"Phage therapy, viral phage therapy, or phagotherapy is the therapeutic use of bacteriophages for the treatment of pathogenic bacterial infections.[1][2][3] This therapeutic approach emerged at the beginning of the 20th century but was progressively replaced by the use of antibiotics in most parts of…
"Phage therapy, viral phage therapy, or phagotherapy is the therapeutic use of bacteriophages for the treatment of pathogenic bacterial infections.[1][2][3] This therapeutic approach emerged at the beginning of the 20th century but was progressively replaced by the use of antibiotics in most parts of the world after the Second World War. Bacteriophages, known as phages, are a form of virus[4] that attach to bacterial cells and inject their genome into the cell.[5] The bacteria's production of the viral genome interferes with its ability to function, halting the bacterial infection.[5] The bacterial cell causing the infection is unable to reproduce and instead produces additional phages.[4] Phages are very selective in the strains of bacteria they are effective against.[5]"
No the ball is on your side, you claimed they do not exist, there is plenty of evidence about to suggest otherwise. You are the one who claims it is all lies. Prove it if you want to be judge and jury. I would suggest you read Mike Yeadons response below.
You are straw manning me and it is a logical fallacy by misrepresenting my argument which is things which are claimed to be real are not proven to be real. Thus the burden of proof is still on those who claim them being real as per logic.
Mike Yeadon learned from me that viruses are not proven few years ago when I asked him if viruses are proven with adherence to scientific method.
I would suggest you not bothering people if you have no valid arguments to present next time..
No mate, I am not, their is decades of evidence from the other side of science that has been published. Ain't seen nothing of substance from you or the rest.
So why no one is able to prove any alleged bacteriophage by direct real time observation of all vital occurring processes with them or by experimentation on them in a form of independent variables?
Why all we have is pointing and declaring of something in micrographs which come from a method (TEM) which is not validated by comparison with reference material?
Not to mention issues with processing of bio matter before it is ready for visualization.
Pathogenic bacteria is not proven by any observation or scientific experiment. And generally study and understanding what so-called bacteria really is is abysmal due a lack of proper tools and methods.
I think Dr. Yeadon's point is concisely made by his last sentence. To paraphrase, human waste can make you sick. Whether you call it a pathogen or not, it can be passed on from one human to another. So, what is it that makes you sick?
One thing I've noticed among all of the studies that disprove contagions. None of them deal with vomit and excrement, or the fluids which can be passed from one to another when someone is sick with a stomach "bug". Can a sick person that is vomiting pass it on to someone else. For the stated reasons above, I think they can.
I have been teaching people on social media platforms since the beginning of 2020 that overload of toxins and unwanted matter disrupts physiological processes. Therefore it leads to disease symptoms.
Pathogen is an alleged bio agent which causes disease symptoms. So far no one has proven any contagious disease.
Toxins, stress, malnutrition, unwanted matter, physical trauma, interaction with matter which is in specific state make us sick.
Consuming excrement or vomit, or fluids of other humans is not something which people normally do. So if anyone is doing it, it is intentional. If you consume someone's vomit and it will damage your issue from its pH state or it is toxic or it will create a toxin from mixing with content of your stomach, it is not contagious disease. Contagion is caused by alleged bio agents. Not by chemical matter.
sure Steve, r0 measures the number of colocated people near coincidentally expressing similar disease symptoms but it does not prove that it is due to transmission of a virus. what is the r0 for scurvy in a boat of sailors
But what is it, biologically, that would make some sick from consuming waste matter? What makes it toxic? Shouldn’t we be able to view it microscopically?
And, if such matter is toxic, it follows that one could get sick from someone near them who is expelling toxic matter or leaving it on surfaces that are touched by hands then eats with them.
That is why I ask about studies that prove contagions of stomach illnesses. I haven’t seen any. Have you?
I’ve seen lots of studies that disprove the transfer of colds, flu, polio, diphtheria, small pix, and other illnesses.
This fallacy originates from the Latin phrase "onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat"). The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions) the claim. The fallacy of the Burden of Proof occurs when someone who is making a claim, puts the burden of proof on another party to disprove what they are claiming."
