Coronavirus: what real science would look like, if it existed

by Jon Rappoport

March 10, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

This is one of the most important articles I’ve written on the current “epidemic.” (full archive here)

When you look at the justification for all the lunatic measures being taken to “stem the tide” of the coronavirus, you come to the simplicity of CASES.

How many cases are there? How many people are “infected?”

And the answer to that comes from what?

From tests. From diagnostic tests.

Of course, some people are ridiculously labeled “cases” without tests. I’ve explained that nonsense in other articles.

Outside of China, the most widely used test is called the PCR. It must be done with tremendous care, because contamination with irrelevant microbes and cellular material can yield a misleading and absurd result.

The PCR, it is claimed, can take a tiny, tiny bit of material from a patient and blow it up many times, so it can be identified. “This is the coronavirus. This patient is infected.”

Not only that, the test’s proponents assert that, quite easily, the PCR can also determine the AMOUNT of virus in the patient’s body. Why is that vitally important? Because, to even begin talking about the patient ever getting sick, he must have millions and millions of coronavirus actively replicating in his body.

There are people (and I’m one of them) who challenge the claim that the PCR can show how much virus is in the patient’s body. The experts try to brush us off—we don’t understand the intricacies of the test, it’s highly technical, we’re not qualified to make a judgment, etc.

I’ve been searching for a way around this futile argument. In the process, I’ve discovered something important about the PCR. I SEE NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ACCURACY OF THE TEST HAS EVER BEEN PROVEN.

Let me explain. You bring your car to a good repair shop. The mechanics hook it up to a device and run a test to diagnose what’s causing the car to stall. Who says their tests are accurate? At some point in the past, these diagnostic procedures have been vetted, to make sure they work properly.

And sure enough, when the mechanics say, “We’ve found the problem,” and when they correct that problem, you drive the car and it doesn’t stall anymore. This is called a real-life result.

This is not the situation re the PCR. Its proponents claim it can count how much virus is in a patient’s body—how much of a particular virus. But where is the proof, in real-life terms, that the PCR can do that? How was that proof ever established?

When I say proof, I don’t mean technical mumbo-jumbo. I’m not referring to the highly dense language these scientists use among themselves. I’m talking about real live human patients, and results.

After all, if the PCR is being used to diagnose people, and if the results are being used to count the number of coronavirus cases in various countries, and if the number of cases forms the basis for, say, locking down the whole of Italy in a mass quarantine…THE TEST IS IMPORTANT, WOULDN’T YOU SAY?

I have seen no wide-ranging proof that the PCR was ever checked properly, when it was first introduced, to show it could do what researchers say it can do.

WHO TESTED THE TEST?

I have come up with a process—a simple process—which will check the veracity of the PCR. It should have been carried out decades ago. The fact that it wasn’t is an enormous scandal.

Here it is.

From a hundred patients, very small tissue samples are taken. The PCR lab people don’t take the samples. They don’t ever see the patients or know who they are.

The lab professionals run these hundred samples through the PCR, obtain results, and then report: what virus did they find in each case, and how much of that virus did they find?

Let’s say, in six instances, the lab techs claim they found a great amount of virus in the patients.

Well, those patients should be sick.

Are they? ARE THEY?

“We’ve determined that patients 4, 9, 32, 54, 65, and 86 all have a huge amount of virus in their bodies.”

“Interesting. Thanks. Let’s see. Hmm. Turns out these people are fit as a fiddle. Not sick. I guess your test didn’t work. It’s a flop.”

Or maybe the test does work. The six patients are sick. LET’S FIND OUT. IN THE WORLD, NOT IN JOURNALS.

That’s what I mean by real-life results. No jive, no tap dancing.

There is more. This experiment with the hundred patients? It should be done, not just once, but many times. A hundred patients here at this facility, a hundred patients there at that facility. Thirty or forty different facilities, and thirty or forty different sets of a hundred patients. It should be done by independent scientists without conflicts of interest.

It should have been done decades ago. I see no evidence that it was.

THE TEST WAS NEVER PROPERLY TESTED. A GIANT SCANDAL.

Think about what that means.

Think it through.

Trace all the implications.

For example, imagine you’re the political leader of a country, with 100 “reported cases of the coronavirus.” Are you going to lock it down? Are you?

Think about everything that’s happening now in the world. Use your intelligence.

THINK IT THROUGH.

Don’t jump on the fear bandwagon. Don’t jump on the “scientific” b.s. bandwagon.

Use your mind.

You’re interested in scandals? I’ve just presented one. It’s blaring with a thousand trumpets, right out in the open.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

This entry was posted in Covid.

70 comments on “Coronavirus: what real science would look like, if it existed

    • Guitardave says:

      THANK YOU!, LV. The power of belief is awesome. The TV is the witch doctor pointing the bone.
      This is what happens when ones true psychic power is unconscious, and turned against you by the psychopaths who understand its use. DON’T BELIEVE THE LIES.
      Everyone should read, meditate on, and comprehend this article. Thanks again, LV.

