The so-called “viruses”, causing diseases, are not scientifically proven
Article by Ewa Leimer
The article gives an overview of how long the hypothesis of a "virus" has existed, how conventional medicine defined "virus" in the past and today, and how Germanische Heilkunde®, discovered by Dr. med. Mag. theol. Ryke Geerd Hamer, takes the idea of "viruses", which are in reality nothing more than harmless protein compounds, to ad absurdum.
After a short introduction, the author writes about the so-called “scientific” basis of "virology" and the development of ideas about the existence of a "virus" up to today's conventional medical definitions. This is followed by a brief summary from the perspective of Germanische Heilkunde® and how the knowledge about "viruses" changed in the progress of Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer's research work.
The current discussions on whether the Corona Virus (Covid-19) is dangerous, or whether it is just an ordinary virus, similar to the virus causing a harmless influenza, is a farce, because until today medicine has not presented any scientific evidence that would confirm the existence of this so-called virus (virus = poison, pathogen = poison, causing the disease).
Any attempt to explain the absurdity of assuming the existence of so-called disease-causing viruses will not succeed without having self-tested the knowledge of Germanische Heilkunde. This (self-testing, self-verification) clearly shows the absurdity of this concept.
In the system discovered by Dr. Hamer, called by him Germanische Heilkunde®, there is no concept that "evil" is stronger than "good", that something "sick" is stronger than something "healthy" (these terms came with the Jewish-Christian religion).
The set of rules of the System in Germanische Heilkunde® gives us a logical explanation for the development of so-called diseases and does not leave even a nanometer of space for the old medical consensus. Even the so-called virology in its publications contradicts its own speculative evidence, or more precisely its own guesses, because it has no evidence - evidence is of no interest at all. It is simply assumed that viruses exist.
In the System of Germanische Heilkunde®, however, every step can be verified, traced and predicted.
These are the 3 basic criteria of Scientific Knowledge:
- Traceability (reproducibility)
If these three basic criteria are missing, one cannot speak of scientific knowledge.
Medicine is based on old, outdated pseudo-"scientific" models, while usurping the name of natural science. All progress in medicine relates exclusively to the technologies (techniques) it uses: it has a huge arsenal of technical inventions at its disposal. Progress in technology was possible, because it is based on verified (scientifically proven) knowledge, such as chemistry or physics.
However, medicine still lacks an unambiguous, scientific answer to the basic medical question: Why do the symptoms, that are called "illness" in conventional medicine, occur?
Diagnosis in medicine is based only on visible symptoms and the interpretation of these symptoms is not based on any scientific evidence. For this reason, medical science must rely on hypotheses, consensus, dogma (Oncology textbook for medical students, PZWL 2003 medical publishing house, p. 58) and statistics. (See also film: Medicine and its paradigm)
One of the assumptions of medicine is the existence of a so-called “virus”, supposedly causing the disease.
In expert publications of so-called "virology", although the name "virus" stands for "virology", none of these publications shows the structure of a human virus (neither in blood, nor in other kind of body fluid, or e.g. in case of measles on the body). Only "something" was noticed in the dying cell.
Unlike bacteriophages (without any scientific basis, medicine calls them bacteria viruses), which can be easily isolated from the collected material and biochemically examined (it has been possible since 1940), the so-called "viruses" that supposedly cause diseases in humans, animals or plants have not been isolated until today.
An isolation experiment of a (supposed) human virus has never been carried out, because there are no medical protocols under which such a procedure should be conducted. Only bacteriology has such protocols (since 1940).
What are these so-called “Bacteriophages” (called viruses by orthodox medicine)?
When bacteria die "normally" (and this happens slowly) because they are deprived of the conditions for living (e.g.: too hot, too cold, radiation), they produce spores (" survivors") that can survive for centuries. And when the environment is favourable again, new bacteria are formed from these spores.
However, if the bacteria do not have time to create spores, they are "reduced" to minimal particles, i.e. "only" to nucleic acid (called Genetic Material in school/conventional medicine). This nucleic acid is surrounded by a coating of protein, the building material needed for life. All these particles are the same.
Therefore, the bacteria do not die completely but leave the nucleic acid as a source of energy (the primary function of nucleic acid is to produce energy) which is used by other bacteria living in the surrounding area.
The so-called bacteria necrosis is therefore also something purposeful, a sensible process.
These small particles are considered to be the cause of bacterial death in school medicine. That is why they are called bacteriophages, bacterial eaters ("viruses"), which is an incorrect name.
This model of bacterial behaviour has been transferred to alleged human viruses (supposedly found in human cells). John Franklin Enders (1897-1985) was the first to do so.