I am waiting for your response with irrefutable evidence that supports your claims.
I think you are confusing my intention. I am not making the claim that you think contagions are real. You are probably aware of the same studies I referred to. We agree. I am questioning whether or not stomach illnesses are contagious. I cannot find any studies for those as with the rest.
behaviour that shows a lack of good sense or judgement on social media platforms and you can take me to the court where you will falsely accuse me for slander. Yet I will clearly prove that there was no slander committed.
Do you want to start this game with me or do you want to start interacting with people in good faith?
Blocking me is not going to help you to win the argument. It will be obvious for others that you do not have valid arguments to present.
Wrong. By logic the burden of proof is on initial claimants and their supporters, not on those who question or deny their claims. Also it is not even a scientific theory. For this a hypothesis has to be tested by conducting an experiment on a real independent variable.
"Burden of Proof
Informal
This fallacy originates from the Latin phrase "onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat"). The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions) the claim. The fallacy of the Burden of Proof occurs when someone who is making a claim, puts the burden of proof on another party to disprove what they are claiming."
It keeps coming back to naming certain particles and claiming THESE must be the "cause" of disease. The fact is, toxic assaults and malnutrition are the actual cause. Locating some maggots on road kill is NOT evidence that the maggots killed the animal.
You have convinced me of something today, kordelas.
By bludgeoning me in the comment section and leaving vacuous generalities - both hallmarks of trolls - I'm convinced more than ever that 'not a virus' is an op.
please considerthe followinghttps://duckduckgo.com/?q=sewerage+divers+india&t=ffab&atb=v223-1&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images id love to see your reasoning, deductions, extrapolations etc etc ,,, i dove a bit into this ... and am led to conclude from just facts as impartial as i can be...that ... fact 1 the divers have been doing this for years and generations wit no observable ill effect etc etc we are all searching for the truth'
How does this square with sanitation is correlated with the improvement of health, not vaccines?
Intriguing plus the added chemicals in products must be impacting their health.
Are their life spans cut short? I lived in India for a year many decades ago.....those people are beasts of burden. Women on roadsides chopping up rocks into gravel hours at a time in beating sun and heat, men as skinny as rails bicycling heavy loads....don't know how they do it, but they don't live long.
i think [speculate ] the micro organisms break down everything chemicals etc etc into their basic conponents... recyclers back to earth ,,, there are microorganisms even in radioactive cooling structures in nucular power plants ...to me all this is a major substantion of beuchamp terrain hypothesis good luck
Phage therapy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy
"Phage therapy, viral phage therapy, or phagotherapy is the therapeutic use of bacteriophages for the treatment of pathogenic bacterial infections.[1][2][3] This therapeutic approach emerged at the beginning of the 20th century but was progressively replaced by the use of antibiotics in most parts of the world after the Second World War. Bacteriophages, known as phages, are a form of virus[4] that attach to bacterial cells and inject their genome into the cell.[5] The bacteria's production of the viral genome interferes with its ability to function, halting the bacterial infection.[5] The bacterial cell causing the infection is unable to reproduce and instead produces additional phages.[4] Phages are very selective in the strains of bacteria they are effective against.[5]"
Phages are not proven to exist. No one has observed them, identified them, isolated them and experimented on them.
Bacteriophages (phages) have been extensively isolated from various environments for over a century. This is well known.
Then provide irrefutable evidence of them.
I had some comedic banter with you lately,
But the facts are that:
-alleged biological viruses have never been proven,
-alleged nucleotides (RNA, DNA, genomes, genes, genetic sequences) have never been proven,
-alleged infectious diseases have never been proven,
-alleged immune system has never been proven,
-alleged pathogenic bacteria has never been proven.
Your beliefs won't change those facts.
We are still waiting for irrefutable evidence from you and your experts.
Or maybe do you want put money on the betting table? I am going to offer more than you and your millionaire friends are able to offer.
So Steve, the ball is on your side. And all odds are against you.
