WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

719

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

I don't believe COVID-19 is anything other than the flu, it's never been proven to exist and there is a 1.2 million dollar reward for irrefutable proof. That said, anything attempting to place blame on Wuhan for anything related to COVID is artificial information to direct attention away from whatever sleight of hand is taking place. That's my hypothesis, and it formed because even mainstream media touches on the subject periodically, and I trust 0% of anything on cable.

[–] 1 pt

>I don't believe COVID-19 is anything other than the flu, it's never been proven to exist and there is a 1.2 million for irrefutable proof.

Yeah let's talk about that

https://www.australiannationalreview.com/global-issues/millionaire-offers-1-2-m-reward-to-anyone-providing-an-isolated-sample-of-the-covid-19-virus/

>German journalist Samuel Eckert is offering a reward of 1 million dollars for those who provide irrefutable proof of the existence of Covid-19. By proof, he means the isolation of the virus according to Koch’s postulates. To date, no one has been able to win Eckert’s challenge.

If the guy is asking for covid19 to be isolated... He can wait. Sars-cov-2 has been isolated, covid-19 is the disease caused by sars-cov-2...

And he wants the isolation to be made according to the koch's postulate... That's going to be a tough one...

https://www.virology.ws/2010/01/22/kochs-postulates-in-the-21st-century/

>The organism must be regularly associated with the disease and its characteristic lesions. The organism must be isolated from the diseased host and grown in culture. The disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the organism is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host. The same organism must be reisolated from the experimentally infected host.

Any volunteer?

>Koch applied these criteria to show that anthrax, a common disease of cattle, was caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthracis, and that tuberculosis in humans was caused by a different bacterial species. His postulates provided a framework for proving the role of microbes in disease. As a consequence of his work, the study of infectious disease was placed on a secure scientific foundation, which ultimately made possible rational treatment and control. Despite the importance of Koch’s postulates in the development of microbiology, they have severe limitations, which even Koch realized. For example, he believed that cholera and leprosy were caused by microbes, but could not fulfill all four postulates. Furthermore, Koch knew that the putative agent of cholera, Vibrio cholerae, could be isolated from both sick and healthy people, invalidating postulate #2. The limitations of Koch’s criteria are even more obvious when we consider viral diseases, which were not yet discovered when the postulates were formulated. Thomas Rivers, who has been called the ‘father of modern virology’, wrote: ‘‘It is unfortunate that so many workers blindly followed the rules, because Koch himself quickly realized that in certain instances all the conditions could not be met. . . . Thus, in regard to certain diseases, particularly those caused by viruses, the blind adherence to Koch’s postulates may act as a hindrance instead of an aid.’’ Many viruses do not cause illness in all infected individuals, a requirement of postulate #1. An example is poliovirus, which causes paralytic disease in about 1% of those infected. Further compromising postulate #1 is the fact that infection with the same virus may lead to markedly different diseases, while different viruses may cause the same disease. Postulates #2 and #3 cannot be fulfilled for viruses that do not replicate in cell culture, or for which a suitable animal model has not been identified.

...

>That said, anything attempting to place blame on Wuhan for anything related to COVID is artificial information to direct attention away from whatever sleight of hand is taking place.

Yeah like, chinese were forced to conduct fauci's funded experiments at gun point?

>That's my hypothesis, and it formed because even mainstream media touches on the subject periodically, and I trust 0% of anything on cable.

You mean that, just because MSM says one thing the opposite is necessarily true? That's how you formed your hypothesis? And you don't see what's wrong with that? Like, "non sequitur" for instance?