Tuesday, April 23, 2024
HomeCOVID-19Virus or not? Covid under the microscope

Virus or not? Covid under the microscope


MANY people live with an exaggerated fear of viruses, encouraged by books and movies portraying them as mankind’s ultimate predator. The ‘pandemic preparedness’ industry and the World Health Organization exploit this fear as they continue to extract billions of dollars from taxpayers, and seek to inveigle governments into signing away citizens’ rights in service of the biosecurity agenda.

Fear drove much of the mishandling of SARS-CoV-2, fruitlessly shutting down cities, imprisoning children and causing vulnerable old people to die alone, incarcerated in hotbeds of infection and deprived of healing sunshine and the company of loved ones. It also contributed to the widespread acceptance of an experimental and dangerous gene inoculation that purported to be a protective vaccine, but which according to a recent multi-country analysis has resulted in an estimated 17million excess deaths.

In trying to counter this folly, some influential commentators have gone as far as arguing that the entire pandemic was a money-making invention, with no virus involved at all. Even the very concept of viruses, as infectious pathogens, has been called into question. The idea has proved appealing to many of those dismayed by the deceptions and propaganda to which we are still being subjected on Covid. 

Last Wednesday. October 4, the UK Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART), an expert group with a strong record in challenging Covid illusions, published a report examining the ‘virus doesn’t exist’ story.

HART is a group of highly qualified doctors, scientists, economists, psychologists and others who came together through a shared concern about the lack of open scientific debate on Covid in mainstream media, and the trend towards censorship and harassment of those who question the orthodox narrative.

The report begins by looking at and ‘supporting’ a case that there was no novel virus, in the sense that people’s immune defences against SARS-CoV-2 were not markedly different from any previous respiratory virus, and the mortality rate was low. Where excess mortality was seen, such as among young people in New York City – who reportedly died in the thousands in spring 2020, but not elsewhere – the causes may have been entirely different.

But for the following reasons, it says, the virus ‘model’ best explains observations surrounding the 2020 outbreak, even though science cannot yet fully explain how viruses spread, and why they cause illness in some people and not in others. 

·         In most cases, groups of people became ill with similar symptoms after being exposed in a shared environment.

·         A unique genetic (RNA) signature was detectable with the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test in people with these symptoms, vastly more often than in well people. Although the test was misused in ways that gave false positives, the RNA sequence looked for was lengthy and specific and the association was real.

·         Lateral flow tests, which could be done at home, successfully identified the protein coded for by this sequence.

·         Crystallography showed how the structure of the virus’s characteristic spike protein gave it an exceptional ability to infect human cells.

·         Sick people went on to produce antibodies to the proteins produced by the RNA sequence.

·         When material thought to contain the virus was cultured in cells, the degree of damage done was proportional to the strength of the PCR test result. When laboratory-grown virus was used to infect healthy young people, half developed detectable virus after two days and symptoms of Covid after two to four days.

·         Across the world, scientists have conducted a huge amount of sequencing of the virus’s genome, demonstrating how it evolves over time.

·         Finally, a respiratory illness was experienced which some people experienced as viral in nature, and with characteristic, unusual symptoms such as loss of taste or smell, and long duration of sickness and cough. Although in other (less panic-driven) circumstances it might have been referred to simply as ‘some weird bug’ or a ‘nasty flu’, clinicians have claimed they could diagnose it without testing, and patients seemed good at knowing whether they had it. 

The authors emphasise that none of this tells us anything about the impact of the virus on health or mortality – only that it really did exist.  

Two pieces of evidence on which, they say, the ‘no virus’ proponents seem to place a lot of weight are critically examined. 

They write: ‘The first is that, unlike say measles and polio, the SARS-CoV-2 virus does not replicate in cells, filling them with virus, before causing them to explode, releasing the particles. Instead, SARS-CoV-2 virus particles are claimed to bud from the cell surface one at a time. 

‘The same claim is made for influenza and HIV. It is true that there might therefore be interesting differences between these types of viruses worth exploring, but the umbrella term virus is still useful given their other similarities. 

‘The second is the fact that there has never been a pure isolate of SARS-CoV-2 virus (that means a solution containing only virus particles with no cells). This could be because no one has tried hard enough to carry out this work. 

‘But let’s assume it is because it is not possible to isolate this virus. What would that mean? It would mean that there is something oversimplified about the explanation given for how viruses are formed and transmitted from person to person which needs more study. It is not enough to discount all other evidence that the virus model is the best fit to explain this illness.’

The report concludes that while the pharmaceutical industry is seen as favouring germ theory for its potential to boost drug sales, holistic health approaches are often perceived as ‘alternative quackery’. Rather than take such extreme positions, ‘it is better to keep gathering evidence to see which model (or models) provide the best explanation for how the world works’. 

This is a truly scientific approach, very different from the corruption of scientific process (see examples here and here) which accompanied the rollout of the RNA jabs, and denial of the still unfolding consequences.  

Two aspects of the report, however, require comment. 

Firstly, it may betray a failure to recognise the panic experienced by those who knew that although this was not a completely ‘novel’ entity, it was genetically engineered as part of the biodefence collaboration between the US and China (and possibly the UK as well – witness the role of the Wellcome Trust’s Jeremy Farrar, now WHO’s chief scientific officer, in trying to hide the laboratory origin of the virus).  

Secondly, I would like HART experts to look at the case painstakingly built over several decades by a group of scientists in Perth, Australia, that ‘HIV’, the purported cause of Aids, truly has never been shown to exist as a unique infectious agent, even by conventional virological standards, and despite the hundreds of billions spent on ‘HIV’ research and treatment. In many respects, the evidence shows Aids to be a completely different category of illness from Covid, as described in my recently published book and seven-part TCW series.  

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Neville Hodgkinson
Neville Hodgkinson
Neville Hodgkinson is the former Sunday Times medical and science correspondent who created an international storm by reporting a scientific challenge to the ‘HIV’ theory of Aids. His new book, How HIV/Aids Set the Stage for the Covid Crisis, is an expanded and updated version of his previous book on the controversy. It is available here.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.