    • Wayne says:

      The media casts the spell, and the public becomes entranced, fixated on fear and death

    • lamberth says:

      Good article, thank you.
      Mind over Matter.

    • Katie says:

      I have decided to kiss everyone I see, whether I know them or not…

    • Alan says:

      Many an alternative medicine doctor has talked about “emotional stress” being immunocompromising, and recommend prayer and meditation. Fits well with Bechamp’s theory.

    • Protestant says:

      @LowVoltage- I just read that article— fascinating stuff! It makes me wonder whether some kind of hypnotic trance mind control is being used on voodoo “believers”. Will professional hypnotists ever admit that they can actually induce death from hypnosis, by commanding the mind to start shutting down the organs, perhaps by drastically lowering blood pressure, or refusing food & water, as discussed in that article? Scary.

    • Cynthia Silveri says:

      Pretty much describes a possible reason for the “reported” increase in hospitals being “over run” with sick people.

      I totally believe that our minds are that powerful.

  1. Joz Lee says:

    The Amazing Role of Germs And Infections
    By Andreas Moritz

    Destructive bacteria naturally increase in larger numbers wherever excessive waste matter accumulates and requires decomposition. Have you ever wondered why we have more bacteria in our body than we have cells? Most bacteria are produced inside the body, whereas relatively few enter it from the outside. The body also ‘grows’ bacteria from tiny, indestructible colloids of life in our blood and cells.One of the world’s most ingenuous medical researchers, Professor Antoine Bechamp (1816-1908), called these tiny cellular compounds microzyma. The German scientist, Dr. Günther Enderlein, who published papers on this research in 1921 and 1925, referred to them as protits. Protits are tiny dots in the blood and cells that you can apparently see with any microscope. These dots or colloids of life are virtually indestructible and survive even after the body dies.

    According to the phenomenon known as pleomorphism, these protits develop or change form in response to a changing condition (acid/base balance) of the blood or cell milieu. As the cells’ environment becomes acidified and toxic, the protits turn into microorganisms that are designed to break down and remove dead cells, toxins, and metabolic waste-products that the body is unable to remove. If further destruction of dead, weak cells and other waste is required, the protits become viruses and, eventually, fungi.

    You may know how difficult it can be to get rid of a toenail/foot-fungus. Fungi only go after dead, organic matter. The presence of congested and half-decayed or dead toe tissue practically forces the body to produce and/or attract more and more fungi to help decompose the lifeless parts of the foot.

    As you might know, cancer cells are filled with all sorts of microorganisms. Allopathic medicine does not really explain how they get into the cells, unless they are viral. Most doctors assume that the germs come from the outside, but this assumption is unproved (and was even disputed by Louis Pasteur himself, who invented the germ theory).

    As the brilliant scientists Bechamp and Enderlein demonstrated, these germs are created inside the cells in response to the presence of toxic waste material that the body is unable to remove. They may also attach themselves to other weak, undernourished cell tissue (particularly cells that suffer from poor oxygenation). Their purpose is to decompose these damaged, weak cells. This microbial activity is commonly known as ‘infection’. Like cancer, however, an infection is not a disease. Rather, it is a sophisticated, combined attempt by the body and microbes to avert the suffocation and poisoning caused by accumulated toxic waste material in its tissues, the lymphatic system, or the blood.

    If you piled up kitchen garbage in one area of your house, it would attract a lot of flies and bacteria, and this would generate a foul-smelling odor. You would certainly not blame the flies and bacteria for the stench. They are just trying to digest some of the garbage. Likewise, those microbes that are attracted to or produced inside unhealthy cells are not part of the problem; they are part of the solution to the problem.

    An infection, if properly supported by natural approaches of cleansing and nourishment, can practically prevent the genetic mutation of aerobic cells into cancer cells. Cancer and infection share some of the same original causes. For this reason, a significant number of cancer patients who suffer a major infection such as the chickenpox go into total remission and are subsequently found cancer-free once the infection has passed.

    According to over 150 studies conducted in the past 100 or more years, spontaneous tumor regression has followed bacterial, fungal, viral, and protozoal infections. During episodes of fever, tumors literally break up, and the cancer cells are promptly removed via the lymphatic system and other organs of elimination.

    During such a major infection-which is nothing but an appropriate healing response initiated by bacteria and the immune system-a considerable amount of toxic waste is broken down and removed from the body. This, once again, permits oxygen to reach the oxygen-deprived cells. Upon contact with the oxygen, the cancer cells die or otherwise mutate back into normal cells. The tumors have no more reason to be there, hence, the occurrence of spontaneous remission of cancer in these patients. In some cases, brain tumors as large as the size of an egg have literally disappeared in this way within 24 hours.

    The standard approach of suppressing infection and its resultant fever among hospital patients is medical malpractice and stands responsible for the loss of millions of lives that could easily have been saved by letting nature do its job.

