57 Comments

Jamie, this is awesome. I am also writing some articles pulling pants down from both genetics and virology (both largely frauds, using the same magical thinking). I don't know if you have seen this very good summary for genetics, I have it bookmarked but have not gone through this yet. Good resource: https://criticalcheck.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/dna-discovery-extraction-and-structure-a-critical-review/

Expand full comment

Thanks Sasha... look forward to your articles as always. Yes Tam's work was very ahead of her time.

Expand full comment

🎉 DNA Discovery and Historical Context

The quest to understand life's fundamental components led to the discovery of DNA. Initially conceptual, it became tangible with Miescher's extraction in 1869, paving the way for genetics.

Miescher isolated nucleic acid from leukocytes, coining the term "nuclein," which marked a pivotal moment in genetics.

🔬 DNA Extraction Process

Miescher used sodium sulfate to isolate leukocytes, revealing that nuclein contained phosphorus and nitrogen, hinting at its role in heredity.

Critiques of Miescher's methods question the assumptions about chemical treatments and the ethical implications of sourcing leukocytes.

🧬 Critical Examination of Methods

Assumptions about chemical treatments may have distorted conclusions regarding the preservation of cellular components.

The critique extends to the legitimacy of findings, emphasizing the need for transparency in scientific research.

📜 Components of DNA

Albrecht Kossel's work isolated fundamental nucleic acid components but lacked accessible documentation to confirm his findings.

The importance of transparency in foundational research is emphasized.

🔭 DNA Structure and X-ray Crystallography

The helical structure of DNA was revealed through X-ray crystallography, notably with Photo 51 by Rosalind Franklin and Raymond Gosling.

Concerns arise over the interpretation of diffraction patterns, which may not accurately represent the DNA structure.

🧪 Critique of Watson and Crick's Model

Watson and Crick's double helix model is critiqued for its speculative nature and lack of direct evidence, relying on assumptions rather than empirical proof.

🤔 Final Thoughts on Methodologies

The review questions the methodologies employed in DNA research, advocating for a reevaluation of established scientific narratives.

Ethical and methodological concerns regarding animal experimentation and the need for reproducibility in studies are highlighted.

🌱 Reductionist Thinking in Western Science

The influence of materialistic and reductionist thinking in Western science is critiqued, contrasting it with Eastern philosophies that emphasize a holistic view of life.

🧠 Role of Consciousness in Health

A link between consciousness, fear, and health outcomes is discussed, suggesting that positive emotions may foster beneficial adaptations in organisms.

🔄 Biological Transmutation and Genetic Modification

The concept of biological transmutation challenges traditional genetic inheritance, proposing that environmental interactions influence genetic expression.

🔬 Criticism of Traditional Molecular Biology

The reliance on techniques like electron microscopy and PCR is critiqued for potentially producing artifacts rather than genuine biological insights.

🧬 Nature of DNA and Genetic Testing

Skepticism surrounds the role of DNA in heredity, suggesting it may not be a functional blueprint but rather a byproduct of chemical processes.

🌍 Environmental Influence on Heredity

Environmental factors are shown to influence genetic expression, introducing the idea of "genetic assimilation."

💧 Role of Water in Biological Systems

Water's properties are discussed as critical for understanding life, suggesting a holistic view of biology that includes environmental influences.

📉 Challenges to Established Scientific Narratives

Participants express a desire for a more integrative understanding of life that transcends reductionist models.

⚖️ Ethical Considerations in Genetic Manipulation

Ethical concerns regarding genetic engineering and the societal impacts of biotechnology are raised, urging a reevaluation of genetic research.

🌌 Existence of Biological Structures

Skepticism is directed at the existence of biological structures like DNA and proteins, with claims that much of accepted science is based on theoretical constructs rather than empirical evidence.

👨‍⚕️ Critique of Medical Science

A comprehensive critique suggests that many medical practices and theories are overstated, with a disconnect between practice and scientific understanding.

💔 Nature of Disease and Healing

The text posits that diseases may be natural reparative processes rather than distinct entities, advocating for a holistic view of health.

Expand full comment

Thank you, I absolutely agree that genetics is a complete sham. I would spend hours reading results from all the different genetic experts on the study results from our families blood samples from 1998-2002. We were part of a trial involving sequencing the Waardenburg Syndrome gene. The results & their different conclusions were wild to say the least. Scratching my head thinking & finally laughing realizing that they were literally making shit up. The quackery of APOE, MTHFR PCR ect. All the different drugs, vaccines, preventive diets , scams upon scams to save mankind from made up things is quite astonishing and disturbing. If only we could get more people to read these studies as well as their obsession with Fruit Loops and MAHA, we might make some more progress.

