How do scientists know that certain viruses exist, particularly when they claim that a specific virus causes a specific disease? For example, how do researchers verify the existence of the coronavirus, Ebola, HIV, or SARS?
Is it possible that some viruses are being created or manipulated in biowarfare labs, and how can scientists confirm the existence of these viruses in order to develop vaccines to protect against them?
These are questions I have been considering since 1987, and throughout the years, I have sought out the perspectives of independent researchers to try to understand their responses.
I have managed to find some answers to my question about how scientists verify the existence of viruses, but I have also encountered many false mainstream claims. To determine the presence of a virus, a tissue sample must be taken from a living person and filtered to obtain a smaller sample that may contain the virus. This sample is then examined under an electron microscope to see if any particles resembling a virus are present. However, there is disagreement about how many of these particles are needed to confirm the existence of a virus – it could be just one or it could be many.
To prove that a virus is causing disease in a person, it is necessary to demonstrate that the virus is actively replicating at high levels in the body and that the person’s immune system is unable to eliminate it.
There is currently no definitive method for verifying this. However, if a virus is detected using an electron microscope and found to be replicating in a person’s body, it can be concluded that it is an exogenous virus rather than an endogenous virus that normally resides in the body. However, there is no foolproof way to consistently make this distinction.
Is it possible to confirm the existence and identification of all viruses that are claimed to cause epidemics through observation with an electron microscope?
Sometimes, researchers have been unable to confirm the existence of viruses that they claim are causing epidemics through observation with an electron microscope. This means that they may have made premature conclusions and implemented measures such as lockdowns and quarantines without sufficient evidence. While these actions may benefit those who stand to profit from them, they are not based on scientific proof. The interview with Etienne De Harven, conducted by Celia Farber, delves into this issue and includes insights from esteemed scientists. It is a technical and thorough discussion that is worth reading and considering carefully.
According to Etienne De Harven, the use of electron microscopy (EM) as a diagnostic tool in HIV research has been questioned due to the inability to find HIV in human blood using this method. Western Blot and Elisa tests for HIV antibodies also lost credibility after certain studies were published. The concept of measuring viral load (VL), or the supposed number of HIV particles in the blood plasma of AIDS patients, was introduced using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. However, De Harven asserts that it has never been possible to find retroviral particles in the blood plasma of any AIDS patient using transmission electron microscopy, even in those with high viral loads. This claim has not been refuted.
When researchers claim to have published the genetic sequences of viruses, are they actually studying endogenous viruses that naturally reside in the body and do not cause harm, or are they identifying exogenous viruses that have been introduced from the outside? Is it possible that some researchers who claim that a newly discovered virus is a man-made weapon are actually examining the genetic sequence of an endogenous virus that has been awakened from its dormant state in the body?