    Body cells use the inhaled oxygen gotten from the alveoli of the lungs. In turn, they produce carbon dioxide and water, which is taken to the alveoli and then exhaled. These exchanges occur as a result of diffusion. In each case the materials move from an area of high concentration to an area of lower concentration.

  2. Joz Lee says:

    Human trillion microbes in or on us. 99% Bacterial 1 % Human. https://www.ted.com/…/rob_knight_how_our…/transcript…
    Bacteria communicate with one another using small chemical molecules that they release into the environment. These molecules travel from cell to cell and the bacteria have receptors on their surfaces that allow them to detect and respond to the build up of the molecules. This process of cell-to-cell communication in bacteria is called “Quorum Sensing” and it allows bacteria to synchronize behavior on a population-wide scale. Bacterial behaviors controlled by quorum sensing are usually ones that are unproductive when undertaken by an individual bacterium acting alone but become effective when undertaken in unison by the group. For example, quorum sensing controls virulence, sporulation, and the exchange of DNA. Thus, quorum sensing is a mechanism that allows bacteria to function as multi-cellular organisms. Cell-to-cell communication in bacteria was likely one of the first steps in the evolution of higher organisms. Current biomedical research is focused on the development of novel anti-bacterial therapies aimed at interfering with quorum sensing. Such therapies could be used to control bacterial pathogenicity.
    https://www.ted.com/…/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria…
    Bacteria are the oldest living organisms on the earth. They’ve been here for billions of years, and what they are are single-celled microscopic organisms. So they are one cell and they have this special property that they only have one piece of DNA. They have very few genes, and genetic information to encode all of the traits that they carry out. And the way bacteria make a living is that they consume nutrients from the environment, they grow to twice their size, they cut themselves down in the middle, and one cell becomes two, and so on and so on. They just grow and divide, and grow and divide — so a kind of boring life, except that what I would argue is that you have an amazing interaction with these critters.
    0:51 I know you guys think of yourself as humans, and this is sort of how I think of you. This man is supposed to represent a generic human being, and all of the circles in that man are all of the cells that make up your body. There is about a trillion human cells that make each one of us who we are and able to do all the things that we do, but you have 10 trillion bacterial cells in you or on you at any moment in your life. So, 10 times more bacterial cells than human cells on a human being. And of course it’s the DNA that counts, so here’s all the A, T, Gs and Cs that make up your genetic code, and give you all your charming characteristics. You have about 30,000 genes. Well it turns out you have 100 times more bacterial genes playing a role in you or on you all of your life. At the best, you’re 10 percent human, but more likely about one percent human, depending on which of these metrics you like. I know you think of yourself as human beings, but I think of you as 90 or 99 percent bacterial.

  3. lamberth says:

    Thanks Jon.

    We live in an inverted reality. Truly a Matrix.
    Where up is down, back is front, and inside is out.
    Where science is pseudo-science, pseudo-science is “science”.
    Where male is now female, vice versa or anything in between.
    Where the villain is the victim and the victim the villain.
    Where good is bad and bad is good.
    Where truth is a falsehood and falsehood is truth.
    Where speaking truth is prosecuted and falsehoods rewarded.
    Where marketing figures can just be plucked out of thin air to support the agenda.
    Where propaganda rules, propaganda based on absolutely nothing (but fear). Where is lie is bigger than the previous one.

    Who is bringing this inversion to us? The fear porn?
    Who owns the global mass media, the compromised politicians, the global corporations, the medical cartel?
    It’s all coming from the same source, and it’s global.
    It’s through fear, propaganda, manipulation, war, plunder, false flags and global terror (in whatever form) that they are ever further spreading their tentacles into global society.

    • William says:

      And don’t forget normal, stable climate is now a crisis. Worse even, an apocalypse. In an inverted reality the arctic is melting down at minus 30 C. Courtesy of the Empire of Lies

  4. Jen says:

    Ha! It was this test that caused me to realize something was hinky.

    Here’s a test:
    1) You can test positive and never get sick.
    2) You can test negative and get sick.
    3) You can test negative and then positive and then negative and then positive. You may or may not get sick.
    4) After you’ve recuperated you can test positive or negative.

    And my personal favorite:
    5) Your dog can test positive.

    Come on, man.

    • William says:

      Like the “HIV” test, positive, negative or “indeterminate”. If indeterminate they use racial and demographic factors to interpret the result. If positive in Africa, move to Australia where you automatically revert to negative. A miracle. But real sciency

    • Low Voltage says:

      The smoking gun.

  5. Spiritof42 says:

    The more I think about it, the more I suspect that viruses are nothing more than harmless genetic fragments. The virus theory empowers the medical establishment the same way the germ theory does.

    Genetic fragments cannot act. They cannot have intention. They float around like dust. To be seen by an electron microscope, they have to be sputtered first. They’re static images. They can’t be seen in action.

