Is Everything We Know About Viruses Wrong? In recent years, the work of thinkers like Hillman has posed significant challenges to the fields of virology, cell biology, and neurobiology. As the world begins to question the legitimacy of virology who wouldn't? especially in light of the recent planndemic, it becomes crucial to reassess our understanding of viruses and their impact.
Viruses, as currently understood, can only be observed under an electron microscope. This process involves heavy metals, dehydration, low pressure, electron bombardment, and X-ray irradiation. This raises a fundamental question: Are viruses real, naturally occurring structures, or are they artifacts created by these harsh conditions? (big pharma)
The effects of viruses are studied using cell cultures, most of which are grown from embryonic tissue, cancerous tissue, stem cells, or monkey cells. These are vastly different from adult human tissue. This discrepancy leads us to question the relevance of these studies in understanding virus infectivity in humans.
For instance, coronaviruses are thought to assemble at the endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi interface. However, if Hillman’s assertions are correct and these cellular structures are artifacts of histological preparation, our understanding of virus assembly might be fundamentally flawed.
Moreover, different cell cultures are prepared using varied procedures and chemical solutions to culture viruses. Could this variability explain why only some cells can grow viruses while others cannot? Notably, SARS-CoV-2 cannot infect many human cell lines but can infect monkey kidney cells, which is unexpected for a purported human pathogen.
Viruses are believed to bind to host cell receptors as the first step of entry. However, Hillman challenges the existence of these macromolecular cell receptors, suggesting that they might not be real.
Adequate controls have not been performed to test the effects of lab conditions, body fluids, antibiotics, and other chemicals on cell cultures. Without these controls, how can virologists be certain that the observed cytopathic effects are caused by the virus and not by the chemicals and conditions themselves?
The biomedical establishment has largely ignored these critical questions. Hillman's level of critical thinking and radical questioning is rare and often absent in modern biomedical science. His sharp intellect and willingness to challenge established knowledge threatened the scientific establishment, risking his career and reputation.
But what if Hillman was right? What if the foundation of modern medicine is built on shaky ground and or dedication to keeping the public sick and hooked on big pharma? Will his groundbreaking work be forgotten, or will others be courageous enough to continue his legacy?
As we navigate these complex questions, it is essential to maintain a spirit of inquiry and openness. Hillman’s work serves as a reminder that scientific progress depends not only on discovery but also on the willingness to question and re-evaluate established knowledge.
Comments