THERE IS NO
MATERIAL
CONTAGION
Dr. Stefan Lanka
CONTAGION
The concept of contagion and idea that pathogenic 'viruses' can pass from host to host is deeply rooted in the human psyche. But is it true?
​
This first section deals with the science dispelling this myth, revealing the true nature of what we call 'viruses' and the simple measures we can take to avoid illness.
In a recent paper titled 'The Misconception Called 'Virus' (essential reading), Dr. Stefan Lanka - a German biologist and virologist - clearly reveals how the entire field of virology has been refuted. This has been done simply through the inclusion of a negative control in so-called 'infectious' experiments.
Negative controls are essential within the scientific method. Without them we'd struggle to ascertain the validity of our studies or even understand the effectiveness of certain treatments/drugs. As a result, for medicine we have FDA negative control standards and terms like 'placebo' or 'double-blind' studies.
In virology, a negative control would allow us to confirm whether an alleged 'infectious' agent has actually caused a damaging reaction, or whether the reaction would occur regardless.
Bizarrely and rather embarrassingly, this negative control has never featured in such infectious experiments.
​
​
As Dr. Lanka shows, when a negative control is included in infectious experiments - meaning no alleged 'virus' is present - we still observe the identical, deathly reaction in sample tissue.
As he points out, this is simply because of the way scientists prepare it for the 'virus'. Virologists not only starve sample cells of their nutrients, but also bombard them with toxic antibiotics to rule out bacterial infection. It is this poisonous preparation that generates the same damaging results - with or without the allegedly infected blood or saliva. (Diagram 1)
The genetic fragments within these dying cells are then hypothetically combined to form
a very convincing, rather scary but totally imaginary CGI model of an end-to-end 'viral' genome.
This genome does not exist in reality. It is merely a fictional product thought to be terrorising our society through pseudoscience alone.
When virologists think they're looking at the ghastly effects of such hypothetical 'viral genomes', what they're actually looking at is the natural excretions of toxic cells.
These excretions are known in the scientific community as exosomes and are expelled in auto-immune response to any degree of any illness. And in this way, 'Viruses' are actually our friends not our foes, as we shall see.
But if this is true, how can the entire field of virology be mistaken? We touched on this in the intro, but for clarification let's suppose we were born into a world that teaches 2+2=5. And that from this foundational error we built an entire body of knowledge.
However intellectual, sharp or knowledgeable the academics may be, their conclusions will remain forever incorrect so long as they fail to question the false gospel of their discipline:
2 + 2 + 7 - 3 x 4 / √ 247 x 16 - 1 = ?
Unfortunately, however, through years of training and the accumulation of academic credentials, the ego rigidly self-identifies with errors. And today, many scientists, doctors and nurses would sooner kill you than accept the simple truth.
"It's easier to fool someone than it is to convince them they've been fooled."
Mark Twain
For more detail on the history of this subject please read Dr. Lanka's paper - which you can find here. Alternatively - if you don't have time - I've included a key point summary of this paper below.
You can also watch Dr. Lanka's recent presentation (transcript here) which shows that although the infection theory began as an error, it later turned into a fraud. A madness, of sorts, developed through the industrialisation of a profound misconception. A calamitous error that now endangers the entire human race.
In light of this work and to promote a global reformation in medicine, Dr. Lanka has been offering €100,000 to anyone who can prove that measles is caused by a 'virus'.
And despite a falsely advertised success story - which Lanka succinctly refutes in his paper - he'll never lose, because as he simply explains "there is no material contagion".
So what is really sickening people at this time? We'll come to this shortly, but first let's continue to explore the theme of contagion.
"There is no pathogenic virus."
Dr. Stefan Lanka
If you've now read Dr. Lanka's article 'the misconception called virus' you will no longer be surprised to learn that the concept of contagion has never been scientifically satisfied.
​
The gold standard for proving the causative agent of an infectious disease is comprised of the four Koch postulates, they are:
Most importantly, with respect to current affairs, along with all other 'viruses', NONE of these postulates were met for the alleged discovery of SARS-CoV-2.
So what exactly are these tiny little 'viral' fragments we see in electron photography?
In the following two part video series, Dr. Andrew Kaufman corroborates Lanka's findings. Kaufman explains how 'exosomes' - tiny little vesicles - are released from toxic/dying cells in auto-immune response to any physiological insult.
We learn that these tiny vesicles - containing snippets of our own DNA/RNA - are what virologists falsely claim to be 'viral'. And that when researchers think they've fulfilled Koch's postulates, they've merely observed the induction of exosomes - just as in Lanka's negative control study.