    On the other hand, living cells can act. That’s why I suspect that viruses are created by our cells as some kind of defense mechanism. Once they serve their purpose, they’re disposed of by white cells.

    If you’re a corporate scientist, it’s in your interest to interpret the data in your favor. That’s why I find it so common for academics and authorities to interpret their observations in reverse of cause of effect. Follow the money and the power!

    • Amanda says:

      @Spirit- I don’t know what they are, but I think everything they tell us about viruses is a lie.

      I’ve been in the process of reading Janine Roberts’ Fear of the Invisible and she exposes much of the fraud surrounding HIV, Polio, and viruses in general–I think TPTB just use the idea of viruses as a psychological weapon to keep the fear alive and the belief in the germ model alive.

      Fear of the Invisible:
      http://www.whale.to/a/roberts_b.html
      https://www.amazon.com/Fear-Invisible-Janine-Roberts/dp/0955917727 (looks like Cynthia McKinney knows Roberts and that she even testified in the house of whores/Congress)

      A good summary of her book is here: http://www.davidpratt.info/roberts.htm

      “We have been taught to greatly fear viruses, yet scientists have long known that these are fundamental parts of life, made by the millions by all healthy cells…Cells naturally produce viral-like particles without being invaded, both when healthy and sick…It now seems that we may have misconceived the virus; that most of them could well be simply inert messages in envelopes carried from cell to cell…We need to know if a poisoned cell may produce unhealthy messengers or viruses…Research indicates that cellular stress, illness or malnourishment often precedes the production of viruses rather than the reverse…. As we have seen, no virus has ever been isolated directly from a sick patient’s cells. Since ‘scientists have long known that the guaranteed way to make cells produce viruses in the laboratory, including flu and measles virus, is not primarily by getting them infected, but by exposing them to stress and toxins’

      Another book I’m working on is this one:

      Book- Virus Mania. Avian Flu (H5N1), Cervical Cancer (HPV), SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio- How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense

      http://www.whale.to/a/virusmania.html
      http://www.whale.to/c/Virus-Mania55tt66.pdf

      More on the fear racket here:

      The Viral (Infectious Disease and Epidemic) Fear Racket http://www.whale.to/a/infectious_scares.html

      • Spiritof42 says:

        Thanks for the info. I forgot about the whale site. It’s a great resource. I read Virus Mania. Ordered the Roberts book.

      • stephen langley says:

        Great comment. Here’s one explaining how all ‘diseases’ are the result of a single condition: toxemia.

        http://durianapocalypse.net/health/nature.html

        If one considers the condition of the planet which has resulted from the current globalist-bankster-military-pharmaceutical-geoengineering-petrochemical-poison-cabal, then one can’t help but see the entire dynamic and their end game.

        As Jon has revealed, the virus ain’t jack and the real problem is the fear & panic… all designed to completely wreck each individual nation, the pieces to be picked up by the cabal.

      • November says:

        Thanks for the info 🙂

    • William says:

      But they tell us HIV is diabolically clever. Retroviruses, which aren’t infectious pathogens, are expressed by cells in response to oxidative stress like drug abuse or malnutrition, probably for chromosome repair. In that sense AIDS (drug abuse including especially AV’s, repeated venereal infections, etc.) causes HIV, an attempt to repair cell damage

      • stephen langley says:

        What a great article… thank you, thank you, thank you !! If I had a million bucks I’d give it to you… if I had a couple of hundred I’d purchase your Matrix series (seriously, I’m a poor boy but, at least I repost all your articles). Knowledge is power, but as Einstein remarked, imagination is much more powerful !
        Great comments all around and much more to read so as to be armed with knowledge to help alleviate the real epidemic: Fear.
        Thank you again, Jon Rappaport, for your tireless work and devotion to truth. Blessings

  6. Kev says:

    Here’s an interesting article.

    https://www.academia.edu/41727245/Questions_Raised_By_the_New_Coronavirus_Too_Many_Experts_Too_Little_Thought_

    Here’s a snippet from the introduction:

    CDC’s (
    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    ) diagnostic coronavirus test is a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test that provides “possible” detection of COVID-19. According to the
    CDC, a positive test result suggested “likely infection”, presumed to be contagious. As for negative results, however, US regulators warned that negative results don’t necessarily preclude infection. If consistently negative results don’t preclude
    an infection with coronavirus, then there could be more behind the disease than just coronavirus. Curiously, Kary Mullis, the inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, said that such tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at
    all; they can only detect proteins that researchers believe, in some cases wrongly, are unique to the virus being tested for.
    The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves. [1]

    • Jackie says:

      Here’s another link to this article where you don’t have to use Google or Facebook to read:

      https://zenodo.org/record/3698160

      Click on the little arrow and you can save a PDF of it.

    • Maverick says:

      sooooooo basically they are saying, If you have a negative you could still have a coronavirus but if a positive it COULD be the corona even though it is not really the case. Lets stop with the bullshit here what you are trying to directly say is the tests are garbage and you want everyone to have the coronavirus even though they really dont.

