounts aren't excessive.

[Anonymous No.12731190]

>>12731154
>Gram-negative bacteria are always toxic
Yes. Sure anything is toxic, if there is too much.
>because they have lipopolysaccharides in their cell wall,
>lipopolysaccharides are always a toxin
And? It’s the same for endogenous enzymes. The homeostasis have to be in a certain corridor.
>The body can tolerate it so long as the amounts aren't excessive.
Correct and there won’t be too much unless there is something going wrong. And I agree you don’t eat rotten stuff, because the bacteria have produced toxins in there. But they don’t attack you with the toxins.

[Anonymous No.12731507]

>>12730471
This

[Anonymous No.12731602]

>>12713318
go kiss a cow's cunt, retard

[Anonymous No.12732759]

>>12731602
Interesting places your mind immediately went to

[Anonymous No.12733693]

Figures it’s the toxin produced in another state of the life cycle and not the bacteria producing it inside the organism.

[Anonymous No.12733707]

>>12713318
i red the bible

[Anonymous No.12733715]

Germ theory is true, and I can prove it.

[Anonymous No.12733993]

>>12733715
In the sense of Henle. Often incorrectly referred to as Koch’s postulates. I’m really interested. I have never seen anything proven in the sense of Koch’s original postulates. Just this nonsense about modern day, molecular or metagenomics Koch’s postulates. Show it.

[Anonymous No.12734342]

>>12733715
We are waiting.

[Anonymous No.12734945]

>>12734342
Still

[Anonymous No.12735386]

>>12733715
That’s what they all think, but can’t deliver.

[Anonymous No.12737123]

>>12734342
>>12734945
>>12735386
There’s a country in Europe that’s literally full of germs and was responsible for all the diseases that impacted Europe.

[Anonymous No.12738123]

>>12737123
Hilarious. Seems like nobody can deliver.

[Anonymous No.12738297]

>>12731190
So you admit it, bacteria cause infections?

It just sounds like you are having a pointless quibble over the concept of "everything is a poison at the right dosage". It just so happens that many bacteria and the like have a low concentration before they start poisoning us.

>Don't attack us with poisons
Our body has defense systems to kill bacteria we don't like. Bacteria counteract that by developing things to kill those cells and allow them to eat others. The idea that predation is somehow exclusive to things with the same number of cells is weird. A single celled organism is perfectly capable of attacking and eating a multicellular one as it's adaptive strategy.

Some bacteria don't do that, quite a bit live in harmony with us. But they aren't cognizant of what they are doing on higher levels so if introduced to an area with vulnerable food, like the blood, they will start proliferate rapidly while consuming all the easy nutrients we use to stay alive. Killing us just the same.

[Anonymous No.12738393]

>>12738297
>It just sounds like you are having a pointless quibble over the concept of "everything is a poison at the right dosage". It just so happens that many bacteria and the like have a low concentration before they start poisoning us.
I admit that your world view accordingly would have to be.
>any gram negative bacteria is toxic
This isn’t even the mainstream narrative. If the laboratory tells me that’s just the background toxicity. It’s no big deal to me. We evidently are a habitat to many gram negative bacteria. You are trying to derail the discussion. My point was get rid of the toxins produced at another point in the life cycle. In fact it seems like you are largely agreeing with me. Since my point is it’s the toxins. You just disagree on them not being produced in the healthy living organisms? Which the in vitro cells certainly aren’t.
>Bacteria counteract that by developing things to kill those cells and allow them to eat others. The idea that predation is somehow exclusive to things with the same number of cells is weird.
The cells of a dead or quasi dead organism aren’t representative. The bacteria do it because that’s their role in the ecological system. Their role is not to kill living organisms.

[Anonymous No.12738992]

I've had COVID-19 this last winter. Ask me anything.

[Anonymous No.12739071]

>>12738123
Literally just did. If you think germ theory is invalid, the least you could do would be to propose a new name for the inhabitants of Germany.

[Anonymous No.12739072]

>>12738992
How was it determined? Plaque assay or qRT-PCR.

[Anonymous No.12739085]

>>12739072
Also did you travel by plane a lot?

[Anonymous No.12739289]

>>12739072
>>12739085
As a test, and because I literally had all of the symptoms described.

At the time, I was working in a mall. During Covid, the mall where I was located was full of wealthier people who travelled quite a lot. My state actually has one of the newest variants of the virus.

I can honestly say it's real. And what happens during this virus is not pretty. It's very 'head'-based: it affects a lot of things in your head, your senses etc.

My gums started to bleed profusely.
My taste and smell went away entirely.
My eye started to hurt on the top of my socket, and I started to see squiggle lines in my eye, indicating I was losing my vision. (what I think happened, is that my nasal and ocular cavities were congested somehow).
My entire head had a headache for two days in a row
I started hearing weird squishy sounds in my ear, like dripping water and various things. It sounded like something was moving around
I had an intense cough, that was almost guttural, like no other cough I've ever had.
The breathing was the worst, I almost had to go to the ER again (because I originally went for my vision) when I started to have difficulty breathing, but somehow I made it through it.

I don't even want to consider how I would have fared if I was a smoker. Scary stuff.

The other stuff was mild though, mild indigestion, not really any diarrhea. Just extreme amounts of weird side effects in your head.

[Anonymous No.12739304]

>>12739072
Anal swab

[Anonymous No.12739353]

>>12713700
OK, schizo.

[Anonymous No.12739357]

>>12739304
>>12739085
>>12739072
That's not me. I didn't have an anal swab.

After the problems with my vision, I visited the ER because I thought I either had parasites or some kind of ocular loss (which, by the way was not entirely untrue for either, since they do use an anti-parasite medication to treat this virus, if you've ever seen pictures of them on your lung you would understand).

I had a large stick poke into my nostril. It literally hurt my fucking brain when they did it, and I'm not sure why, it was just my nasal cavity. Weird virus.

[Anonymous No.12739358]

>>12739289
>as a test
Sure. But there isn’t one test.
>My gums started to bleed profusely
That’s certainly strange since it’s claimed to have the opposite effect on clotting.
>my taste went away
That’s something new.
>My entire head had a headache for two days in a row
>I started hearing weird squishy sounds in my ear, like dripping water and various things
Rather scary, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t due to SARS-CoV-2. Well, I’m glad it’s better now.
The test are essentially crap. And you can test positive for any number of reasons.
I was sick all the time years ago too, but than I started looking after the vitamins, minerals, fresh air and moving enough. Which stop it almost entirely despite my not really optimal lifestyle.

[Anonymous No.12739365]

>>12739358
I'm sorry you thought that I didn't have Coronavirus? I have tested positive for coronavirus, far AFTER I started having symptoms.

You don't sound very knowledgeable about what you're talking about, and quite frankly it makes me upset considering I actually had to go through 2-3 weeks of symptoms in between trying to work jobs (because Unemployment is slow and sucks ass)

[Anonymous No.12739371]

>>12739365
>>12739358
Just to be clear, I agree that people getting tested willy nilly is going to spread Covid. However, it is a real virus with real effects. It fuckin exists, and it is nasty.

[Anonymous No.12739396]

>>12739365
I’m not saying you weren’t sick. I’m just saying I don’t know would you really had, but all I can tell you, if it was indeed COVID-19 it was a very exceptional case.

[Anonymous No.12739399]

Well my state has the newest mutation.

Let me tell you friend, all of this hospitalization could be the training, or breeding ground, for new mutations for this virus. It is getting extremely good at evading innoculation, as you can see in the news.

[Anonymous No.12739407]

>>12739399
is for
>>12739396

[Anonymous No.12739438]

>>12739399
Seriously. I’m somebody with a clue about the mainstream narrative in virology. And these claims about mutations are very far out there. Usually mutations are claimed to be completely meaningless or just make a very small difference. It’s has to be proven in the laboratory. And Coronaviruses are allegedly equipped with a proof reading machine. So they can correct their genome for errors. It’s just fear mongering. And if a vaccine doesn’t work it’s, because it’s useless and not because something mutated.

[Anonymous No.12739464]

>>12739438
>because it’s useless and not because something mutated.
The Pfizer vaccine didn't work on an African mutation.

It's out there, trust me. You have no clue what to grade this against, a virus of this magnitude has not existed in such close quarters like this ever.

Almost one half of NYC had this. You have to understand that when you concentrate the level of density in hospitals that eventually the virus will mutate.

You are just incorrect, this virus has verifiably mutated, and it is partially because of the extreme pressures of hospitalization.