However, human cells are organised in a more complex way, whether in vivo or in a test tube.
Enders adopted a model from bacteriology without taking this fact into account: he used a model from bacteriology in his experiments with animal cells.
But he did not isolate any virus. Instead of showing the actual virus isolated, he claimed that the cells had died because a smear was added to them from the "patient" (person showing some symptoms). He conducted his experiments in a test tube.
In case of so-called "measles", for example, he took a smear from saliva of a person "sick with measles" (or rather a person who had symptoms classified as measles) and added it to the cells defined by medicine as so-called healthy and the cells began to die.
However, they would die whether or not something was added to them.
What was this procedure like?
According to the bacteriophage model, J. Franklin Enders deprived cells of their source of life, added a cocktail of antibiotics, containing streptomycin (antibiotic), which kills cells by itself. In 1954 this was not known. It was only in 1973 that this antibiotic was found to kill them.
He added a smear from the saliva of the "patient" to the previously "prepared" cells. (man who had symptoms). The cells died very quickly. But Enders didn't run any control tests.
If he had done the control tests at that time, i.e. compared the cells subjected to the procedure with those that were not subjected to the prcedure and waited some time, he would have noticed that in both groups the cells were dying, only the cells from the group that were subjected to the procedure were dying faster as "healthy" cells.
For Enders, the dying of cells alone was "sufficient evidence" for the virus to exist.
When did the "Virus" History begin?
The history of the "virus" was initiated by Pasteur (1822-1895). It was Pasteur who had the idea that there must still be a pathogen a thousand times smaller than bacteria, which cannot be seen under a (optical) microscope. He called this so-called pathogen a poison. His assumption was not based on any scientific evidence.
From Pasteur's diaries it is clear that the published results of his research differed from the actual results of his research (=forgery). Although he forbade his descendants to publish his diaries, the last of his male descendants did not submit to his will and the world learned about this fraud from a book written by Prof. Gerald L. Geison, based on these diaries. (See the film in Polish language: Medicine and its Paradigm)
How is a “Virus” defined in Medicine?
The "old" definition of a virus in school/conventional medicine is: "Viruses (is from the Latin neuter vīrus referring to poison and other noxious liquids) are small infectious particles infecting all forms of life, incapable of multiplying outside the host cell."
In the meantime medicine has "supplemented" this definition:
"Viruses constitute a large and heterogeneous group of infectious agents whose structures, with few exceptions, can only be determined using the electron microscope, represent no cellular structures observed in other groups of microorganisms and have no metabolic activity independent of the host cell in which they multiply. Each virus contains nucleic acid and proteins. Viral proteins account for 40% to 96% of the virus."
The role of proteins in the living organism:
Proteins are the material of living organisms they need for life. Protein is one of the basic nutrients. It is essential for the proper functioning of the organism, because proteins participate in various ways in virtually all processes taking place in the body.
The human body builds the required proteins - enzymes, blood proteins and many others - from 20 different amino acids (protein forming amino acids). Non-protein-forming amino acids are not used to build proteins, but they have many other functions in the body.
In the different cells of the body, the amino acids are combined to form proteins. A protein (protein) is formed from the amino acids.
What evidence for the existence of human viruses has medicine to present?
None at all!
First of all, it is important to know that only electron microscopes made it possible to see cell structures invisible under an optical microscope. But the images that are visible under the electron microscope show dead matter. (Due to the technology used, because electrons can only move in a vacuum)
Under the electron microscope, various small (dead) particles (static image) are visible both inside and outside the cell.
Medicine interprets these normal cell components visible in dead matter as so-called "viruses". However, it is not able to isolate any of them, nor is it able to carry out biochemical procedures to investigate their structure, and this is necessary in a scientific study!
It is important to know that the images seen under the electron microscope, which allegedly indicate the existence of "viruses", are no different from other microscopic images of cells with their "normal" components.
How does the procedure look like, that claims to confirm the existence of viruses?
The material to be tested (e.g. oral smear) is taken from the person defined as 'sick' (person showing symptoms) and subjected to PCR test and procedures (reproduction of nucleic acid, so-called genetic material RNA).
Duplicated DNA/RNA (nucleic acid) material from a person, defined as "sick", is compared to DNA/RNA material taken from a person, who is defined as “healthy” by school medicine. The difference between them is defined as a virus. Because it is assumed that the so-called genetic material (nucleic acid) in a so-called healthy person is static, that it is not subject to any changes.
But here medicine has a problem: in between, it turned out that the so called genetic material of every so called healthy person is constantly changing. The whole idea of genetics vanished in the air.