Expand full comment

Genetics is truly the mother, with all due respect, to every scam that exists today. No one would have been able to keep pulling off the fraud unless modern “ science introduced the bio hacking cult decades ago that introduced gene altering monsters who have destroyed human lives with this butchering.

Expand full comment

Agreed... I think it really should be all hands to the pump to show the fraud of genetics...

Expand full comment

Absolutely agree, the field of genetics is filled with eugenics. All the doctors who told us our kids wouldn’t be able to have kids or else they would end up like Hellen Keller, true story, so they should get their tubes tied and vasectomy’s to prevent further birth defects. Meanwhile, our son had a beautiful baby boy 11 months old whose perfect. It’s a killing field.

Expand full comment

Goes back even further with false cell theory that was popularised by Rudolph Virchow in 1858. He plagiarised the theory and through his contacts suppressed the knowledge of the time ( embryology ) and marginalised any independent science.

“ “As a result of cellular pathology, a blueprint of life in cells had to be assumed in order to be able to claim, on the one hand, that life, but also diseases, develops from cells. Neither disease toxins, pathogens nor disease genes have been discovered to date.“

Expand full comment

I have heard similar conclusions from others but this time it really stuck. Your explanation of “it’s all chemistry” Wow! My only recommendation is to compare to something all the laymen’s are familiar with, home pregnancy test (a chemistry test). You all that are working through all this scientific madness are writing the script to the most amazing docudrama ever. I hope you all one day are recognized as the legends that you are.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your kind words of support

Expand full comment

Virology "quantifies" the "amount of virus" by using terms like "plaque-forming units" and "TCID50." The process is: extract tissue from a mammal, "pour in virus", watch "cytopathic effect" (cell death), fancy math, out pops "number of virus."

They claim the virus exponentially grows in a living organism, going from a measly 100 (infectious dose) to over 10 to 100 billion viruses by peak viral load (typically within just 5 days). All this quantified by recording, say, the amount of lung tissue cells dying in a petri dish over time. Femtograms of infectious virus to a hundred micrograms or more within just 5 days. The most humble of viruses - even a rhinovirus - is quantified in this fashion.

"In vitro" - in the petri dish - the function any nearly any virus is the same: runaway viral replication causing extensive cellular death.

"In vivo" - in the body - the function of nearly any virus is, to start with, runaway viral replication but it is always somehow curbed within 5 days or so JUUUUST before it would start to cause extensive cellular death and start liquifying the tissues of the affected creature from the inside out. In fact even when there are more infectious deadly viruses than susceptible cells to be killed by the virus it is always somehow curbed before it can overwhelm and destroy every such cell, or even just 5 or 10% of such cells. Then, the virus - despite not possessing a brain or even a metabolism - begins to exhibit a wide variety of remarkable behavior depending on its kind. For example, one virus might *CAREFULLY* infect one cell - only to make a few copies and then CAREFULLY not destroy the cell - as it migrates outwards towards your skin to *CAREFULLY* infect skin cells to produce - a RASH.

Take a skin biopsy sample, grow it in a petri dish, and put that very same CAREFUL virus into the petri dish, and it transforms into a viral rage, aggressively destroying every skin cell in the petri dish, thus demonstrating proof of its existence.

And billion-fold exponential expansion past that 5 day mark? From micrograms to GRAMS or KILOgrams of virus? In a living creature's lungs/tissue? Of course not. Not even in the most immunocompromised 90 year old.

This seems quite odd behavior for an "exponentially self-replicating non-alive particle."

Expand full comment

Beautifully put

Expand full comment

Dr. Thomas Cowan live today "The End of Virology, Again". Just got this so the it's timely:

https://www.youtube.com/@conversationswithdr.cowana5439 He is another brilliant Dr. who blows holes in the virus theory. Enjoy!

Expand full comment

So, we get sick from ??? (poisons deliberately added to our environment), and the same people who put the poisons there constructed a massively elaborate "diagnosis" apparatus to identify illness.... Just So That they may push their cures on us. This is a scam of apocalyptic proportion. It's "poisoning the well" on a massive scale. This will bring down western medicine as we know it.

[Remember the holistic store owner in Covid who basically stated the above? "The system" bent over backwards to shut her down asap and call her a quack? She may have been arrested.]