[Anonymous No.12739485]

>>12738393
You can't get rid of the toxins they produce man. Any gram negative bacteria that proliferates outside the gut or surface of the skin will start causing problems. This is why we try very hard to ensure bacteria isn't present inside the bloodstream. They generate toxins as a part of their existence. The life cycle argument is bs because it ignores the central premise that "bacteria cause infections that kill people". They don't just make it once because someone ate a slightly rotten food and got a couple micrograms of endootoxin in their system. The problem I'd that the bacteria in the rotten food proliferate and start generating a consistent high level of endotoxin.

Some bacteria make more diverse sets of toxins at higher levels and some at less. This means some bacterial species like anthrax are more dangerous while others like non-pathogenic e.coli are less. Anthrax being a sample that actually matches up sorta with your hypothesis as their spore form is more deadly. But regardless it's a bacteria causing an infection that kills people.

>Their role is not to kill living organisms
What are you smoking? Why wouldn't bacteria kill other organisms if it gave them food? Some don't do it in a general sense and rely on symbiotic or direct predation on other bacteria. But some dine quite happily on animal tissue, some are so good at it we just call them flesh eating bacteria.

It's bizarre how firmly you are trying to deny the idea that bacteria can cause disease. Or just that germs in general can cause disease.

Saying "it's not the bacteria that kill it's the toxins" is the same as saying "it's not the gun that kills it's the bullets". Technically correct in the most uselessly pedantic way

[Anonymous No.12739555]

>>12738393
>The bacteria do it because that’s their role in the ecological system. Their role is not to kill living organisms.
Nigga their role is to eat and reproduce, just like us. Obviously its not very prudent to evolution to parasitically drain your host and kill them. But its not like bacteria make any choices whatsoever in how their genetic makeup is or what animals they infect and colonize. Random chance dictates their behavior, and this is why some bacteria is safe and others are dangerous. And this is true for all animals, different types of cell structures and immune systems are all vulnerable in different ways and are therefore affected differently even with an infection of the same bacteria. Its just chance that some animals can be fine around types of bacteria like ecoli, and humans are generally not.

Again, their role is to eat and reproduce, just like everything else. They do not discriminate if they find a suitable host, even if they might kill said host, they actually don't know that. They can't choose what animals they infect, so naturally they do completely kill living organisms from time to time.

[Anonymous No.12739703]

>>12713318
Meds, take them.

[Anonymous No.12739873]

>>12739555
>Bacteria are organisms just like we
No. That’s your fundamental mistake. And individual bacteria is completely part of a greater supper organism, which consists out of similar bacteria. A large part of this supper structure are phages. They are highly specific and transmit energy and information between bacteria. Wrongly assumed to be bacterial pathogens.
There is evidence for sharing of genetic material between all bacteria in one organism. And our cells communicate with the bacteria in many ways. The bacteria essentially become one with their surrounding. If they are being direct towards being decomposers they will be that. If they are directed towards producers they are going to be that. For them this is the most optimal strategy.
We probably see bacteria associated with illness, because our body is making use of them as part of a mechanism to deal with something. It can be too much, than you obviously have to stop it. But unless you solve the issue the same or worse problems are going to resurface.

[Anonymous No.12739957]

>>12739873
It's called an ecosystem. Everything is part of a greater ecosystem that works together to maximally handle nutrient and energy transfer.

You genuinely seem to think that bacteria ecosystems are not only intelligent but their intelligence stops them from consuming producers. Despite that not being the case for literally any other part of the biosphere.

Then you start assuming that bacteria are being recruited by the body during illness.

Honestly take a course on bacteriology if you want to talk about this stuff. Learn how they work.

[Anonymous No.12740878]

>>12738297
>quite a bit live in harmony with us
38 trillions
>so if introduced to an area with vulnerable food, like the blood, they will start proliferate rapidly while consuming all the easy nutrients we use to stay alive. Killing us just the same.
Only in vitro

[Anonymous No.12740885]

>>12739289
That's poisoning tier

[Anonymous No.12740887]

>>12739399
>as you can see in the news.
Good goy

[Anonymous No.12740889]

>>12739464
Vitamin D would be more effective than a shitty "vaccine"
Also yeah viruses "mutate" every 3 days or so, and after ten mutations it's considered a "variant", but their sequencing is basically just computer generated shits that doesn't reflect anything real

[Anonymous No.12740891]

>>12739485
Anthrax was a known psyop.
>it's not the bacteria that kill it's the toxins
Yes, and bacterias aren't contagious.
This isn't about semantic, mainstream know that the toxins are dangerous and not the bacterias.

[Anonymous No.12740943]

>>12739555
>But its not like bacteria make any choices whatsoever in how their genetic makeup is or what animals they infect and colonize
Lol, you might check on that, mainstream science doesn't agree.

[Anonymous No.12740972]

>>12740885
Coronavirus is seriously that bad.

[Anonymous No.12741111]

>>12740972
The flu can be that bad too, just saying that it looks like some severe environmental poisoning.

[Anonymous No.12741114]

>>12741111
Well I got a verified positive diagnosis.

So, as usual, the skeptical 4chan basement dweller is incorrect.

[Anonymous No.12741127]

>>12713318
it is not

[Anonymous No.12741277]

>>12741114
>a verified positive diagnosis.
Lol, the PCR is scientifically meaningless

[Anonymous No.12741341]

>>12741127
That's what they always say before digging

[Anonymous No.12741356]

>>12741341
>digging
enjoy botulism

[Anonymous No.12741460]

>>12739957
>It's called an ecosystem
Yes. Humans are also part of an ecosystem and there is the super structure of our species. But it’s much weaker than in bacteria and it has to be.
>You genuinely seem to think that bacteria ecosystems are not only intelligent but their intelligence stops them from consuming producers.
I believe that it’s a stable equilibrium. And every part of the machinery is aligned with it. Yes. I believe Bacteria to be intelligent. Meaning intelligence defined as the ability of an organism to adjust to the environment around it in a sensible manner.
>Then you start assuming that bacteria are being recruited by the body during illness.
I’m saying it would also fit with our data. And it’s more likely, since the benefits of many bacteria to host organisms are already shown, while Koch’s postulates can’t be satisfied, if you actually close the loop holes.
>Honestly take a course on bacteriology if you want to talk about this stuff. Learn how they work.
Never did bacteriology defined as such. But I did microbiology, infectology, virology, immunology, system biology and signaling pathways. And while I’m not a bacteriologist in the strict sense. I’m competent enough to determine, if Koch’s postulates could be meet.
All I heard and saw were claims about something being dangerous/or associated with something. Case studies of mostly already severely ill people’s conditions worsening. Like stuff about the flesh eating “monster” bacteria virbio vulnificus. Where they tell you by the way the individual in our case study was already terminally ill.
The hogwash about molecular, modern day or metagenomics Koch’s postulates. I remember the jokes about mice lie and monkeys exaggerate. Or if it tells you the truth it’s not in vitro/VERO. Jokes about the promiscuity of specific antibodies. Some even tell you, it’s more complicated or that’s not what happens in the lab, but it will be in the textbook for another 20 or 30 years.

[Anonymous No.12741479]

>>12741460
>virbio
vibrio

[Anonymous No.12742063]

>>12741356
Toxins aren't contagious, bacterias aren't contagious.

[Anonymous No.12743009]

Henle-Koch’s postulates are the gold standard. There is nothing else that comes even close. If it wasn’t, why are they trying to pretend to “modify” them to the point they can be satisfied? If you have any study we will look at it. Maybe the one evil organism is out there. But up to now it hasn’t been shown to my knowledge. And I’ve look at an insane amount of bad methodology and wild speculations in many papers.

[Anonymous No.12743032]

>>12713710
Is this satire or not? I can't tell

[Anonymous No.12743048]

>>12743009
>Koch abandoned the requirement of the first postulate altogether when he discovered asymptomatic carriers of cholera
Oh fuck

[Anonymous No.12743323]

>>12743048
Correct even Koch realized it’s nonsense and this pathogen/ germ concept is going nowhere. But it was too lucrative and too prestigious too stop it. Them playing with the definitions really causes vicarious embarrassment. Or maybe it’s hilarious entertainment depending on what type you are. Have some examples
>small association does not mean that there is not a causal effect
>(it’s there trust me guys)
Okay.
>lack of such [laboratory] evidence cannot nullify the epidemiological effect on associations
>(can’t really be falsified)
Good one.
>Occasionally it is possible to appeal to experimental evidence
>occasionally
>possible
If you tell me Bradford Hill didn’t had a great sense of humor I don’t know.
>disease with no other likely explanation
Really makes you think why general clinic, pathology and toxicology findings are so rarely seen in any papers regarding this subject.