"A virus is fully
an exosome in
every sense of
the word."
James Hildreth MD
Dr. Andrew Kaufman - Part1
This science supports a simple theory of disease that 'mysteriously' vanished from western education - Antoine Bechamp's terrain theory. It states that:
​
'Disease arises when our biology is exposed to poor conditions. We do not catch disease, we build it.' Antoine Bechamp
​
This perfectly corroborates with the science of exosomes and fact that 'viruses' are the result of toxicity and not the cause of illness.
"A virus is simply
the excretion of
a toxic cell."
Rudolf Steiner
This makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Afterall, where do 'viruses' actually come from? For example, imagine a lake full of dead fish, would you think that:
​
a.) These deaths were caused by a deadly 'virus' passing from host to host? or,
b.) The water is toxic?
Unfortunately, however, our prevailing, reductive worldview of disease - Louis Pasteur's germ theory - ignores both external and internal conditions, conversely focusing on microorganisms as the primary causative agent of illness.
Later in life, Pasteur finally accepted the terrain theory and recanted his own paradigm - not that this remotely altered the course of western education and allopathic medicine.
​
"The microbe is nothing, the terrain is everything."
Louis Pasteur
BACTERIA
So far we've discussed exosomes/'viruses'. But as you can see from the above chart, we're dealing with microorganisms in general. So how does bacteria apply to this science?
Human beings are largely comprised of bacteria, the human microbiome is effectively a walking civilisation of microorganisms. When we're healthy, these microorganisms go about their business and remain mostly unnoticed. Just like the so-called 'pathogenic' mycobacterium tuberculosis - which, right now, is present within each and every one of us.
However, when we're exposed to poor conditions our bacteria makes us very aware of it. To decompose the dying cells they rush to the scene of the crime and, unfortunately, get framed for being there.
"Blaming microorganisms for disease is like
blaming firemen for fires."
Dr. Tom Cowan
Bacteria operate in a similar way to some larger, more familiar organisms. Larvae therapy, for example, is useful in healing stubborn wounds because maggots consume only dying cells and ignore healthy tissue. This is why they don't gobble you up when they're in your hand.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
The bacterial consumption of dying cells ultimately flags the unsanitary condition to the brain which calls for backup and an immune response. Antibiotics, of course - which are actually comprised of natural products synthesised by bacteria - can remove, replace and more efficiently emulate their role.
Let's suppose you unfortunately ate some toxic fish from the earlier example. You get food poisoning and think of all the 'nasty' bacteria in your stomach.
The pre-existing, poisoned or dying condition of the fish, however, is the primary, causal agent of disease. Not the subsequent micro-organisms - present solely to decompose the dying, organic matter which you've now partially become.
Bacteria has been around for billions of years. It forms a foundational building block of all physiological life. Our notion of 'bad' bacteria is a misconception based on their inseparability from poor conditions.
As an example, let's scale this up and take a scandalous, corporate manufacturer of 'forever' chemicals like DuPont - who knowingly poison people and the planet.
Imagine one of their boggy, toxic, waste sites - poisoned by waste products and conditions in which 'bad' bacteria can thrive.
From a human perspective - in the good vs evil paradigm - with no awareness of the bog, these toxic strains of bacteria may certainly seem to be a cause of disease. However, the truth is that these lifeforms were the effect of a toxic environmental condition. They exist solely to consume the bio-hazardous waste.
Our materialistic, reductionist worldview systematically blames the bacteria and ignores the conditions for which they arise. To clean the toxic waste land, is to eradicate the source of disease.
Treating the effects of illness is, of course, a profoundly useful thing. But without understanding the cause from which sicknesses arise, we will forever fail to cure and remove all sorts of diseases from human civilisation.
​
As an example, poverty - which makes billions susceptible to disease - persists not through lack of annual donation, but through lack of a remedial social model that respects basic human needs. (Please visit home page for solution.
As another example, if you accidentally left the kitchen tap running and came home to a flood, would you:
a.) Put towels down, then turn the tap off? or,
b.) Turn the tap off and then get the towels?
If you had a tyre with a thousand punctures, would you:
​
a.) Get a puncture repair kit? or,
b.) Get a new tyre?
​
Without understanding the cause of disease what chance do we have of eradicating it?
With so many alleged 'viruses' and bacterial 'infections' throughout human history it can be very difficult to accept this reality.
For this reason I've included a short list of summaries explaining the true nature of various epidemics. Malnutrition, toxicity, poisoning and unsanitary conditions all suffice as simple explanations for disease - we don't need 'viruses' or bacteria to explain illness.