Expand full comment

thanks; we seem to have built a self-congratulatory world in the west; that to some, appears built on delusion; folks talk of string theory in physics; 40 yrs it seems spent chasing an apparition? our revered world of virology coming under scrutiny; keep up the great work;

Expand full comment

You are doing amazing work. The more I learn the more I don't trust the "science". It seems medical science stopped about 1920 and it became the "science is settled". Then I woke up with books such as dissolving Illusions, Virus Mania etc. What really blew my mind was scalar energy in relationships to our bodies. Transmutation of the elements in our bodies is a science not well understood or recognized. Dr Jerry Tennant put together an excellent book on the history of Scalar energy. Unfortunately the health "freedom" movement seems to be controlled with everyone lining up behind Dr Malone's mRNA (wink wink).

Expand full comment

Thanks for your kind words of support Stuart. I believe ultimately we are electromagnetic beings and most of these "biological" happenings are incredibly simple at its core... Yes we can only keep speaking the truth and eventually we will break through the CO narratives.. people power.

Expand full comment

You are so right. Nikola Tesla was proving this along with Royal Raymond Rife. Every atom has a specific frequency and a group of atoms or molecules have a frequency. It truly is exciting when you search for the truth in science.

Expand full comment

the Health Freedom Movement referred to as 'Not A Movement' by those that understand.

Expand full comment

I would add a controversial topic on why humanity has lost its way - the body is seen as a machine made out of bits an pieces to fix.

Spirit/ Soul is above matter.

https://media2-production.mightynetworks.com/asset/53521ab1-e7a1-4e05-8af6-3c21f503a42e/The_Real_Biology_-_Spirit_is_above_Matter.pdf

Hardly anyone can think any different including the power elite that are driven by a delusional ideology to become “ god” .

They have got everything except for absolute power - See Red Symphony .

https://educate-yourself.org/cn/Red-Symphony-1968-Josif-Landowsky-78-pages.pdf

And now they seem to believe and want material immortality is possible at the cost of experimenting and destroying the human species and life on this planet.

—-

( takeaways- A new theory of life

https://www.wplus-verlag.ch/de_DE/p/buy/die-4-ausgaben-des-jahres-2019

W-plus 2019 / 1 , German )

The false cell theory has presented a false and fatalistic worldview, the defect within and out that could develop and strike anytime.

For those living in fear of suffering and death takes away some of the joys of life.

Those who have confidence, trust biology and believe in a meaning in life before and after death are more likely to live a fulfilling life.

They are less likely to take part in evil and fall for propaganda and insane ideologies, the delusion of material immortality - nowadays promoted as transhumanism

—-

Hard to know what is measured when they claim to be RNA and DNA.

But with Dr Peter Augustin findings, the dense water that oscillated between energy and matter , my understanding is the first sign of life attempting materialising , RNA that constantly builds and disintegrates and can form into more stable structures that give rise to life. That is why nothing can be actually isolated and can not be fixed entity.

Dr Lanka mentions that the oceans are full of this biomass - bionts wrongly named giant viruses.

So something that is measured in nature eg. from the ocean can give us an understanding of how life becomes visible to us.

What they produce in the labs are human produced chemicals and artefacts that do not study life.

Expand full comment

Excellent and thanks. So we do not know if viruses exist. We do not even know - if they exist - if they are alive or dead. We have never seen one. We cannot claim any evidence beyond assumed effects for their existence. We invent methods of detection that confirm our assumptions. Then we stop society, mass inject the world, injure and kill millions ( including my dad) with God only knows what, and claim, while victims die on the surgery floor, that we have "saved millions of lives"? Madness. Can this be stopped? I hope so. Good luck with the work and getting the message out. Your stuff is reported in our family and circle and if forums like this can continue we may reasonably assume the same with others. Perhaps a critical mass can be reached.

Expand full comment

FWIW: the version of the ELISA "HIV" test that the late Roberto Giraldo used in his experiments in the 1990s was apparently withdrawn from the market by ABBOTT Labs sometime circa the year 2000. I dug around in the early 2000s to find out what happened, and I received a response from a rep from ABBOTT. He claimed that the withdrawal of this individual test kit was part of a larger "quality control" action by the company which affected MANY of its diagnostic products. In other words, supposedly this test kit was NOT withdrawn from the market in response to this type of problem that Giraldo was trying to highlight. The company replaced that test kit of course, and certainly there are still PLENTY of reasons to doubt the validity of all of these tests and ALL TYPES of tests for "HIV" and other viruses. However, it is important to always keep in mind that this is NOT just because of the dilution rates of these various test kits.

Giraldo's work on this issue was similar to the efforts made earlier in the 1990s by another long-time veteran AIDS dissident, my friend Christine Johnson. She is the author who compiled the infamous "list of factors known to cause false positive HIV test results". That title was NOT something Johnson came up with, but it was created by the Indie alternative news magazine which "broke" her "list" in 1996.