[Anonymous No.12743340]

>>12743323
>too stop it
to
>didn’t had
have

[Anonymous No.12743976]

>>12743048
How little the motives change. Now everybody is allegedly SARS-CoV-2 positive without being sick.

[Anonymous No.12745311]

>>12740972
Not supported by the data, since in most countries there is no excess mortality.

[Anonymous No.12745910]

>>12713318
Germ theory? Already been debunked 200 years ago.

[Anonymous No.12746253]

>>12743032
both.

[Anonymous No.12746323]

>>12745910
>Luciferian
Your argument has been rendered entirely invalid. Get a new one.

[Anonymous No.12746329]

>>12746323
>what is the UN

[Anonymous No.12746607]

>>12745910
Nice one.
>>12746323
>one thing I disagree
>the rest of everything is hence invalid, but it’s not like I could disprove any of it
Seems like this indicates it was pretty spot on.

[Anonymous No.12747790]

>>12743032
It’s the truth. Presented in a naive funny and simplistic manner.

[Anonymous No.12747955]

>>12713318
The game is so easy. Most people will never check their knowledge. It’s going to come from somebody with title, position or charisma telling or making them memorize something. Maybe there is a surrogate like a textbook doing a similar thing.
Most can be persuaded by a simple picture.
There is just a some body fluid from somebody with a condition. Than it’s mixed with cells and toxic stuff. Cells die due to this. Now they take pictures of the particles from the dead cells. Do search for small pieces of genetic material and make up a construct in their head or nowadays in a computer program, which is based on former constructs.
They go to the public and say.
It’s real! Here look dead cells and that’s the picture. We got it. Here you naysayers that’s the genome.

[Anonymous No.12749386]

>>12739485
>Any gram negative bacteria that proliferates outside the gut or surface of the skin will start causing problems. This is why we try very hard to ensure bacteria isn't present inside the bloodstream.
I missed this one.
Seems like Proteobacteria, Fusobacteria and Bacteroidetes in the natural blood microbiome of health people and Veillonella, Pseudomonas and Haemophilus in the natural lung microbiome of healthy people weren’t informed about your findings.

[Anonymous No.12750982]

>>12745910
Imagine actually believing shit like this.

[Anonymous No.12751933]

>>12750982
I mean that’s your believe. And it’s your positive claim. You need to provide the evidence. Where did they prove the original Henle-Koch’s postulates for a bacteria or a virus. These postulates are common sense. So don’t come with Huebner‘s, Fredrick’s or something worse about modern day, molecular or metagenomics Koch‘s postulates. Or some nonsense about anecdotes in case studies. You know there have been virologist, microbiologist and other specialists in this thread. Yet there is nothing. Maybe because most just believe, but if you really look there is no evidence? Where did they isolate and purify SARS-CoV-2 ex vivo? That just doesn’t exist.

[Anonymous No.12752114]

Academics please respond

[Anonymous No.12753041]

>>12750982
Good luck disproving any of those claims.

[Anonymous No.12753993]

>>12713318
Seems like nobody is even trying to defend germ theory.

[Anonymous No.12754170]

>>12743032
both, it has some truth in it, you make over 70% of the population suffer in order to save boomers and people with health problems. the ramifications of this "pandemic" will be devastating.

[Anonymous No.12754183]

>>12713318
Yesterday 5:31 PM.

[Anonymous No.12754708]

>>12754183
What made you realize it?

[Anonymous No.12755747]

>>12754170
But there isn’t really any evidence of somebody being rescued by all the measures.

[Anonymous No.12756517]

>>12713318
If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat—diseased tissue—rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue; e.g., mosquitoes seek the stagnant water, but do not cause the pool to become stagnant.
Dr Rudolph Virchow

[Anonymous No.12756529]

>>12756517
>Tonsils are "diseased"
>Get strep throat over and over
>Use probiotics
>Never get strep throat again
Were my tonsils diseased or not? I think not.

[Anonymous No.12756552]

>>12756529
I can tell you what most likely happened. You did eat unhealthy food or did expose yourself to toxins. You body had a hard time dealing with it and used the best bacteria available. But as soon as you supplied something better your body decided to use the other organism(s). It makes perfect sense. That’s the reason why reoccurring infections are so common. It’s not because your body is so weak or because the evil microorganism is hiding somewhere, but your body calls for it’s help again and again. Unless the reason is dealt with the symptoms reappear.

[Anonymous No.12756568]

>>12756552
>You did eat unhealthy food or did expose yourself to toxins.
But I changed nothing. I took a bottle of probiotics and that was it. It was clearly a certain strain of bacteria inflaming the tonsils directly, and as soon as they were no longer the dominant bacteria, the tonsils returned to normal. I cured my sinusitis the same way after two decades of hell. A bit of nasal irrigation with xylitol and a few treatments of L. Sakei and no more infections. Nothing was wrong with my tissues, the problem was the bacteria living on them.

[Anonymous No.12756589]

>>12756568
Again it wasn’t the bacteria most likely. Your body was using them to do something. But due to our overcooked/ sterile food and environment/nutrition there was nothing better. The symptoms are there because your body is doing something. And if you supply something, which is able to do it more effectively you can make the symptoms go away. That’s not denied by terrain theory.

[Anonymous No.12756597]

>>12756568
The problem is solved better by the bacteria now living on them. That’s the key. The metabolism of the bacteria before was less effective and caused more issues doing something the body needed to do.

[Anonymous No.12756604]

>>12713318
If germs don't cause disease, why don't you grow some e coli on a petri dish and lick it?

[Anonymous No.12756606]

>>12756589
>Your body was using them to do something.
To do what? And how can a few treatments of L. Sakei in the nose suddenly make my body super great at detoxing or whatever you're getting at? I'm dubious. That isn't even how detox works. Detoxification happens through the liver and the kidneys.

[Anonymous No.12756619]

>>12756597
You're really not giving any answers. What does my nose need the bacteria to do? Why were my sinuses fine when I used an antimicrobial spray, which kept the nasal flora suppressed? I stick by my original claim, my tissues were fine, and they're still fine. They were fine when I kept the bacterial population low, and they're fine now that I've altered the population to something that doesn't trigger inflammation. My body doesn't need anything from the bacteria in my nose, but the reality is bacteria will always grow there, and it's just easier to push them in a benign direction rather than having to keep them suppressed by using a nasal spray multiple times per day.

[Anonymous No.12756623]

>>12713318

[Anonymous No.12756629]

>>12756606
>>12756606
>L. Sakei
I haven’t studied it. But I can tell you I and others were unable to find anything along these lines >>12751933
It’s not there. And if we can’t prove bacteria and viruses can make you sick, we are left with studies demonstrating, how bacteria can cure you or keep you healthy. And that’s exactly what you are describing. But don‘t trust me on it and look it up. I have looked at hundreds of studies and the CPE in vitro experiments or the symptoms/signs caused in animal models. They are always explainable by the other variables. You don’t need a pathogen to explain any observation.

[Anonymous No.12756633]

>>12756629
>And if we can’t prove bacteria and viruses can make you sick
Um, how do you explain challenge trials where people clearly become sick from exposure to viruses and bacteria?

[Anonymous No.12756635]

>>12756568
I can tell you what actually most likely happened. You were probably colonized by Streptococcus pyogenes, which is the most common cause of strep throat. Usually people will be asymptomatic, and then occasionally have problems. The bacteria can also get into the sinuses and cause problems there. You disrupted your microbiome (although home nasal irrigation isn't a very good idea).

I'd like to see terrain theory come up with an equally consistent hypothesis.

[Anonymous No.12756638]

>>12756629
>and the CPE
on
>>12756619
I can’t tell you, but if you can show me the study on the bacteria allegedly making you sick, I can show you how it’s nonsense. Henle‘s postulates could never be proven.

[Anonymous No.12756646]

>>12756635
>Streptococcus pyogenes
Again why should anybody come up with something before you can’t prove it’s pathogenic. Where is the study proving >>12751933?

[Anonymous No.12756655]

>>12756635
>I can tell you what actually most likely happened. You were probably colonized by Streptococcus pyogenes, which is the most common cause of strep throat. Usually people will be asymptomatic, and then occasionally have problems. The bacteria can also get into the sinuses and cause problems there. You disrupted your microbiome
Agree with this entirely, and it was likely due to many antibiotics as I was chronically ill as a child. I grew out of illness in my teens, but the screwed up flora remained, so I continued to deal with throat and sinus issues. I fixed my oral flora in my teens, but didn't think about fixing it in my sinuses for many years.

