In Tamilnadu, India, there is a lot of propaganda about H1N1 virus as a result of a few deaths allegedly because of "Swine Flu" or H1N1 infection. My previous three posts are a result of such reading. That brings me back to the question of the existence of Virus itself. Please read the following article wherein a virologist discusses the "fraud" called Virus.
Source : http://neue-medizin.com/lanka2.htm
 | Dr. Stefan Lanka, virologist and molecular biologist, is internationally mostly known as an "AIDS dissident" (and maybe "gentechnology dissident") who has been questioning the very existence of "HIV" since 1994. In the past years, however, he stumbled over a breathtaking fact: Not even ONE of the (medically relevant) viruses has ever been isolated; there is no proof of their existence. Actually, Dr. Lanka has already stated three years ago, in the almost "legendary" Zenger´s interview: "So for a long time I studied virology, from the end to the beginning, from the beginning to the end, to be absolutely sure that there was no such thing as HIV. And it was easy for me to be sure about this because I realized that the whole group of viruses to which HIV is said to belong, the retroviruses -- as well as other viruses which are claimed to be very dangerous -- in fact do not exist at all." So he was thoroughly reading the literature on those "other viruses" again, and after he could still not find any paper which would provide the evidence, he encouraged people not to BELIEVE him but to ask the institutes and authorities themselves. This has actually taken place, mostly initiated by mothers. The responses were revealing. In September 2001 the German book "Impfen - Völkermord im dritten Jahrtausend?" (Vaccination - Genocide in the third millennium?) by Stefan Lanka and Karl Krafeld was published in which they state that there is still no proof of any (medically relevant) virus. |
This movement (klein-klein-aktion ~ many little actions/steps) has a German website:
www.klein-klein-aktion.de which I have taken (and translated) all the following texts from.
| For almost one year we have been asking authorities, politicians and medical institutes after the scientific evidence for the existence of such viruses that are said to cause disease and therefore require "immunization". After almost one year we have not received even one concrete answer which provides evidence for the existence of those "vaccination viruses". The conclusion is inevitable that our children are still vaccinated on the basis of scientific standards of the 18th and 19th century. In the 19th century Robert Koch demanded in his generally accepted postulates evidence of the virus in order to prove infection; at Koch´s time this evidence couldn´t be achieved directly by visualization and characterization of the viruses, because adequate technology wasn´t available at that time. Methods of modern medicine have profoundly changed over the past 60 years, in particular by the invention of the electron microscope. And still all these viruses we get immunized against have never been re-examined using this technology? |
| Several images and explanations that we were pointed to and that were said to show resp. describe (characterize) viruses, we showed to Dr. Lanka who gives his summarizing comments: |
[The German original of the following text by Stefan Lanka you can find
here (temporarily not available for technical reasons, Jan 11, 2003)]
All these photos have in common that they, resp. the authors, can´t claim that they present a virus, as long as they do not also provide the original publications which describe how and what from the virus has been isolated. Such original publications are cited nowhere.
Indeed, in the entire scientific literature there´s not even one publication, where for "viruses in the medicine" the fulfillment of Koch´s first postulate is even claimed. That means, that there is no proof that from humans with certain diseases the viruses - which are held responsible for these diseases - have been isolated. Nevertheless, this is precisely what they publicly claim. Now, regarding the photos submitted:
1. Many of the photos are colored. This is proof enough, that they are the (art)work of designers, because electron microscopic photos always appear in black and white.
2. The i
mages of the so called HIV-, measles (Masern)- and smallpox (Pocken) viruses clearly show, as the image descriptions
partly already indicate, that these are cells wherein the viruses can allegedly be found. Thus, nothing has been isolated. The photos actually show cells and typical endogenous particles in them. These structures are well known and serve the intra- and intercellular transport. Unlike viruses of the same kind - that are always the same size and same shape (consistency) -,
they differ in size and shape (consistency) and therefore can´t be isolated.
3. 
In the case of the influenza- herpes-, vaccini
a-,
polio-
, adeno- and ebola-viruses each photo shows only a single particle; nobody claims that they´re isolated particles, let alone particles that have been i
solated from humans.
These particles are partially the cellular particles mentioned above (#2) resp. typical artifacts which means: structures that accrue after inappropriate fixing and drying of the probes, while being prepared for the electron microscope.
4. The "isolated" polio viruses are artificial particles, generated by
suction of an indifferent mass through a very fine filter into a vacuum. Its structure (no characteristic structures) differ clearly from the ones of the "viruses" in the cells. Here the information is essential that a biochemical characterization of those "isolated" viruses, although "isolation" is claimed, has never been published anywhere nor has anybody even claimed such a characterization.
5. The photo of the hepatitis B "viruses" does not show isolated structures, but - as the
image title already says, an agglutinate. This is the scientific/medical term for proteins from the blood that are clumped together, as is typical for coagulations. Typically, thereby round and also crystal structures accrue - depending on the condition of the blood sample.
In summary, it must be said that these photos are an attempt of fraud committed by the researchers and medical scientists involved, as far as they assert that these structures are viruses or even isolated viruses. To what extent the involved journalists and authors of textbooks have contributed to this fraud knowlingly or only out of gross negligence, I don´t know. Everyone who starts a recherche in the medical literature, will quickly encounter statements and references that Koch´s first postulate can´t be fulfilled (i.e. Großgebauer: Eine kurze Geschichte der Mikroben, 1997 ["a little story of the microbes"]; editor: Verlag für angewandte Wissenschaft). How these authors who claim the existence of viruses could overlook that, remains a riddle.
Could it be that the term "Contagium" = "Gift" (poison/toxin) = "Virus" from the 18th and 19th century was applied in the 20th century to the cell components which were named "viruses" since the electron microscope was introduced in 1931? And in order to hide this, the "disease causing viruses" have often been described but never been isolated? And then they were used as seemingly logical explanation for poisonings and adverse affects of vaccination, as Luhmann (1995) (i.e.) writes about the symptomatic of Hepatitis B, which was observed for the first time in 1985 following smallpox vaccinations, and 1938 following measles vaccinations? The copies in the textbooks show only structures within cells and nothing that looks like isolation and thus homogenous. The biochemical characterization, which is crucial, lacks completely.
Robert Koch and colleagues, Prof. Rush, Prof. Max von Pettenkofer, Prof. Virchow have shown, for instance by experiments and by observation of the Henle-Koch´s rules that by transmission of bacteria, the supposed contagium vivum, it was not possible to cause the
same disease. So Robert Koch modified (weakened) the 3rd postulate of his teacher, the German anatomist Henle, in the form that the generation of a
similar symptom in animal experiments would be sufficient to prove this hypothesis of disease cause, namely the hypothesis of infectious bacteria. (See Großgebauer: Eine kurze Geschichte der Mikroben).
So it does not surprise me that Prof. Alfred Fischer writes in his book "Vorlesungen über Bakterien" ("[academic] lectures on bacteria") from 1897 (!): "as is true for any infectious disease - the fact that it does not only take the addition of the bacteria but also the unknown something of individual predisposition, goes without saying."
Stefan Lanka, Dec 2001
(Translation Juergen Faas, Dec 2001) (minor changes on March 2, 2002)