At any rate, what unfortunately always struck me about these specific efforts that were made by my contemporaries in our old "AIDS" dissident movement was that they were lacking a more COMPREHENSIVE analyses encompassing ALL of the issues surrounding the purported isolation of so-called "HIV".  After all, aren't we supposed to believe -as the pharma/biotech establishment always insists- that "all tests have false positives"....?? To be fair, both Johnson and Giraldo did indeed explore the problems with claims of "isolation" of so-called "HIV", but they both did so in OTHER written works of theirs.

Under the leadership of the late Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, it is certainly true that the Perth Group's written works often included analyses of a "proteomic" nature or "antibody/antigen" issues. However, in the vast majority of their papers, the Perth Group also managed to include -at least to SOME extent- the all-important questions and problems surrounding the claims of so-called "isolation" of "HIV". This is very similar in scope to the more comprehensive, sweeping efforts being made nowadays on MANY fronts by our host Jamie Andrews and his team working on these control studies experiments.

And speaking of chemistry, the leader of the Perth Group, Eleni P-E, repeatedly claimed that the chemistry that is so obviously occurring in these so-called "virological" pursuits is most likely of an "oxidative" origin. Because Eleni self-trained on issues surrounding so-called "cell biology" through her in-depth studies of the existing peer-reviewed literature, her work was admittedly confined to the notion of a so-called "cellular" system and all its various so-called "components". However, in its *TIME*, Eleni's work was the closest to the most evolved thinking on these issues. After all, what are "redox" and "oxidative" actions other than a bunch of chemicals or organic materials just REACTING to each other, i.e., simply doing what they do naturally......?

Expand full comment

All very interesting.. thank you Rod... I didn't know any of that about Giraldo or the Abbott test.

I think that falsifying these tests in and of themselves is a very beneficial thing even if not backed up with the rest of it....

Agreed that the principles behind what is essentially charge/electromagnetics is at the root of this with Redox and oxidative reactions just being this transfer of charge...

Expand full comment

Just thinking....It might be of moderate interest if someone could find the CURRENT ABBOTT LABS ELISA test(s) for so-called "HIV". If anyone could find the package insert(s) from the current test kit(s), then we could see what the current rate(s) of dilution are for them....I'm sure they still require some -if not GREAT- levels of dilution nowadays....

Expand full comment

I think I mostly agree with you on the issue of falsifying these tests. However, I still assert that the work that YOU are doing in the present day in THAT one area alone surpasses in depth anything that Dr. Giraldo did, and certainly you are far surpassing anything that Christine Johnson did. She did no original experiments herself. I'm saying nothing against Johnson. She was always one of the "good guys" (and gals), always insisting that the issues surrounding the isolation problems be discussed, despite the annoying opposition to doing so at that time that was coming from the Duesberg cabal.

However, with respect to Johnson's "list of factors known to cause false positives", she just compiled a list from the existing scientific literature at that time.... Believe me, though, when I say that back then we all thought that THAT was really "revolutionary"! :-)

Expand full comment

Such a charmer Rod... couldn't and wouldn't be doing this without your support and all of the perspectives and info you bring...cheers mate.

Expand full comment

BTW and IMHO: With all due respect, Jamie, the proof is in the pudding, as they say, on whether or not Johnson's list succeeded. Ditto for Roberto Giraldo's experiments with the undiluted samples. Make no mistake about it, as I said, the effort made by Giraldo on the ABBOTT ELISA test was INDEED quite WIDELY discussed and promoted by us old "AIDS" dissidents back in the day, and so of course was Christine Johnson's "List of Factors....". I realize that hindsight is of course always 20/20. Nevertheless our little old "AIDS" dissident movement FAILED,  and SPECTACULARLY so, in fact.

Most people who invoke our old "AIDS" dissident movement tend to overlook that obvious FACT!

Certainly, many of us also promoted the work of the Perth Group, but the aforementioned efforts of Giraldo and Johnson were REALLY HEAVILY PROMOTED, even by some stalwart dittoheads of Peter Duesberg. Despite all of the energy we all spent promoting these efforts, members of the establishment were hardly quaking in their boots over them. In reality, the establishment hardly batted an eyelash at these analyses that Giraldo and Johnson did.

Contrast these efforts with the following two events from later (the 2000s) in the history of our old "AIDS" dissident movement:

1. The Parenzee case where the prosecution was most DEFINITELY scared by the dissidents! So much so that they felt compelled to ask the asshole Judge for a months long RECESS (which they received) in order to prepare for their cross examination after the direct testimony of the leader of the Perth Group, the late Eleni P-E!  More importantly, the establishment/prosecution subsequently secured the "expert" testimony (read: LIES) of no less than the purported "co-discoverer" of so-called "HIV", ROBERT FUCKING GALLO himself!