>although home nasal irrigation isn't a very good idea)
But I couldn't disagree with this more, assuming distilled water is used. I've reviewed many trials, it's extremely safe assuming dirty water isn't used, and even in those cases, actual complications is extremely rare.

[Anonymous No.12756671]

>>12756646
Your entire "you can't prove it's pathogenic" argument is based on the idea that there are always some other variables at play. It's entirely possible to create a completely pure isolate of bacteria, such that there is nothing other than the bacteria. The argument is then, always, that there's something toxic that is then in the bacteria that causes the disease. Bacterial exotoxins causing human disease is germ theory.

Either disprove the hypothesis or gtfo

[Anonymous No.12756675]

>>12756655
>I agree entirely
Why do you agree? There is no evidence for Streptococcus pyogenes causing it.
Just search for it. I just did search for it.
And all I could find was people telling me anecdotes like https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341518204_Streptococcus_pyogenes_balanoposthitis
or whining about the scientific method being too harsh
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302336575_Limitations_of_the_Henle-Koch_Postulates

[Anonymous No.12756679]

>>12756638
>I can’t tell you, but if you can show me the study on the bacteria allegedly making you sick
For example:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1092765/

Twenty-one adult volunteers were immunized at monthly intervals with three doses of purified type 1 M protein of group A Streptococcus. The soluble vaccine in buffer was administered by aerosol spray into the nares and oropharynx; 23 control subjects received a buffer placebo in the same manner. Antibody responses were observed in sera and nasal washings of some but not all vaccines. Approximately 30 days after the last dose, all subjects were challenged with homologus streptococci applied by swab to the phayngeal-tonsillar areas. In a double-blind system of evaluation, physical signs and symptoms were followed for assessment of infection. Illness was defined on the basis of a positive throat culture, fever, a twofold increase in white blood cell count over baseline, exudative pharyngitis, and cervical adenopathy. By these criteria four vaccinees and 11 controls were obviously ill. One vaccinee and six controls were questionably ill, fulfilling some but not all of the criteria. sixteen vaccinees and six controls were not ill (P less than 0.001). Positive throat cultures were observed in five vaccines and 19 controls (P less than 0.001). Penicillin was administered five days after challenge. No poststreptoccal sequelae or other complication were observed. Thus local immunization with M protein apparently can prevent both colonization and clinical illness after challenge with homologous streptococci.

[Anonymous No.12756685]

>>12756671
>disprove my positive claim
You are the one, who needs to provide evidence. As of yet you claimed pathogenic effects and couldn’t come up with anything beyond some random anecdotes.

[Anonymous No.12756702]

>>12756655
>it's extremely safe assuming dirty water isn't used, and even in those cases, actual complications is extremely rare.
That's my concern, though. Very few people at home actually bother to use truly clean normal/respiratory saline. Complication rates are low, but nonzero.

[Anonymous No.12756708]

>>12756679
Do you think I‘m an amateur? That’s not Henle-Kochs postulates. Which where in question. I bet you don’t even know which criteria they are working with and spoiler it’s ridiculous. Nice try, but try again.

[Anonymous No.12756723]

>>12756702
>Complication rates are low, but nonzero.
True, but I think the risk is higher for someone dealing with chronic strep and sinus infections. With sinus infections especially, you're then at risk for lung infections. My last sinus infection turned into pneumonia when the infection still hadn't resolved after several months, including two courses of antibiotics. At that point I realized I needed to do something to prevent them, and that's when I started experimenting with direct anti-microbials, irrigation, and eventually L. Sakei. It's been three years at this point since I had any kind of URT infection, after 2-3 per year for years.

[Anonymous No.12756733]

>>12756708
>People became ill
>"DOESN'T COUNT!!!!"
I don't care about the postulates. If it's introduced and causes illness, then that's good enough for me. Meanwhile you're relying on bull crap like detox.

[Anonymous No.12756737]

>>12756685
We have entire books about it. Here's the chapter on animal models: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK333421/ These models are accurately described by the current theory on GAS.
>in b4 "but the results can be explained by something else!"
Perhaps, so posit the hypothesis and provide support.
>in b4 "muh Koch's postulates"
Scientific epistemology doesn't give a fuck about your grade school science teacher's buzz words.

[Anonymous No.12756769]

>>12713318
Germ and cellular theories are wrong, humours is where it is.

[Anonymous No.12756781]

>>12756737
>it’s semantics
No it isn’t and you know it. This is the gold standard and even laymen can agree. There is nothing else that comes even close. But if you want we can discuss the modifications.
>S. pyogenes, the development of in vivo models has proven to be challenging for a number of reasons: First, S. pyogenes is a strictly human pathogen and is exquisitely adapted to its human host to the extent that many of its important virulence factors
They just claim it’s a human pathogen. There is no prove.
>murine subcutaneous ulcer model and its air sac derivative
I think you and I both know exactly what happens there.
>Their approach was to create a humanized mouse (hu-mouse) by engrafting human epidermal tissue from neonatal foreskin onto the flanks of the SCID mouse
SCID mouse I think you probably want to tell people about that.
>S. pyogenes effectively colonizes the oropharynx of these primates, and there is an associated characteristic humoral immune response with type-specific M-protein antibodies detectable in serum
We can also get into the specifics of antibody specificity and promiscuity, if you want.
But no there is no evidence for Koch’s postulates and they didn’t do toxicology on the stuff they intruded into the animals. And they even admit it doesn’t cause the same illness.
It just doesn’t prove Koch’s postulates.

[Anonymous No.12756796]

>>12756733
>people are getting ill
That’s irrelevant there are many reasons for why people get sick. And there are may things that can suppress symptoms for some time. They put 21 in the verum group and 23 in the placebo group. Even as a laymen you can see how dishonest it is.

[Anonymous No.12756799]

>>12756781
>This is the gold standard and even laymen can agree.
Only laymen would agree, actually.

[Anonymous No.12756808]

>>12756737
Anything better than your inconclusive
>molecular Koch’s postulates
stuff? I bet you don’t even know what that means.

[Anonymous No.12756815]

>>12756799
Tell the truth. Why would scientists disagree? We both know it; it’s the money. We just pretend it’s there. While in reality the criteria are getting weaker and weaker the more precise our methods are.

[Anonymous No.12756821]

>>12716156
Also an imbalance in bodily fluids

[Anonymous No.12756830]

>>12756796
>That’s irrelevant
It's the only thing that's relevant.

[Anonymous No.12756838]

>>12756781
>This is the gold standard
Where's the gold standard for proving terrain theory? I want more evidence than "the body is detoxing" or "the body is using the bacteria." Surely you have some quality evidence?

[Anonymous No.12756844]

>>12756830
It isn’t. If you understand how the studies are designed and how many ways there are to make animals/people sick or prevent them from showing signs/symptoms despite being sick.

[Anonymous No.12756852]

>>12718923
this, do it, faggot!

[Anonymous No.12756857]

>>12756844
>If you understand how the studies are designed and how many ways there are to make animals/people sick or prevent them from showing signs/symptoms despite being sick.
Are you basically saying that they must have done something that wasn't reported in the experimental group compared to the control group (or vice versa)? I'm not saying that isn't possible, but there's a lot of studies similar to what I posted, so you'd basically be saying that basically all challenge trials on humans and animals are dishonest, which would be a huge conspiracy theory without much proof to back it up.

[Anonymous No.12756870]

>>12756838
>Where's the gold standard for proving terrain theory
Tens of thousands of experiments falling to prove Henle-Koch’s postulates and current day microbiome research make it quiet plausible. Terrain theory agrees on the postulates it’s the same standard.

[Anonymous No.12756879]

>>12756870
>plausible
Uh, no, plausibility isn't proof. You're rejecting actual studies showing bacteria cause illness, so you need more than plausibility. Where's the proof that tonsils that develop strep were already diseased, and they suddenly aren't diseased with a change in the microbiome? Where's the proof the body is "using" the bacteria for something?

[Anonymous No.12756905]

>>12739396
>exceptional case
loss of taste and smell is the most defining symptom, as well as difficulty breathing. But why am I even replying, you are either a lost case of schizophrenia or really invested in trolling.