      Negative = You Have Corona the test didnt pick it up
      Nuetral = You have the virus you just arent testing positive yet.

      Positive = Could be a false positive these tests are crap but you test positive so you have the corona virus.

      100% of the world whether positive, negative or otherwise all have the coronavirus and will need our ‘lifesaving vaccinewhen it comes out so it will be mandatory’

      • Deanna Johnston Clark says:

        It can’t become required by law until the Supreme Court is totally bought off. Many are prepared to take it all the way, including complete unbiased, independent tests outside the usual corrupt suspects….a vast array of official anagrams and alphabet BS liars.

      • Mirage says:

        Exactly…and guess who’s behind the vaccine monopoly? The media’s favorite Humanitarian philanthropist Bill Gates. He didn’t “give away” half of his fortune a decade ago. He invested it in GM seeds and worldwide vaccination projects. Now that his favorite virus (Corona) has popped up he’s resigning from Microsoft so he can get on with his new fortune on vaccine production for the entire world. Don’t forget, his foundation hosted a pandemic exercise called “event 201” in October 2019, a few months before Coronavirus was introduced.

  7. Plamen says:

    Jon, your suggestion is not going to work as they already have the answer for it – asymptomatic carriers.

    But never mind the test, the whole theory is wrong. Dr. Robert Koch formulated four criteria designed to establish a causative relationship between a microbe and a disease. The problem with the germ theory of disease is discovered when we look at “Koch’s Postulates”:

    1. The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.

    2. The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.

    3. The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.

    4. The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.

    Pasteur never quite fulfilled all of these rules. He was not able to find the germ in all cases of a disease. Additionally, many so-called pathogenic germs are often found in healthy people.

    • Deanna Johnston Clark says:

      All “diseases” freely roam through all nature…at any time one could test positive for TB, cancers, strep, mono…anything. But when the organism is healthy and strong of morale it just, as Jesus said, passes through into the latrine.
      The effects of toxic pollution and radiation in enclosed places need clean air and water, sunshine, and rest. Do you see any expert prescribing those?

  8. JV says:

    The victims in China, with air pollution compromised lung disease, are being diagnosed by lung x-rays…not even using the PCR…

    https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/how-china-tests-for-covid-19-coronavirus-12438008

    “WHY IS HUBEI COUNTING DIFFERENTLY?

    Apart from lab-based tests like RT-PCR kits, Hubei health officials are also using lung imaging to “clinically diagnose” patients.

    If lung images show pneumonia, patients who are already marked as suspected cases are confirmed as infected without the need for a positive RT-PCR test.

    As of Saturday, around 17,000 people were clinically diagnosed in Hubei.”

  9. blue horizons says:

    From the establishment scientific perspective:

    Viruses have up to 3000 base pairs in their genome. Compare that to humans with over 3 billion base pairs in our genome.

    A short run of nucleotides (oligonucleotides, oligo means few) ranging from 18 to 24 bases is used as the primer to hit the ‘start’ sequence on the PCR reaction. Primers are designed to match up with the template that is the viral genome in this case. (Can we trust the viral genome sequence that the Chinese released to the public and scientific world?) Polymerase is simply the enzyme that reads the template sequence of codes grabbing nucleotides to form a connected growing chain. When designing the primer it can’t be too long or it will gum up the works.

    All organisms in kingdoms have many overlapping genetic sequences retained for their usefulness and efficiency. These sequences are said to be highly conserved. The genome of fungi match up with 30% of human genes for this reason. Viruses are not alive they are packets of parasitical DNA. However, they share this principle of a great deal of sequence homology with each other and there are many human gene stretches that closely match up with viral sequences. There are four base pairs. If they were keys on a piano, how many unique tunes (base pair stretches) could you create? Now extrapolate this to all organisms on the planet. There are only some many tunes if a limited number of notes are allowed. That’s why we use the same proteins for many different purposes.

    There has to be cross reactivity and false positives in these tests. But how much? AND THE BIG QUESTION, IMHO. If a person can recover and them become reinfected, then does that suggest COVID19 has the most error prone polymerase of all viruses on the planet such that by the time you meet it again a week later it has mutated into such a frankenvirus that your immune system doesn’t recognize it? Sounds like a plot to a bad movie and maybe some tricksters are seeding multiple viruses around that should be harmless but aren’t due to strange assaults to our immune systems. A pachyderm in the room is chemtrails, imho.

    Anyone here a virologist? Please help me understand if I’m on the wrong track. Thanks.

    • walking dead says:

      I have to agree on the chemtrail issue. We now have green algae in our water run off, just look in the ditches or at the waterways from the air ( like in an airplane). We have Black,green, and white mold growing everywhere now. What does breathing in all this mold cause? My research says it causes the same symptoms. It sure is killing every species of tree in my woods. At the rate the trees are dying, I will have a field in ten years if I make it that long. Nothing to see here folks, see ya on the otherside.