SEE: http://www.tig.org.za/Transcript_Perth_Group_evidence.htm (and the other links at that link)

2. The "BMJ 'debate'" which was really an EXTENUATED (over two years long!) discussion that transpired in the comments section of a paper that manifested on the web site of the British Medical Journal. This "debate" drew the attention of none other than yet another high-ranking official in the establishment: the "custodian" of the so-called "genome" of so-called "HIV", Dr. Brian Foley from the Los Alamos Laboratory!

I really recommend that everyone who is interested in our history of our "AIDS" dissident movement  and what transpired check out this infamous debate. It is REALLY rich and packed with data (at least from the Perth Group, of course.) Foley and the other asshole supporters of the establishment tried but FAILED. They KNEW they were failing, so in early 2005, they and their allies decided to pester the editors of the BMJ to terminate the "debate" after TWO YEARS!

Here is the link to the ENTIRE discussion:

https://bmj.rethinkers.net/bmj_debate.html

You can choose other ways to view this discussion on the landing page at this link:

https://bmj.rethinkers.net/

The DIFFERENCE with these two efforts (the Parenzee Case and the "BMJ 'debate'") was that so-called "HIV" itself was always the target in the efforts led by the Perth Group, of course. This target, the missing "virus" named "HIV", was CLEARLY the "Achilles Heel" of the establishment. This can clearly be seen from the way the orthodoxy reacted with such intensity to the Perth Group's efforts in both of these events which was QUITE different from the non-reactions of the establishment to Giraldo's and Johnson's efforts.......

Expand full comment

Another tidbit, FWIW: Circa 1997-98, I guess I technically became Christine Johnson's "successor" in the position of "Science Information Coordinator" for what was then at that time the world's largest "AIDS" dissident organization. Back then, I actually contemplated expanding Johnson's "list" and adding MORE "factors" to it. I certainly could have done that because by the late 1990s, there were additional "factors that are known to cause false positive 'HIV' test results" that were not included on Johnson's list which I believed she compiled circa 1996.

Obviously, I never did get around to expanding that list, but it was not because I didn't believe it was a good idea. (Back then I still thought it was a great way to get the truth out.) I simply got busy and distracted, and I eventually started a different "AIDS" dissident org myself.

Expand full comment

Have you got a copy of this list? Would be interested to see it.

Expand full comment

Sure. Here is the link to Christine Johnson's infamous list: https://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cjtestfp.htm

I think it was originally published earlier in 1996 in "Zenger's Newsmagazine".....

Expand full comment

Although I appreciate this exposure of the slight of hand of this industry, I still don't understand why I can't find any evidence or good explanation of why the human body wants to (and capable of) replicating `dead' foreign matter. Wouldn't the proving/disproving of this strange anomaly bring the real issue regarding the credibility of virology? If I have a wood splinter under my skin, it doesn't replicate... why should a `dead' virus?

Expand full comment

Excellent point

Expand full comment

Goes back even further with false cell theory that was popularised by Rudolph Virchow in 1858. He plagiarised the theory and through his contacts suppressed the knowledge of the time ( embryology ) and marginalised any independent science.

“ “As a result of cellular pathology, a blueprint of life in cells had to be assumed in order to be able to claim, on the one hand, that life, but also diseases, develops from cells. Neither disease toxins, pathogens nor disease genes have been discovered to date.“

Expand full comment

Exciting to read this and a pleasure to see some real science. No viruses = no virology.

Expand full comment

A question about genetics, because I’m learning as I go here: are paternity tests valid then? What is being studied and assessed when using genetics to determine lineage? If not genetics (XY vs XX chromosomes, etc.) what is being observed?

Expand full comment

I will be doing alot more articles upcoming covering all of these topics… Whilst I think there are clear differences in the sequencing results i.e the contents of the sample clear change the outcome somewhat I think that the entirety of genetics sequencing is a sham...

They MUST know BEFORE the test as much info as possible.. in paternity tests...there are usually only a few people to choose from right? And should in many cases be able to tell from looks alone...so right here is it much more tough than a 50/50 call? All of this sham is revealed with blind testing

Expand full comment

Excellent Jamie, thanks for digging through the fallacys.

Here's a link to a podcast about FOIA requests showing proof of isolation studies from 224 organizations.

None could show any proof of any viral isolation.

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/fallacy-idiocracy/episodes/Unveiling-the-Virus-Fallacy-A-Deep-Dive-into-the-Third-Episode-of-Fallacy-and-Idiocracy-e2o27q5

Expand full comment