[Anonymous No.12756911]

>>12756857
>Are you basically saying that they must have done something that wasn't reported in the experimental group compared to the control group (or vice versa)
Essentially correct. The thing is it’s pretty tricky, if you get pretty deep into it. But most of virology is simple >>12747955
I can explain what exactly happens with the medium as the control line, negative control, mock or dummy infection, if you have deeper questions. Basically what they do is put tissue in trouble on abnormal cells. Mix it with other stuff and claim a virus killed the cells. When in reality even the rest of the ingredients would have. Their negative control is never with the same procedure added the fluid of somebody healthy or somebody with a non virus related condition. The animal experiments are nonsense. Even with a basic understanding of pharmacology and toxicology you can easily understand why animals got sick. And there is no need for any pathogen.

[Anonymous No.12756924]

>>12756870
You don't prove a theory. You develop a theory, and everything that fails to disprove it serves to strengthen it. Disproving something like terrain theory, which believes that disruption of tissue is not caused by bacteria, is easy. We see that bacteria can disrupt tissue, because it's directly observed.

[Anonymous No.12756926]

>>12756911
In the case of bacteria it’s similar. Basically the bacteria do produce toxins under certain conditions, but it doesn’t happen in the body. However if you take the bacteria with the toxins they produced you will get sick. You need to purify the bacteria and clean them of the toxins.

[Anonymous No.12756931]

why should I go to a doctor if I know whats wrong with me anyways?

[Anonymous No.12756934]

>>12756926
>but it doesn’t happen in the body
Septicemia?

[Anonymous No.12756937]

>>12756931
Well, if you have a bone sticking out of your leg, I assume knowing what's wrong won't help in getting it fixed.

[Anonymous No.12756945]

>>12756937
Im certain I have sleep apnea from so many people telling me I do so why should I go to a sleep doctor and not just buy the machine instead?

[Anonymous No.12756957]

>>12756879
>Uh, no, plausibility isn't proof. You're rejecting actual studies showing bacteria cause illness, so you need more than plausibility
There is no study proving it. It’s just alleged by studies using irrelevant criteria. I don’t have to prove a negative. You claim molecular Koch’s postulates is fine.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_Koch's_postulates
But I tell you it isn’t because you can’t show. There is a pathogen causing something (like Henle-Koch’s postulates), but just an association. And every honest scientist will agree.

[Anonymous No.12756959]

>>12740889
Vitamine D is only effective with underlying deficiency. Once you control for that, its efficacy in preventing viral infections go to 0. Vaccines are not only much more effective in preventing viral infection, they also apply to the whole population.
Also, take some vit D and expose yourself to HIV, I bet you won’t pussyboi.

[Anonymous No.12756964]

>>12756945
Don't you need a prescription for a CPAP or BiPAP? It would also be good to know why you have sleep apnea, some issues can be corrected.

[Anonymous No.12756968]

>>12756926
>it doesn’t happen in the body
You realize we can detect those toxins, right? It's actually how Clostridium difficile colitis is diagnosed, by ensuring that the bacteria are producing toxins in the body rather than in culture.

[Anonymous No.12756970]

from tom cowan and andrew kaufman

[Anonymous No.12756971]

>>12740943
>mainstream science
finally, a true believer of pic rel
also, source?

[Anonymous No.12756975]

>>12756957
>I don’t have to prove a negative.
No, but you do have to prove your theory. This is Germ vs Terrain. You're basically saying Germ Theory should be rigorously tested, but the same shouldn't apply to Terrain Theory.

[Anonymous No.12756979]

>>12756924
>You don't prove a theory.
Essential you do. You always look for something suggesting different. If you can’t find it, you consider it further prove.
>You develop a theory, and everything that fails to disprove it serves to strengthen it.
Correct.
>Disproving something like terrain theory, which believes that disruption of tissue is not caused by bacteria, is easy.
Show it.
>We see that bacteria can disrupt tissue, because it's directly observed.
And maybe it’s because the tissue needs to be degraded and the body uses this mechanism. Seeing some bacteria around dying tissue is where the misconception started.

[Anonymous No.12756992]

>>12756964
I was just gonna buy a CPAP off ebay or something. I'm pretty sure its from smoking and obesity but I feel tired all of the time so I just want help feeling rested so I can lose weight and get better.

[Anonymous No.12756998]

>>12756979
>Show it.
Not that anon, but haven't we been through this? If I cured my strep almost immediately, and permanently, with probiotics, then isn't that proof my tonsils weren't diseased. You claimed it was my body detoxing, or my body was using the bacteria for something. Show it. I've asked for this kind of evidence multiple times.

[Anonymous No.12757009]

>>12756934
That’s toxin overload.
>>12756959
Well most in mother countries do have it.
>You won’t expose yourself.
Read the thread I have already said I will take clean particles. Obviously not foreign blood. Or the garbage usually put in cultures.
>>12756968
>Clostridium difficile colitis
How is it a prove there isn’t a reason the body makes it produce these toxins. I haven’t seen a study on H-K’s postulates on C. difficile c.

[Anonymous No.12757013]

>>12757009
>That’s toxin overload.
Toxins produced by bacteria in the body, which you claimed doesn't happen.

[Anonymous No.12757019]

>>12756975
Correct and anytime Germ Theory is correctly tested so is Terrain Theory.
>>12756998
>show it
I don’t doubt your story, but maybe it’s just placebo. It proves nothing. If you have the money go to a decent laboratory and let them test it. There is a good chance they will find something in the people, who have it. Currently there is just next to no money going into it.

[Anonymous No.12757029]

>>12718977
this is the state of american education

[Anonymous No.12757032]

>>12757019
>I don’t doubt your story, but maybe it’s just placebo. It proves nothing. If you have the money go to a decent laboratory and let them test it. There is a good chance they will find something in the people, who have it. Currently there is just next to no money going into it.
You're missing the point. You want rigorous studies to prove germ theory, but here you are saying that they'd probably find something, even though we don't have evidence for that now. As of this point, Germ Theory has far more going for it than your claims for Terrain Theory, which has basically nothing going for it.

[Anonymous No.12757036]

>>12757013
No it’s the metabolism of your body. If there is huge tissue trouble there will be an insane amount of degradation products released into the blood. And that’s the central dogma of surgery, remove the place, where this is happening.

[Anonymous No.12757062]

>>12757032
>As of this point, Germ Theory has far more going for it than your claims for Terrain Theory, which has basically nothing going for it.
Except it hasn’t it’s never the real deal. Don’t trust me and look at the modifications. There is just one direction. They are becoming weaker. The prove isn’t there, if you look carefully. E.g. how is two apes with open brains having tissue injected into the open brains prove of an enterovirus causing poliomyelitis. If one of the apes dies and the other can’t move?
Just look at it.

[Anonymous No.12757076]

>>12757036
But they can directly observe the bacterial toxins in the blood of patients with septicemia, meaning toxins are clearly being produced.

[Anonymous No.12757079]

>>12713318
why is this thread still alive

[Anonymous No.12757101]

>>12757076
>bacterial toxins
Yes and there are toxic substances produced by your own cells. It doesn’t prove the bacteria is the culprit. Maybe the body uses the bacteria as a way to deal with the metabolic waste products and determines the bacterial toxins are less harmful.

[Anonymous No.12757113]

>>12757101
But the bacteria can produce toxins that human cells aren't capable of producing, so we know they're not coming from human cells.

[Anonymous No.12757155]

>>12757113
Yes. But if your body has no choice it will risk certain things. Either there is your metabolic waste products causing greater damage or the products of certain bacteria causing less damage. It’s not that easy to just look at what is around. You need to dock deeper. When we didn’t we couldn’t find clear evidence.

[Anonymous No.12757163]

>>12757155
>didn’t
did

[Anonymous No.12757168]

>>12757155
Wait, so when you said that bacteria doesn't produce toxins in humans, you meant it only sometimes doesn't produce toxins in humans?

[Anonymous No.12757181]

discord
.gg
/H8D8U4cq

[Anonymous No.12757191]

>>12757168
Correctly everything is toxic. We discussed it earlier in this thread. Any gram negative bacteria is. However it’s not really dangerous because you would need insane amounts to threaten you.
And yes the body can activate bacteria to the point they are doing things, which they usually don’t do. E.g. eating dying cells or digesting something, which releases certain toxins.

[Anonymous No.12757504]

>>12717059
We have isolated the cholera toxin and we known it's exact mechanism of action down to the atom. It opens chloride channels which then forces water to flow out of the intestine into the lumen. It's no coincidence that the deadly symptom of cholera is shitting yourself into dehydration. Anyone who claims that V.Cholera is not the causative agent of cholera is an idiot.