    • Plamen says:

      If you consider viruses as pathogenic creatures, you’re on the wrong path.

      The irony is that 180 years ago, people had better understanding. There’s nothing to test really – viruses, bacteria, fungi, etc come from within us.

      Look up microzyma and Antoine Béchamp.

  10. paschn says:

    To clarify why I re-post these;

    Our media is controlled exclusively by the same gang screwing us into serfdom via their kosher central bank.
    It’s vital that we all re-post Mr. Rappoport’s articles to not only help him support himself, but to disseminate much needed TRUTHS.

    So, when I leave short messages stating that, I actually do re-post.
    We all should.

    Thank you Mr. Rappoport.

  11. Diane Di says:

    Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD. Inventor of Email
    @va_shiva
    As an MIT PhD in Biological Engineering who studies & does research nearly every day on the Immune System, the #coronavirus fear mongering by the Deep State will go down in history as one of the biggest fraud to manipulate economies, suppress dissent, & push MANDATED Medicine!
    https://twitter.com/va_shiva/status/1237036487151177728

  12. November says:

    I am in agreement that this is total bullshit. Humans (the one’s not in control, but really they are in control and just don’t remember) LOVE their suffering and drama and trauma.

    I am the kind of person, though, that when I see the insanity of this thing spreading like, hey, like an “epidemic”…I am puzzled by how they convince the world that 600 people have died in Italy and more are coming. Do you just think that they are HEAVILY increasing the number of deaths (whatever the actual cause was)? That maybe 4 people died of whatever and they are saying it is 600 and everyone is just unquestionably agreeing to that?!

    It just seems waaaaay too simple. You know? Like, really? And where did this lie originate..who thought of it? And how do sooo many organizations and entities just believe it without asking for proof?! Even though the upper level people in these organizations and entities are corrupt psychos, there is no way they are that organized…to have world leaders and city leaders and airlines and all of the different bureaucracies and all of the hospitals and doctors and nurses and specialists and scientists and all of the people who are “sick” and their families, etc. to have all of them, all over the world, all lined up and planned to participate in this farce…I just don’t buy it. So, what is it? Did anyone die? Did 5 people die? How did they do this and why is everyone going on the word of someone else to an insanely extreme extent? It is driving me crazy. Even for them, it is just too crazy. There has to be some other element to this. I dunno. Does any of that make sense? Lol. Hard to translate some thoughts. What is the general consensus here, in detail, please. That is the only way it will satisfy and register.

    • Dido says:

      Well if the test means nothing, ie.

      “1) You can test positive and never get sick.
      2) You can test negative and get sick.
      3) You can test negative and then positive and then negative and then positive. You may or may not get sick.
      4) After you’ve recuperated you can test positive or negative.
      5) Your dog can test positive.”

      …Then they can ignore negatives (in any amount) whenevver/wherever they want and, conversely, find positives whenever they want.

      From there, some useful positives get tagged to a body, preferably a quick, respiratory infection death.

      No nurse or doctor or hospital official is going to question the ‘expert’ RT-PCR positive.

      Like a lot of the other conspiracies…doesn’t need as many people in on it as you’d think!

    • Benjamin Martin says:

      You have a point, definitely. As an adjunct to what you say there’s an almost total absence of any actual reporting of personal stories, suffering of families, and even the names of people (with very few exceptions) associated with this virus. In terms of modern reporting this is highly, highly conspicuous, to say the least.

    • za ka lu says:

      how is this sold so pervasively November? Imagination. Using (hijacking) our power of imagination to assume as fact the presumption(s) made. A habit by now, perhaps can be called ‘brain-washing’, or better yet ‘imagination washing’-

      • November says:

        Yah. A seed was planted and we ran with it, as we always do. I totally get that. WE are the ones who manifested this, they can always count on that.

        Even believing what I believe and knowing what I know..I guess it still just shocks me how insane what appears to be most humans, are. I think it is just being so “out reality” to me combined with resisting it because I don’t want it to be real. The mindlessness. It is just so amazingly difficult to comprehend…which I definitely think is a good thing. Lol. But F$%K! Enough. The craziness just keeps re-manifesting. What don’t they get? (rhetorical)

        But, somehow, I have faith. For real. It is just frustrating…it all far surpassed silly, long, long ago.

        Holding space is draining. Working on changing that perception.

        ~Peace

        • za ka lu says:

          Hi, yes most do not think critically or logically for themselves, just ‘watch’ and obey really, which is what we are ‘trained’ to do by the system itself.

          I have contemplated and researched the ‘we manifest this reality’ premise for several years now, and this is how I see it;

          the liar creates the lie and its intended outcome(s), the deceived creates behavior and actions to fulfill the lie’s intended outcome, actions and behaviors that would have not been carried out without the deception. The deceived is/are innocent.