Quote from the journal 'Die Zeit' of 12.6.2008.
"The genome was considered to be the unchanging pattern of man. Today, science must abandon this idea. In fact, our genetic material is in a state of constant change.
Two years ago, 25 geneticists gathered at the University of California to solve this seemingly simple question: What is a gene?
However, trying to define precisely the term of their medical field has proved to be extremely difficult. The expert meeting almost ended in disaster.
"We had many hours of meetings, everyone was yelling at each other..."
What researchers have found in the human or animal chromosome (including plants) breaks previous thought patterns in genetics.
Medical research, in particular, faces new challenges (since medicine believes that the body is unchangeable, is determined by its genes, it divides them into good and bad genes - the idea even won the Nobel Prize - Harald Zuhausen patented the idea as a virus and vaccine against uterine cancer).
Body and soul (health, development, ageing) are subject to a genetic interaction whose complexity exceeds all previous ideas.
Genetics must say goodbye to their image of a stable genome where changes are pathological exceptions."
As I mentioned before, school (conventional) medicine tries to prove the existence of the so-called "virus" (pathogen) in the following manner: two cell cultures are taken, one is defined as "healthy", the other as "sick" (with the alleged pathogenic agent). The difference between the results of the complex "tests" carried out indicates, in her opinion, "something" (the alleged "virus") that causes the disease.
This is what "scientific" research is supposed to "confirm" the existence of the virus...
Do the labs themselves know what they're looking for?
Also the results of "research" (tests used in school medicine ) on so-called "antibodies", are also based on such "reliable" scientific evidence.It should be noted that antibodies belong to glycoproteins, whose molecule contains 82% - 92% protein and 4% to 18% carbohydrates. So here we are also dealing with a protein.
Dr. med. Ryke Geerd Hamer about "viruses":
In the initial phase of his research work, Dr. Hamer thought (because it was taught during his studies) that so-called "viruses"(pathogens) do exist. But from the beginning he saw helpers in them. As he made further discoveries, he began to doubt their existence ... it is understandable that he uses the term in his later publications when describing the course of vagotonia of ectodermal parts of organs: "Viruses, if they exist". In the final stage of his research work he already knew for sure, that in the vagotonic phase of a SBS of ectodermal parts of organs, the body does not need any additional helpers.
The logical systematic of the Germanische Heilkunde allows this meaningful (sensible) process to be easily traced and understood.
The ectodermal tissue of the living organism, which was created during the evolutionary development, belongs to the youngest tissue and the changes occurring on it are visible almost immediately: in the active phase of SBS in the form of tissue atrophy (ulcera = ulcers) immediately after the occurrence of the DHS and continue until the end of the active conflict phase. After the Conflictolysis (CL = end of biological conflict activity) the restorative process begins on the tissue immediately, recommending the filling of the cavities formed on the tissue in the active phase of SBS.
Proteins play a fundamental role in this restorative process. The demand for proteins is naturally higher in this phase, because the cavities formed in the ca-phase must now be filled with new tissue.
After the end of SBS, the restorative process also ends ...
The organism is returning to Normotony... to a state that in medicine is called "health."
Summary with regards to Germanische Heilkunde® knowledge:
In endodermal and mesodermal tissues medicine has no problem with finding microbes (microorganisms), because these tissues in the course of SBS use their help. However, they are wrongly classified as pathogens.
Their presence alone is enough for school (conventional) medicine to qualify them as so-called pathogens.
The argument is: We have a "sick person" (i.e. a person with symptoms), we find microbes in it, so we conclude: microbes cause these symptoms (this "disease"). In the opinion of medicine, the so-called theory of infection is confirmed by this.
However, the ectodermal tissue does not need microbes in a SBS. But the 'infection theory', on which medicine is based, obliges medicine too to find the pathogen. These complicated studies carried out in "diseases" of ectodermal tissue (in which there are no microbes), are an intensive attempt to keep alive the old consensus, i.e. the "infection theory".
In its efforts, medicine uses the latest technological achievements at its disposal: among other things, an electron microscope under which it sees tiny particles in and out of cells and interprets them freely, because until today it has not been able to isolate and biochemically examine them...
If it's a protein, it's the basic building block of a living organism. It's not surprising that it's present, in every living organism... in every cell...
That's why Dr. Hamer says that if there were any "helpers" on the ectodermal tissue in the course of vagotonia, it could only be proteins. In medicine, these proteins are called "viruses."
The article is based on an interview with a German microbiologist, Dr. Stefan Lanka and the book "Medical Microbiology" Manual for Medical Students of PZWL 2004 and of course on the works of Dr. med. Mag. theol. Ryke Geerd Hamer