[Anonymous No.12757507]

>>12757101
>Yes and there are toxic substances produced by your own cells. It doesn’t prove the bacteria is the culprit. Maybe the body uses the bacteria as a way to deal with the metabolic waste products and determines the bacterial toxins are less harmful.
We can isolate the toxin and determine its protein sequence. We can also isolate the pathogen and determine its gene sequence. When we see the toxin encoded in the pathogen's genome but not in the human genome then it is quite obvious that the pathogen is producing the toxin. Only a retard would deny this.

[Anonymous No.12757736]

>>12756633
Where?

[Anonymous No.12757775]

>>12756975
>theory
Germ thing is a theory
Terrain is the observable nature of reality

[Anonymous No.12757799]

>>12757504
Toxins and bacterias aren't contagious, nor is the bacteria and its toxins by products the root cause of the experienced symptoms.
We eradicate cholera with better water sanitation, and to avoid shitting where you eat, that's well known fact.
You won't achieve anything by feeding third worlders with antibiotics and vaccines.

[Anonymous No.12758723]

>>12757504
Yes. We know the AB5 protein and biochemically characterized it. But we do have strong evidence suggesting it isn’t produced in living organisms. Read into the studies most people from whom v. cholera can be cultured aren’t sick. And likely many more do also have it in smaller amounts where it’s harder to culture. You need to show Henle-Koch‘s postulates being satisfied. Finding some protein, antibody or sequence is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.12759052]

>>12758723
>But we do have strong evidence suggesting it isn’t produced in living organisms.
>We have strong evidence that a PROTEIN TOXIN isn't produced in living organisms
LOL. Where'd it come from then? The primordial soup? Proteins are made by living organisms. Unless you're being a definition-fag and counting viruses as not-living, but even then, the cholera phage needs to be integrated into a living cholera for the toxin genes to be expressed.

The ctx gene is found right here, the complete cholera genome sequence. Go search for ctxA and ctxB. Why does the cholera organism encode for the cholera toxin gene if it doesn't also produce it? Just junk DNA?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/ACIA01000008.1

[Anonymous No.12759196]

>>12759052
You misunderstood what I said. I said the bacteria doesn’t produce it in living organisms. It just happens in death tissue. Which all the in vitro experiments show, because that is dying tissue.

[Anonymous No.12759451]

>>12759196
> I said the bacteria doesn’t produce it in living organisms.
Cholera bacteria (which are organisms that we have observed being alive) inhabit the lumen of the intestine. The bacteria synthesize the toxin and secrete it. Cholera bacteria have been isolated from stool samples of living people infected with cholera. You're just wrong.

[Anonymous No.12759473]

>>12759451
>Cholera bacteria (which are organisms that we have observed being alive) inhabit the lumen of the intestine.
You are wrong they usually life in brackish water.
>The bacteria synthesize the toxin and secrete it.
Which is not proven to be the case in living organisms.
>Cholera bacteria have been isolated from stool samples of living people infected with cholera
And most people we cultured it from don’t have any symptoms.
If you do have a study proving Henle-Koch‘s postulates for vibrio Cholera than present it.

[Anonymous No.12759487]

>>12759451
If you wonder why the people with the symptoms also have the bacteria it’s quite simple. They ingested the bacteria and the toxin. The toxin was produced before. Not during the time in the intestine.

[Anonymous No.12759504]

>>12759473
>life in
live in

[Anonymous No.12759531]

>>12759473
>You are wrong they usually life in brackish water.
I am not wrong. They live in water but they also inhabit the lumen of the intestine.

>Which is not proven to be the case in living organisms.
yes it is

>Cholera bacteria have been isolated from stool samples of living people infected with cholera
And most people we cultured it from don’t have any symptoms.
That doesn't fucking matter. If it causes sickness in some people but not in others, it's still the causative agent in those whom it causes sickness.

[Anonymous No.12759571]

>>12759487
>If you wonder why the people with the symptoms also have the bacteria it’s quite simple. They ingested the bacteria and the toxin. The toxin was produced before. Not during the time in the intestine.
And how does this in anyway invalidate the germ theory, which is the whole point of this thread?

[Anonymous No.12759908]

>>12759531
>I am not wrong. They live in water but they also inhabit the lumen of the intestine.
Yes you are. You are disputing the mainstream here and not me. And while they are able to live in the intestine it’s not the natural (usual) habitat.
>yes it is
No it isn’t. Otherwise show it according to Henle-Koch‘s postulates.
>That doesn't matter.
I absolutely does. If you can’t fulfill the postulates it’s unproven.
>If it causes sickness in some people but not in others, it's still the causative agent in those whom it causes sickness.
It’s not even shown to cause it in them. I said „we can culture it“. It’s associated or correlated, but there is no prove of causality. And you would expect people, who mistakenly ingest the toxin also often happen to ingest the bacteria.

[Anonymous No.12759917]

>>12759571
>And how does this in anyway invalidate the germ theory, which is the whole point of this thread?
Because it’s the toxin produced by the bacteria outside of the intestines and not by the bacteria inside the intestines. While germ theory alleges it’s the bacteria in the intestines producing toxins, which they can’t show.

[Anonymous No.12760104]

>>12759917
Bacteriologists aren't stupid, they know the toxins cause symptoms and not the bacterias themselves.
The issues with germ/terrain theories is the root cause of a state.
Germ theory only state that a micro organism is involved, while the terrain theory ask why is there this particular micro-organism more than usual.
It's as simple.
>>12757799

[Anonymous No.12760128]

Checkmate germ theorists.

[Anonymous No.12760158]

If vaccines are usell for bacterias and viruses, can we make vaccines for targeted toxins?

[Anonymous No.12761018]

>>12760128
Impressive

[Anonymous No.12761059]

>>12760158
they already exist, check up tetanus and diphteria vaccines

[Anonymous No.12761069]

>>12713318
Do you have any good doku, which can convince me against watching biology lessons since 30 years. And also read 5 books on it + ofc school?
If not go away

[Anonymous No.12761217]

>>12757029
This is actually depressing. There's actually a guy's post I just read in here that said viruses don't even exist. He actually believes every single virologist in the world is in one giant conspiracy when you can literally see pathogens under a fucking microscope. Why is my country full of retards?

[Anonymous No.12761249]

>>12761217
>defund education in favor of blowing up sand niggers
>americans turn into retards
Big shocker.

[Anonymous No.12761646]

You know you can buy microscopes right? You know you could independently verify this right?

[Anonymous No.12762276]

>>12761069
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtWYQS3LFlE

[Anonymous No.12763008]

>>12761217
>>12761249
First, how do you know everybody in here is from America. Secondly maybe the virologist or most do believe the pathogenic viruses have to be there. And hence make them appear by any means. You probably don’t know the protocols for proper biochemical analysis and genetic characterization. But you can look them up. They have been done multiple times for particles like giant viruses and phages. However they also don’t make the organisms sick, but that’s another story. Never for animal viruses. We also have protocols for characterization of all kinds of cell components, but also EVs and apoptotic bodies. And guess what happens to be induced by the virus „isolation“ protocols. Correct it’s exactly, what you do to produce a lot of EVs and apoptotic bodies. They always do it in vitro and never ex vivo. Because if they do try to isolate it ex vivo, meaning directly from an animal/human, it’s never there.
You also have to kill everything to look under the electron microscope so these pictures are even more meaningless. But the pictures they show you are indistinguishable from the EVs and apoptotic bodies.
>>12761646
Not really. Because common microscopes need dying tissue in a Petri dish. With the electron microscopes it’s even worse there it needs to be totally dead. And that’s why the virologists and some bacteriologists are so confused. They think they got the culprit, when in reality they are watching the cleaning crew. They could never prove the cleaning crew is the culprit and back in the days they were drinking and injecting this stuff nonstop, but next to nobody got sick. Same goes for all the laboratory workers. Until very recently they had next to no serious protection. Same goes for the animal trials. I have discussed something somebody else posted. And briefly alluded to the animals and procedures involved. If you look into these animal trials you can easily see there are better explanations for all effects whitenessed.

[Anonymous No.12764059]

>>12762276
Thanks. I‘m not him, but I‘m going to check it.
>>12761069
I have read far more than two hundred virology papers regarding viruses allegedly making humans sick and probably around one hundred papers regarding the bacteria. I agree with OP and I‘m going to check the documentary for you.

[Anonymous No.12764189]

>>12764059
That's not a documentary but a presentation I enjoyed.
I'm not aware of any big documentary production on this topic.

[Anonymous No.12764290]

>>12764189
I think it’s good, but it goes straight into the deep mechanism. Maybe we need something better sourced; well I don’t know his book so maybe it’s there.
The question is how can we make more people and specifically scientists aware. I try to expose the terminology and how it changes directly. Or what the specific processes of pathology seen in vitro or in the animal models truly mean, by basically showing the flaws in the methodology. And make them understand, what qRT-PCR/qPCR and the in silico alignment does. Sometimes exposing the tricks used with the vaccines or antibodies. But maybe the indirect approach of explaining the hole system is better. Not sure, if scientists are open enough. I realized it by looking at PCR/ de novo alignment stuff and the transmission patters not fitting with human to human or vector born transmission, but with poisoning and psychological phenomena. Some of the high lights are the disappearances with changes of diagnostic criteria or the disappearance of SARS-CoV-1. Which made me look at the isolation experiments/protocols in virology I knew in a different light and saw the flaws. From there I checked the literature on bacteria. But I guess it’s different for everybody and not many will go my road. I like Stefan Lankas approach, but many are probably better reached by delivering piece after piece at a time.

[Anonymous No.12764363]

>>12761069
I advise it. I liked it as far as I checked it. If you have detailed technical questions or need terminology explained feel free to ask.

[Anonymous No.12764546]

>>12764290
This is all very technical, but most people instinctively know that diseases are multi factorials, one cause one treatment is already very criticicised.

Debunking the last 200 years of medicine would need at least a 10.000 pages book, but deep down we know.

Some good intro article I can recommend : https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/why-only-thing-influenza-may-kill-germ-theory

[Anonymous No.12764572]

>>12763008
>First, how do you know everybody in here is from America.
With you, it's just sort of obvious.

[Anonymous No.12765232]

Why does your nose still get stuffed up with mucous if you drink vodka through it?

The vodka didn't kill any bacteria there?

[Anonymous No.12766359]

>>12765232
Wut?

[Anonymous No.12766372]

>>12760128
it's a stupid false dichotomy, pathogens both seek and aggravate weak tissue, this is just like predation. A very healthy gazelle won't get hunted down by a hyena, but if the gazelle is injured it will be easy prey, but then if there is no hyena the injured gazelle will at least be alive.

[Anonymous No.12766376]

>>12766372
Predation/homeostasis

Does nature kill itself because there is an injured gazelle?

[Anonymous No.12766378]

>>12759196
factually wrong, bacterially produced LPS (aka endotoxin) is a constant burden on the intestine in basically all people to some degree. Go study it, it's very fascinating. For example, they found that alcoholic liver disease isn't caused by alcohol itself, it's the endotoxins that burden the liver when the alcohol allows them to pass through the intestinal wall.

[Anonymous No.12766434]

>>12766376
I have no clue what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous No.12766441]

>>12766434
Low test

[Anonymous No.12768055]

>>12766441
This

[Anonymous No.12768412]

>>12766441
based

[Anonymous No.12769482]

>>12766378
You don’t get terrain theory, which is the reality. Look into the video posted.

[Anonymous No.12769804]

>>12766434
You will have to find out.

[Anonymous No.12770618]

If germ theory was true, all doctors would be dead.

[Anonymous No.12770619]

>>12770618
u stupid bich let this thread die

[Anonymous No.12770630]

>>12770619
You can't kill an idea

[Anonymous No.12770631]

>>12759917
>Because it’s the toxin produced by the bacteria outside of the intestines and not by the bacteria inside the intestines.

The expression of tcpA and ctxA was examined during intestinal infection using a recombinase based in vivo expression technology (RIVET). The contributions of ToxR, TcpP and ToxT in tcpA and ctxA expression were found to differ significantly during infection compared to growth in vitro. TcpA was induced in two temporal and spatially separable events in the small intestine. ctxAB was induced monophasically only after tcpA expression during experimental infection of infant mice. The dependence of ctxAB expression on prior tcpA expression was not observed during in vitro growth (Lee et al.1999; Lee, Butler and Camilli 2001). These studies provided novel insights into virulence gene expression in vivo. The picture of virulence gene activation provided by these studies implies that after oral ingestion, the vibrios are exposed to a host signal present in the stomach/small intestine that causes ToxR and TcpP to become activated and induce toxT expression.

https://academic.oup.com/femspd/article/76/1/ftx126/4791527

No, you're just wrong. Mouse models have shown that the intestinal environment induces expression of the toxin and toxin-coregulated pili.

[Anonymous No.12770644]

>>12770631
>Because it’s the toxin produced by the bacteria outside of the intestines and not by the bacteria inside the intestines.
This doesn't make sense from an evolutionary point of view, either. If a pathogen were to piss toxin into the brackish water (which would have to be a fuckload of toxin if it's just going to keep a whole puddle at high enough toxin concentration), then it would be outcompeted by a mutant that can sense when it needs to produce the toxin. Anyway, germ theory proved right once again.

>>12759908
>I absolutely does. If you can’t fulfill the postulates it’s unproven.
No it doesn't. You're saying that if one person for whatever reason is more or completely resistant to cholera than another person, then cholera is not a pathogen because it doesn't cause explosive diarrhea in every single person it infects. It needs to cause a statistically significant increase in the amount of explosive diarrhea in an infected group versus a non-infected group, which it does.

[Anonymous No.12770860]

>>12770644
>>12757799

>It needs to cause a statistically significant increase in the amount of explosive diarrhea in an infected group versus a non-infected group,

Cholera infection is most often asymptomatic or results in mild gastroenteritis. Approximately one in 20 people will have severe disease

https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/public-health/infectious-diseases/disease-information-advice/cholera

[Anonymous No.12771081]

>>12770644
>If a pathogen were to piss toxin into the brackish water
It doesn’t „piss“ toxin. It puts out proteins to degrade dead organic matter in the water. There is no pathogenicity to dead organisms.
>at high enough toxin concentration
You will get high concentrations if the conditions are right for v. cholera.
>then it would be outcompeted by a mutant
Not. It’s already effective enough.
>Anyway, germ theory proved right once again
You didn’t prove anything.
>It needs to cause a statistically significant increase in the amount of explosive diarrhea in an infected group versus a non-infected group, which it does.
You need the basics. Association isn’t showing pathogenicity. Fulfilling Henle-Koch‘s postulates is.

[Anonymous No.12771106]

>>12771081
Why are we even mentioning Koch's postulates? He failed at fulfilling his own main theory, it's like we are searching for a holy grail that would only signify the doom of humanity, and as reality can't provide it we are shifting to a virtual simulation of nature, forcing it onto the common consciousness.

[Anonymous No.12771121]

>>12770644
Stop responding to the schizo.

[Anonymous No.12772116]

>>12771121
I‘m pretty sure he can decide for himself. Interesting how you seem afraid of the idea to the point you need to convince yourself every proponent of it is mentally ill.

[Anonymous No.12772910]

>>12771081
>It puts out proteins to degrade dead organic matter in the water.
Cholera toxin opens ion channels in the intestinal membrane. That's the "purpose" of the protein, as much as anything in nature can be said to have a purpose. Its production is upregulated when the cholera bacteria senses that it is in the intestine.

[Anonymous No.12773296]

>>12772910
The CTX isn’t specialized to destroy intestinal membranes at all. It binds and activates G proteins, which lead to adenylate cyclase activation. Which is ubiquitous in nature. It’s very clear that this is a bacterium, which helps to degrade death and dying tissues and make the energy and substances stored there available to other processes mostly in brackish water.
>if anything in nature can be said to have a purpose
Yes there is purpose and most scientists probably know it on some level there is no question. It’s just ignored on purpose. And how much effort is sometimes put into finding ways to deny it.
>Its production is upregulated when the cholera bacteria senses that it is in the intestine.
How would you even measure that? There is nothing suggesting this.

[Anonymous No.12773870]

>>12773296
I hope it stays around for the answer.

[Anonymous No.12773897]

It has been nearly 2 weeks. Please let this thread die.

[Anonymous No.12773929]

>>12773897
No, every other thread must be locked and saged to ensure this thread lives a healthy life on page 1

Have you no compassion for the safety and wellbeing of our older threads?

[Anonymous No.12774651]

>>12713318
im looking to get covid 19 to get it over with any tips for boosting immune system before going through with it?

[Anonymous No.12774708]

>>12774651
Go in highly polluted places, or breath toxic fumes for a while, eat poor diet, drink alcohol and avoid sunlight.
Then do the reverse.

[Anonymous No.12774787]

>>12773897
This thread will die when germ theory will be dead.