          When the deceived discovers he has been lied to (in respect to the ‘system’), he then discovers that there is a vast and pervasive mechanism of coercion in place to force compel performance for these intended outcomes. All against the will of the deceived, and these forced performances as before would not normally be carried out if it were not for the willful brutal intimidation enacted on them by the system. So with coercion, the deceived is under duress and is innocent.

          So we dont create this distorted ‘reality’, we are tricked into performance through meaningful deceptive intentions.

          z

    • BS Detector says:

      And yet, even if 600 people died of said malady, how many died of automobile accidents this month?

  13. za ka lu says:

    Hello,
    Brings me back to the ‘presumption’ concept mentioned in these articles. Presumption is used as a tactic in literally everything to do with the SYSTEM. As shown in this article with the virus testing situation and science for example, it is all posited. No validation of testing’s effectiveness has been ever performed, testing is to be presumed as valid and accurate, posited, and when blindly ‘accepted’ without critical thought, it is attorned.

    pos·it
    verb
    past tense: posited; past participle: posited
    1.
    assume as a fact; put forward as a basis of argument.
    2.
    put in position; place.

    This also plays into the ‘gullibility’ of man-kind. Gullibility is reinforced at every turn, every step in regards to literally everything. Was I ever party to true and correct negotiations with system where I could have “consented” to performance? No. (informed consent is the only valid form of consent, cannot consent to unknown / uninformed). This is one example, think how this is the situation with everything to do with the exploiters.

    So the virus story and the ‘testing’ is ran to be presumed as ‘real’, and when we take the bait, it’s authenticity is never questioned, except by a few, one of which wrote this article.

    This is what all ‘authority’ of the system is based on, posited to be presumed ‘as fact’, and when acquiescence to the ‘to be presumed’ takes place, performance is then ordered, as the false claim is rendered ‘as fact’ to compel performance.

  14. za ka lu says:

    Oh and one more thought I would like to share, wouldn’t the ‘elites’ or the ones perping this ordeal on mankind be concerned about contracting the disease?

    This plays into the ‘presumed’ perfectly. Roll out a viral epidemic story that is to be ‘presumed’ as real, so that mandatory vaxx’s can be implemented and carried out for what ever reason or purpose, most likely of which is heinous and diabolically and against our best interest (or best interest of earth and it’s innocent inhabitants). Everything else is made to be presumed, dollars, courts, legal, banking, science, education/university, history…so why would this be any different?

    Vaxing to change DNA so future generations are rendered to droid-istic worker bees? (apologies to the real buzzing bees out there), lockdown all man-kind? sell the needed ‘response’ to the world? all while pocketing trillions in the process. Or?

    Fits seamlessly.

  15. Sarah says:

    People are inevitably going to get sick. You would test positive for a genetic sequence most already have.

  16. From Quebec says:

    I will believe these globalist who tell us that there is a virus killing most of the people in the world, when I will see them running scared in their underground bunkers never to Be Seen Again.

  17. Benjamin Martin says:

    Fine work Jon, as always. This article really puts one in the picture about the totally obscure and obfuscated realities about this, the following quote is from the article…

    ‘Vice president of NSW AMA Dr Danielle McMullen said medical professionals were not receiving the correct information about how to test potential COVID-19 cases.’

    https://apple.news/Ac3PyjLDASMWa1rhfxJvH4g

  18. Glenn says:

    Jon,

    If I recall Kary Mullis the inventor of PCR said the test wasn’t designed to be used for this type of testing

  19. Laura says:

    The Pandemic Science Gods don’t need to do no real stinkin’ science! See, when “science” becomes a humanist religion, Gods in Lab Coats and Magic come in to play…objectivity and truth are outrageously irrelevant. Down with those! Honest, scientific human studies like the ones you outlined have no place in this game. How insane for you to even suggest such things!
    If this corona crap doesn’t die down and go completely kaput real soon, I might just need some happy-numb pills. Opium is a natural product after all, from pretty little flowers. I want some!

  20. Jackie says:

    Look who just sold half their Merck shares — 9 million bucks worth — the evil queen of CDC/Merck herself:

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/mercks-vaccine-division-president-julie-gerberding-sells-9-1-million-in-shares-is-she-jumping-ship/

    • Kati says:

      Thats why you can trust the CDC, in bed with big pharma… their mouthpiece, tools. Its all a big fraud like the rockefeller medicine school itself too.

  21. Jackie says:

    Indeed!
    And I want to have a talk with somebody about the poor lighting in these train cars that we are forced to ride in.

  22. Kat says:

    What about this testimony from a doctor in Italy? I’ve been reading and sharing your posts but how to explain these sudden numbers in Italy? I know the it may not be covid19 but why would this not happen usually if they are the usual pneumonia cases?

    https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/ff8hns/testimony_of_a_surgeon_working_in_bergamo_in_the/

    • Plamen says:

      If the hospitals have more patients that usual it is because people panic under the influence of the media and once they are in the hospital their condition is likely to get exacerbated. This is especially for older people.