No the ball is on your side, you claimed they do not exist, there is plenty of evidence about to suggest otherwise. You are the one who claims it is all lies. Prove it if you want to be judge and jury. I would suggest you read Mike Yeadons response below.
SD, you wrote * & I quote; "you claimed they do not exist," actually Kordelas states;.........."never been proven".
You are straw manning me and it is a logical fallacy by misrepresenting my argument which is things which are claimed to be real are not proven to be real. Thus the burden of proof is still on those who claim them being real as per logic.
Mike Yeadon learned from me that viruses are not proven few years ago when I asked him if viruses are proven with adherence to scientific method.
I would suggest you not bothering people if you have no valid arguments to present next time..
No mate, I am not, their is decades of evidence from the other side of science that has been published. Ain't seen nothing of substance from you or the rest.
Yes, you are. And you still have not presented any valid evidence of your claims.
You have no valid arguments so far.
Well mate if you schooled Mike Yeadon, produce the evidence to back yourself. That is all that has been asked of you.
This therapy has been used in Russia for DECADES and is studied in the west as a replacement for antibiotics which are now longer functioning well:
https://www.bacteriophage.news/antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-with-bacteriophages/
The 'no virus' team is outing themselves on this one.
I know that bacteriophages are a thing.
What people choose to call them is a different matter.
They work as you described.
We used them in industry in a technique called "phage display".
As far as anyone can tell, iirc, they're a signalling system used by certain monocellular organisms.
As regards bacteria, anyone doubting their existence is welcome to make a refreshing glass of squash using the contents of an unflushed toilet.
Let me know how you get on.
So why no one is able to prove any alleged bacteriophage by direct real time observation of all vital occurring processes with them or by experimentation on them in a form of independent variables?
Why all we have is pointing and declaring of something in micrographs which come from a method (TEM) which is not validated by comparison with reference material?
Not to mention issues with processing of bio matter before it is ready for visualization.
Pathogenic bacteria is not proven by any observation or scientific experiment. And generally study and understanding what so-called bacteria really is is abysmal due a lack of proper tools and methods.
I think Dr. Yeadon's point is concisely made by his last sentence. To paraphrase, human waste can make you sick. Whether you call it a pathogen or not, it can be passed on from one human to another. So, what is it that makes you sick?
One thing I've noticed among all of the studies that disprove contagions. None of them deal with vomit and excrement, or the fluids which can be passed from one to another when someone is sick with a stomach "bug". Can a sick person that is vomiting pass it on to someone else. For the stated reasons above, I think they can.
I have been teaching people on social media platforms since the beginning of 2020 that overload of toxins and unwanted matter disrupts physiological processes. Therefore it leads to disease symptoms.
Pathogen is an alleged bio agent which causes disease symptoms. So far no one has proven any contagious disease.
Toxins, stress, malnutrition, unwanted matter, physical trauma, interaction with matter which is in specific state make us sick.
Consuming excrement or vomit, or fluids of other humans is not something which people normally do. So if anyone is doing it, it is intentional. If you consume someone's vomit and it will damage your issue from its pH state or it is toxic or it will create a toxin from mixing with content of your stomach, it is not contagious disease. Contagion is caused by alleged bio agents. Not by chemical matter.
Explain why so many studies compute roughly the same R0 for measles.
If it isn't contagious, R0=0.
There aren't any studies finding an R0 of 0. Why not?
sure Steve, r0 measures the number of colocated people near coincidentally expressing similar disease symptoms but it does not prove that it is due to transmission of a virus. what is the r0 for scurvy in a boat of sailors
Explain why no one has proven any virus and any contagion so far.
Why no one has done it?
I am waiting for your response.
hmm.. quiet ..
As always.
Crickets or excuses.
But what is it, biologically, that would make some sick from consuming waste matter? What makes it toxic? Shouldn’t we be able to view it microscopically?
And, if such matter is toxic, it follows that one could get sick from someone near them who is expelling toxic matter or leaving it on surfaces that are touched by hands then eats with them.
That is why I ask about studies that prove contagions of stomach illnesses. I haven’t seen any. Have you?
I’ve seen lots of studies that disprove the transfer of colds, flu, polio, diphtheria, small pix, and other illnesses.