[Anonymous No.12775220]

>>12756685
>Has group A strep infection
>Give antibiotics group A strep is sensitive to
>Infection clears faster than control group

[Anonymous No.12775263]

Ok you crusty hippy germ theory deniers.
How the fuck do you explain global infections rates of Covid. What is the alternative hypothesis here. Everyone get ill by simulataneous being malnourished? What is the explanation beyond a pathogen.
Are people the people who are getting ill the “bad terrain”.

Seems to me you are ignoring to data that vaccines are reducing disease severity and transmission. Why do you ignore this data?

[Anonymous No.12775326]

>>12775263
These days dying of cancer counts as dying of COVID.
Simple. Keep blindly trusting the experts if you want to, even as they lead you down a bottomless hole.

[Anonymous No.12775359]

Tell me more about Koch's prostate

[Anonymous No.12775409]

>>12775263
>global infections rates of Covid
It’s all based on snippets of mRNA and the qRT-PCR wasn’t even adjusted for the real deal. They just went with primers into the whole transcriptome in the supernatant. They don’t really know where the material belongs to. Based on the short snippets they used de novo alignment and assembled a whole theoretical genome in silico. To make things worse the testing procedures aren’t standardized and the operational false positive rate is unknown. Incorrect melting temperatures, ridiculously high ct-values, horrible choice „genes“ targeted, primer dimers and hairpins are all issues plaguing the tests on top of it. Even if you believe there is anything beyond the in silico to it.
>What is the alternative hypothesis here. Everyone get ill by simulataneous being malnourished? What is the explanation beyond a pathogen.
Most people aren’t getting sick and panic can make the population less healthy. Experimental treatments can and did make things worse.
If we look at overall mortality rate in all countries there is nothing exceptionally happening.
And yes. Fear and toxins can make a lot of people sick in a very short time.
>Seems to me you are ignoring to data that vaccines are reducing disease severity and transmission
They aren’t even officially claiming the gene therapy, claimed to be vaccines, reduce transmission. And we can get into the tricks with the relative risk reduction and absolute risk. Or how the dates in the studies seem to be very carefully chosen. Vaccines and the new mRNA or DNA based gene therapy make you sick and thereby suppress symptoms afterwards for some time. It’s an old trick.

[Anonymous No.12775549]

>>12775409
So we are supposed to choose “fear”, “toxins” and “panic” as a genesis. In a global pandemic where the infectious transmission model is not only proven by innumerable studies, but is clearly visible with your own eyes. Why did everyone not simultaneously get covid then? Why did countries with hard lock downs (where distress is probably highest) have the lowest rates of ill was?

Vaccines have had huge impact, and contrary to your claims they have almost zero side effects in the vast majority of people, and at worst they get a transient fever.

You are very critical of the data behind these hypotheses, but where is your explanation for this? This stuff about toxins and fear is so vague.It doesn’t hold up against the consensus.

It seems to me that you are incredibly selective in your choices of data, and ignore the vast evidence in support of a pathogen model of disease. You can support literally any quack theory with a couple of citations. But you have to ignore 1000s of other first

[Anonymous No.12775551]

>>12775549
False.
Vaccines killed 40 times more elderly people in Israel than the meme flu would have.

[Anonymous No.12775558]

>>12775326
It’s easy to trust experts when your are and expert. And you work with them closely.

However, I can understand why a basement dwelling virgin might have a little trouble trusting anyone outside of his discord server

[Anonymous No.12775565]

>>12775551
Show me the data. Oh wait, it doesn’t exist because that didn’t happen

[Anonymous No.12775587]

>>12775551
Where do you get this shit from?
>inb4 source is a data analyst enthusiast and meme war veteran on twitter

[Anonymous No.12775629]

>>12775587
>>12775565
>>12775558
Here you go my dear redditors:
Un groupe de chercheurs dissidents, qui ont examiné les chiffres impliqués dans l’expérience israélienne actuelle de Pfizer a publié une étude détaillée il y a deux semaines. « Nous concluons, ont-ils écrit, que les vaccins Pfizer, pour les personnes âgées, ont tué pendant la période de vaccination de 5 semaines environ 40 fois plus de personnes que la maladie elle-même n’aurait tuées, et environ 260 fois plus de personnes que la maladie parmi la classe d’âge plus jeune. »
Google translate it, if you love truth so much.

[Anonymous No.12775635]

>>12775558
>>12775565
>>12775587
Remember to get your mysterium experimental serum sheepies.

[Anonymous No.12775636]

>>12775629
>still no source

[Anonymous No.12775948]

I’m not translating this. Just link me the article

[Anonymous No.12775973]

>>12775635
Yet when you’re septic with pneumonia you would beg for antibiotics

Keep deluding yourself schizo

[Anonymous No.12776003]

>>12775263
Vaccine data?

>muuh covid

If it's contagious why masks don't work?
If it's contagious why lockdowns don't work?
If it's contagious why social distancing doesn't work?

[Anonymous No.12776008]

>>12775409
>the operational false positive rate is unknown.
97% at 35ct

[Anonymous No.12776018]

>>12775973
>pneumonia
doesn't exist
>antibiotics
they don't work

[Anonymous No.12776021]

>>12775629
>>12775636
>>12775948
I thinking it's from this article
https://www.francesoir.fr/videos-debriefings/vaccination-en-israel-des-chiffres-de-mortalite-qui-interpellent-video

Why would anyone believe in this gay covid19 psyops anyway...

[Anonymous No.12776028]

>>12776018
Why would anyone take antibiotics?
They mass feed cattle with this shit and then complain of "avian flu" and all kinds of shits.
What a bunch of retards.

[Anonymous No.12776069]

>>12776028
What the fuck are you talking about? Antibiotics don't work, feeding them to cattle makes no difference.
Never reply to my posts again, motherfucker.

[Anonymous No.12776102]

>>12776069
Fucking retard, if antibiotics worked then why do infections rise since they introduced them?

[Anonymous No.12776123]

>>12776018
>>12776069
>>12776028
>>12776102

[Anonymous No.12776163]

>>12776102
What are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.12776197]

>>12776028
ms paint? impressive if so

[Anonymous No.12776203]

>>12775973
Modern medicine is a scam, no thanks.

[Anonymous No.12776237]

>>>/x/

You need to go back, you can literally check this kinda stuff with a goddamm microscope yourself

[Anonymous No.12776480]

>>12776237
Yeah so easy lol, show me a video of a viral process on YouTube then.
Not a 3d animation.

>but but

[Anonymous No.12776512]

>>12775326

[Anonymous No.12776558]

CHAD threds never die!

[Anonymous No.12777015]

>>12775549
>In a global pandemic where the infectious transmission model is not only proven by innumerable studies, but is clearly visible with your own eyes
Henle-Koch‘s postulates could never be satisfied. The rest is just rumors.
>Why did countries with hard lock downs
They believed it or pretend to believe it. I‘m not a sociologist.
>Vaccines have had huge impact, and contrary to your claims they have
I looked at the data and couldn’t find it. But if you find a clean study than post the methodology and the findings/raw data and I will look at it. Because frankly I don’t believe it exists.
>You are very critical of the data behind these hypotheses, but where is your explanation for this?
I‘m not making a positive claim. But there are others, who can explain it to you. One of these videos was posted.
>consensus
>selective
I looked at hundreds of studies. I know they never properly purified a virus and did genetic and biochemical characterization. It only has been done with phages and giant viruses, but if you know better share it with us. The game was always the same since Enders.

[Anonymous No.12777312]

>>12776008
Well it’s speculation since the real thing isn’t there in purified form. So you could argue it’s 100 percent. But than there is the transcriptome of healthy people and those with atypical pneumonia, where you can find some of the mRNA snippets of the alleged virus SARS-CoV-2.
But I agree anything over 20 isn’t strong. Anything over 25 is murky. And anything over 30 is already a big if. And that’s assuming they properly designed the cooking protocols which they didn’t. People driving 35 or more cycles probably are profiting big time or don’t know what they are doing. But the operational false positive rate isn’t determined.

[Anonymous No.12778265]

>>12776237
not an argument

[Anonymous No.12778546]

>>12776003
And when the vaccine is introduced the diagnostic criteria suddenly change. What a coincidence.

[Anonymous No.12778977]

>>12775263
>muh covid
yeah maybe pick an example that isn't a blatant psyop with fudged numbers

[Anonymous No.12779825]

>>12713318
Only recently. With this COVID hoax, people are waking up to the truth!

[Anonymous No.12779969]

>>12779825
Yeah same, really learned a lot about health and science during this fake pandemic, hope it will be useful to me someday.

[Anonymous No.12780649]

Good bye thread.

[Anonymous No.12781845]

>>12780649
Goodbye.