With the bubonic plague, smallpox, cholera and influenza, we've certainly experienced many outbreaks of illness. But what we need to understand is that these illnesses were not the result of contagious microorganisms passing from host to host.
​
Let's consider the black death for example. Bad weather, war and famine, alone, would have certainly bred disease in an undeveloped, malnourished and unsanitary society with primitive healthcare.
"Had it not been for the mass selling of vaccines,
Pasteur's germ theory of disease would have fallen into obscurity."
E. Douglas Hume
HEALTH
Today, through the normalisation of pollution, EMF radiation, denatured junk food, binge drinking and toxic tap water, our very culture still breeds the external and internal conditions conducive to disease.
​
Further still, with common phrases like 'Monday blues' and 'TGI Friday', our weekly, indentured servitude and lack of true freedom leads directly to the stress, anxiety and routine substance abuse that weakens immunity.
Every time we eat and drink we have an opportunity to stay healthy or get sick. The more we unconsciously consume toxins, the more we 'feel like death' and our cells induce exosomes ('viruses') as our bodies tirelessly work to expel them.
"Let food be
thy medicine
and medicine
be thy food"
Hippocrates
Conversely, abstinence from toxins and the consumption of organic fruit, veg and clean water provides the body with an abundance of electrolytes and live enzymes that catalyse metabolism and boost immunity.
​
The following, comparative electrograph shows the remarkable energetic difference between an apple and a steak.
Note how the electrical activity of the steak emanates solely from nerve endings. Whereas the apple is vigorous, full of life and glows in comparison. We must eat life, not death!
Although variety is the spice of life, when it comes to nutrition it really depends on the extent to which you're willing to compromise health. Eating crisps, refined chocolate, chips and beefburgers offers nothing but a brief dopamine hit and a confused stomach.
​
We need only the natural, plant-based, essential amino acids with respect to protein. The non essential amino acids are so-called because they're automatically synthesised by us phsyiological organisms.
Here's a particular absurdity. We cut trees down and clear rainforests to grow soy beans for cows because they're rich in protein. We then chop the cows up into little pieces and eat them for the very same, but now secondary and bloodied source of protein. Is this wise? Why not simply consume the primary source of protein?
Contrary to popular belief, the plant kingdom truly has everything we need to thrive. From vitamins, fats and proteins to minerals and electrolytes, plants have it all.
​
But if you're thinking of switching to a plant-based diet, it's best to do so gradually as the body builds a certain dependency on the things we're accustomed to - however unhealthy.
​
For example, when recovering drug addicts experience horrendous withdrawal symptoms, it's not because drugs are healthy.
​
The more we poison ourselves with toxins, the more antibodies we defensively produce. A certain immunity may subsequently be built for such toxins.
Although it eventually takes its toll, this is why lager louts can 'hammer' ten pints on a Saturday night but 'lightweights' head straight to hospital after just one or two.
"When diet is wrong, medicine is of no use;
when diet is correct, medicine is of no need."
Ayurvedic proverb
Consciousness is the cure - you are what you eat.
"There is no pathogenic virus."
Dr. Stefan Lanka
Of course, no one wants to be sneezed over all day. But it's important to note that this will only incrementally add to your pre-existing level of toxicity. There is no cold or flu 'virus' passing from host to host.
The 'viral' disease we experience is the result of our internal and environmental condition. It is the degree of toxicity that gives rise to mild, cold-like, or more severe, flu-like symptoms.
Understandably, throughout the winter months, as our bodies battle to stay warm, we're more vulnerable to disease.
However, a healthy, organic, plant-based diet, abstinence from binge drinking, exercise and basic self-care is all that's required to avoid illness.
But Covid-19, we're told - is a far deadlier disease. Based on what we've learnt, however, you will now understand that this statement simply can't be made.
The 'infectiousness' of 'viruses' is not objective, but rather, subjective and contingent upon:
1. Viral load - the degree of exposure to toxins.
2. Immunity - The pre-existing strength of your immune system.
Remember, 'viruses' are the result of toxicity and not the cause of illness. So what good, you may ask, is ignoring the cause of illness and injecting the effects of disease through vaccination?
Sure, exposure to, or consumption of toxins - through injection or alcohol - will always yield an immune response, but that is all. Many have received vaccines and yet still 'catch' the 'infection' they were supposedly protected from. Now you know why.
FURTHER READING
So far, the true science of contagion isn't boding well for vaccination, lockdowns, masks, social distancing or self-isolation. On the next page, we'll take a look at the fraudulent field of vaccination.