There is no study that proves contagious diseases.
If anyone claims contagious diseases being real, then the burden of proof is on them as per logic.
So how did you come to a conclusion that I claim them being real?
correct..
Barnstable County. Burden shifts to you to explain it. Over 100 people SEQUENCED with sars-cov-2. Explain it.
sequences based on what- nothing as it turns out - Cormans paper
Wrong. The burden of proof is on you.
Shifting it on me is a logical fallacy.
"Burden of Proof
Informal
This fallacy originates from the Latin phrase "onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat"). The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions) the claim. The fallacy of the Burden of Proof occurs when someone who is making a claim, puts the burden of proof on another party to disprove what they are claiming."
I am waiting for your response with irrefutable evidence that supports your claims.
I think you are confusing my intention. I am not making the claim that you think contagions are real. You are probably aware of the same studies I referred to. We agree. I am questioning whether or not stomach illnesses are contagious. I cannot find any studies for those as with the rest.
Not to mention your propaganda links to wikipedia and some not scientific article are pathetic.
Perhaps we can stick to science rather than personal attacks. If that's not possible, I can fix the problem. Let me know.
I can fix the problem with you by exposing your
behaviour that shows a lack of good sense or judgement on social media platforms and you can take me to the court where you will falsely accuse me for slander. Yet I will clearly prove that there was no slander committed.
Do you want to start this game with me or do you want to start interacting with people in good faith?
Blocking me is not going to help you to win the argument. It will be obvious for others that you do not have valid arguments to present.
Your beliefs are not valid evidence.
The burden of proof is still on those who claim existence of exosomes, viruses, pathogenic bacteria, phages, nucleotides and immune system.
So provide valid evidence or admit that you do not have it.
the burden of proof is on the person challenging the existing theory.
It's an hypothesis, not a theory.
No, it isn't. This theory is only believed for a long time, but has, in fact, never been proven in the first place.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim - science is about falsifiability - can we get back to our natural sensibilities..
Wrong. By logic the burden of proof is on initial claimants and their supporters, not on those who question or deny their claims. Also it is not even a scientific theory. For this a hypothesis has to be tested by conducting an experiment on a real independent variable.
"Burden of Proof
Informal
This fallacy originates from the Latin phrase "onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat"). The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions) the claim. The fallacy of the Burden of Proof occurs when someone who is making a claim, puts the burden of proof on another party to disprove what they are claiming."
It keeps coming back to naming certain particles and claiming THESE must be the "cause" of disease. The fact is, toxic assaults and malnutrition are the actual cause. Locating some maggots on road kill is NOT evidence that the maggots killed the animal.
I have been teaching people about it since the beginning of 2020 on social media platforms.
Yeah, right.
Go to Russia and find out yourself.
The burden of proof is not on me as per logic.
You have convinced me of something today, kordelas.
By bludgeoning me in the comment section and leaving vacuous generalities - both hallmarks of trolls - I'm convinced more than ever that 'not a virus' is an op.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
So you are unhappy because I logically refuted your arguments.
Lol.
please considerthe followinghttps://duckduckgo.com/?q=sewerage+divers+india&t=ffab&atb=v223-1&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images id love to see your reasoning, deductions, extrapolations etc etc ,,, i dove a bit into this ... and am led to conclude from just facts as impartial as i can be...that ... fact 1 the divers have been doing this for years and generations wit no observable ill effect etc etc we are all searching for the truth'
How does this square with sanitation is correlated with the improvement of health, not vaccines?
Intriguing plus the added chemicals in products must be impacting their health.
Are their life spans cut short? I lived in India for a year many decades ago.....those people are beasts of burden. Women on roadsides chopping up rocks into gravel hours at a time in beating sun and heat, men as skinny as rails bicycling heavy loads....don't know how they do it, but they don't live long.
i think [speculate ] the micro organisms break down everything chemicals etc etc into their basic conponents... recyclers back to earth ,,, there are microorganisms even in radioactive cooling structures in nucular power plants ...to me all this is a major substantion of beuchamp terrain hypothesis good luck