      Also, it’s been recorded that students tend to develop symptoms of the disease they study. So under the influence of mass hysteria doctors are likely to get fully absorbed by their roles similar to actors who sometime associate with the character of the role they play so much that they might temporary lose their own personality.

      • Rick says:

        As well, 5G testing might explain it, no?

        • Plamen says:

          I personally believe that the targeted countries have something else in common. I don’t know what exactly … yet.

          Why don’t we hear about many cases in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh? All densely populated and not with the best hygiene standards in the world.

          • Mirage says:

            The targeted countries are said to have close ties to China including Italy which surprisingly allied itself with China by becoming part of the Chineses silk road and belt.

    • za ka lu says:

      Kat, how explain ‘these sudden numbers’? one possible explanation is they are false, to be presumed as fact.

    • NC says:

      It seems like an emotional recording about people coming in distraught with fear, then being subjected to bogus testing which confirms their fears, which leads to more fear.
      Any viral problem can be dealt with using IV Ozone…cheap and rapid, but the medical community ignores whatever big pharma cannot patent.

  23. John says:

    What if the virus is already in our system and completely harmless? The only reason we are finding it is because now we are looking for it. When they say over 70-80% will be infected might they mean that 70-80% already have the virus in their system. The flu acts this way. If someone dies of pneumonia then is found to have the flu in their system then the CDC claims it was the flu that killed the person. We should be testing healthy people to determine if this virus already exists within the healthy population.

  24. Tim says:

    Lots of false positives in PCR, and there are different ways to do the test.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15649533

    So for viruses, it has to be noted that virus particles are not all viable. The PCR has no way to know how much of the (possible) virus present is viable. ie 100% of virus present could be non-viable, and the test would still show a positive.

    So there are different ways the test can give false positives.

    • Tim says:

      Also, the question of distinguishing endogenous from exogenous viruses cannot be gotten reliably at by pcr. The PCR could just give you readings of endogenous virus, and it would be ‘positive’

  25. Bob Smithson says:

    This is excellent. It’s basic science. I’ve been thinking like you on this for weeks (and, not that it proves anything, I have 3 science degrees, bs, ms, and phd). Why aren’t they doing this?! It’s ludicrous. If they are, where are the findings?!

  26. BS Detector says:

    We can talk all the science we want, but it really boils down to PHILOSOPHY: “It is so lucky for leaders that people do not think.” – Attributed to one A. Hitler

  27. Larry C says:

    “When I say proof, I don’t mean technical mumbo-jumbo. I’m not referring to the highly dense language these scientists use among themselves. I’m talking about real live human patients, and results.”

    I like mumbo-jumbo, especially served up by willing, slick and good-looking sycophants with a fine Chianti.

  28. Larry C says:

    Musical interlude, to while away these care-free days…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssCrJ-SVQHI

  29. William says:

    I am a medical lab professional with PCR experience. In all my exposure to the methodology, it is purely a qualitative analysis. In other words, it produces a yes/no, pos/neg type of result, as opposed to quantitative analysis, which generates a specific number, e.g. a fingerstick glucose test. There are situations where PCR methodology can indirectly provide what is known as semi-quantitative data, i.e. ranges and thresholds, but anyone who suggests PCR by itself can provide purely quantitative data regarding viral load values is completely wrong and I don’t know of any lab professional who would suggest such a thing. So on this point I can corroborate the OP.

    As to the origin of the specific PCR assay for this ostensibly novel virus, that speaks to what is known as validation. As the name suggests, this process provides proof that results produced by the assay are valid. Normally, validation of a new assay is arduous, requiring an immense amount of data over an extended time period to arrive at the necessary statistical “proof”. Add to that the fact that the roll-out of a new assay must also be validated a second time by each testing facility that implements the assay, though this secondary validation is much smaller in scale, but still not insignificant or quick.

    Long story short, from a laboratory perspective, the development and implementation arc of the PCR assay for this supposed COVID-19 virus is highly suspect, if not outright unbelievable. Again, on this point I can corroborate the OP.

    However, I would like to propose an alternative to the conclusion that all this means the virus doesn’t exist, which, as far as I can tell, is the general position of the OP. Instead of being a hoax, all the legitimate questions raised about the origin of the testing still stand, and I believe are better explained, if the virus was known to exist before the outbreak. In other words, it was an experimental organism, developed in research/military/bioweapon labs, for which PCR methodology had already been developed and validated, that “somehow” was released into world population. And when it was released — presto! — the test was online and ready for roll-out, much to the succor of an otherwise oblivious public.

    So I believe it is an actual virus that was man-made and existed in labs before the outbreak, the PCR test is real and also pre-existing, and that it was somehow loosed upon world population. I’ll leave it to you to ponder the “somehow”.

  30. WALID DAKHEL says:

    The Germ Theory_ The New State Religion – Dr Tim O’Shea – YouTube

    https://vimeo.com/414558984

Leave a Reply to Diane Di Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *