How the theory of deadly microbes took power in medicine and society

by Herbert Ludwig

Medical theories about bacilli and viruses as external pathogens of various infectious diseases have been afflicted with serious scientific and methodological shortcomings from the very beginning. (1) Hypotheses quickly became dogmatic truths, without really being able to be proven until today. However, fame, money and the interests of the emerging pharmaceutical industry did not allow researchers to shy away from fraud in order to give general validity to their theory of the enemy, the deadly microbes that attack humans and animals like swarms of locusts.

From the very beginning there was science fraud

Already the founders of the medical microbiology, Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, could not resist fraudulent machinations, as Torsten Engelbrecht and Dr. Claus Köhnlein in their book "Virus-Wahn (virus mania)" describe. Pasteur was "not a role model with a divinely clean slate, but a glorious researcher who started from false basic assumptions and with 'his two most important experiments fooled the whole world', as the specialist magazine The Lancet wrote in 2004." (S. 47)

Pasteur's fanatical hatred of microbes was based on the belief that bacteria flying through the air are responsible for all kinds of diseases and that there are no bacteria in a healthy body, i.e. that it is germ-free. But the organism is dependent on many bacteria and Pasteur's assertion has long since been refuted by experiments with animals that were kept in microbe-free cages with sterile food from birth, whereupon they all died after a few days.

"Moreover, 'Tricky Louis' had deliberately lied even during his vaccination experiments, which made him ascend to the Olympus of the gods of research." So he claimed to have successfully vaccinated sheep against anthrax. But the process had not been publicly documented, and as it later turned out, he had secretly cribbed the vaccine mixture from his research colleague Jean-Joseph Toussaint, whose career he had previously ruined by public verbal attacks, and sold it as his own great discovery. Also, after allegedly successful, in truth unscientific experiments, he presented, under much praise, a rabies vaccine that later turned out to be unsuitable and which "may have caused rabies rather than prevented it," according to science historian Horace Judson.

"Robert Koch, too, was in truth a businesslike swindler. In 1890, at the 10th International Medical Congress in Berlin, the microbe hunter, 'with an oversized ego', proclaimed in all its glory that he had developed a miracle cure for tuberculosis. And in the German Medical Weekly he added to this: Experiments on guinea pigs had proven that it was possible to 'bring the disease to a complete standstill without damaging the body in any other way'. That sounded like a miracle."

And so the reaction of the world public to the miracle cure "Tuberculin" was so overwhelming that sick people from all over the world went on pilgrimages to Berlin, Koch's place of work, to the lung sanatoriums that were springing up like mushrooms. But tuberculin failed catastrophically. "Long-term cures did not occur; instead, one hearse after another drove up in front of the lung sanatoriums." All those on whom the brew had previously been tested or who received it as a supposed cure reacted with chills and high fever or with death. "Robert Koch was forced to reveal the composition of his secret remedy, and it turned out that he himself did not know exactly what it contained. It was an extract of tubercle bacilli in glycerin, and dead tubercle bacilli could also be detected." (Wikipedia) And Koch's critics, among them Rudolf Virchow, also scientifically proved that tuberculin is not able to stop tuberculosis, but rather that it is to be feared that it makes the disease worse. "Koch was asked to present evidence for his famous guinea pig experiments - but he could not", the authors said.

According to experts such as the Heidelberg historian Chr. Gradmann, Koch had skilfully staged the market launch of tuberculin and prepared it from long ago. His publication in the German medical weekly magazine was accompanied by extremely positive reports from his confidants. "The professor calculated the profit to be expected from a 'daily production of 500 portions of tuberculin at 4.5 million marks per year'. In 1891, Koch became director of the newly founded Royal Prussian Institute for Infectious Diseases, now the Robert Koch Institute. In 1905 he received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of the bacillus that is supposed to cause tuberculosis.

Typically, Koch himself never admitted that his tuberculin was a failure. And Farbwerke Höchst, which was looking for a low-cost entry into pharmaceutical research, had entered into tuberculin production, with Koch's student Libbertz supervising production. This, he said, was the driving force behind the close cooperation between Koch's institute and the up-and-coming pharmaceutical industry.

Fraud runs through the further history of science. "A survey of scientists published in the scientific journal 'Nature' in 2005 showed that one third of the researchers admitted that they would not shy away from fraudulent activities and would simply put aside data that did not suit them." "Just as in politics and business, so too in research we are bombarded, soaked and tormented by fraud," the authors quote the renowned science historian Horace Judson and subsequently the anti-corruption organization "Transparency International" in their 2006 annual report: "From a global perspective, corruption exists at all levels of the health care system, from the ministry of health to the patient - and there are almost no limits to the criminal imagination."

Problem of insufficient openness and verifiability

Trust in science thrives on openness and the possibility that other researchers can verify the results presented. But much of this takes place in secret, without independent checks and verifications, so the temptation to cheat is very great. The "community of science," writes Horace Judson, "is inspired by the belief that it has a right to abundant government research funding - and at the same time to be free from public scrutiny." Established research, the authors agree, has thus actually managed to largely seal off its science building.

"It starts with the fact that ultimately no one is able to look directly over the shoulders of the researchers in their work and see if the data is being honestly recorded. So you just have to trust that they are being truthful." And practically no one takes the trouble to check the truth of the data and results presented by their research colleagues. Such quality checks would be equated with a waste of time and money and therefore not financed. Instead, they are fully occupied with chasing after the new and thus what promises high profits. Whereby just in the today's time many experiments are so complicated developed that they cannot be copied at all and examined thus exactly.

"Admittedly, one might think that the so-called peer review system largely eradicates fraud. It is still commonly regarded as a sacred pillar of the temple of science that promises to maintain quality standards. But in the way this peer reviewing has been practiced for decades, the worm is in it. All that is needed is an understanding of how it works, and that is how it works: peers, who remain anonymous, review the applications for research projects and articles submitted by their peers - and then decide whether the applications are to be granted or whether the articles are to be published in a scientific journal. There are said to be about 50,000 peer-reviewed journals of this kind, and all well-known journals such as Nature, Science, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, The Lancet, etc. are peer-reviewed."

But Richard Smith, head of the British Medical Journal from 1991 to 2004, said from his own experience: "Peer reviewing is easy to abuse, ineffective in exposing gross deficiencies and almost useless in exposing fraud."

No wonder, then, that all the cases of fraud that the science historian Judson described in his 2004 book "The Great Betrayal", published in 2004, were not discovered by the peer review system, but by pure coincidence.

The monocausal thought pattern

The authors of "Virus Mania" state that at the end of the 19th century, when Pasteur and Koch became celebrities despite their deceptions, the general public hardly had a chance to stand up against the microbe propaganda. The medical authorities, who clung to the simple theory of microbes as mortal enemies, together with the up-and-coming pharmaceutical industry, had already taken the reins of power and public opinion too firmly in their hands. Thus, the decisive course was set for the establishment of a laboratory animal medicine with the goal of developing (alleged) miracle pills (or injections) specifically against very specific diseases.

From then on, attempts were made to squeeze almost everything into the monocausal model "one disease - one pathogen - one (chemical) miracle cure". Many glaring mistakes and failures had to be admitted, but the course was held firm. "Thus the ruling medicine claimed over a long period of time and with verve that diseases like scurvy (seafarer's disease), pellagra (rough skin) or beriberi (miner's and prisoner's disease) were diseases caused by germs. Until Orthodoxy finally grudgingly admitted that vitamin deficiency is the real cause."

In the case of beriberi, a degenerative nervous disease, the turnaround came only after a few decades, when in 1911 vitamin B1 (thiamine) was isolated, which is missing mainly in refined foods such as white rice. Robert M. Williams, one of the discoverers of thiamine, wrote that through the work of Pasteur and Koch "all physicians were so fascinated by the idea of (microbial) infections as the cause of disease that it soon became an axiom (irrefutable truth) that diseases could have no other cause (than microbes). This focus of physicians on infections as the cause of disease was undoubtedly responsible for the fact that nutrition was not considered as a possible cause of beriberi."

Even in the 1950s, the monocausal microbial theory had little support. One of the most important medical authorities of the time, Max von Pettenkofer (1818-1901), still sought to grasp things in their entirety and always included various possible causes of disease in his considerations, including individual lifestyles and social aspects. The microbial theorists' simple monocausal model of thought seemed completely unrealistic to him. Thus he energetically engaged in the discussion about the fight against cholera, which became so typical in the 19th century in countries with rapidly growing industrialization. He took the same standpoint as the famous physician Francois Magendie (1783-1855): cholera was neither imported nor contagious, but was caused by excessive dirt from the most catastrophic housing conditions. Accordingly, in industrial centers such as London, the poorest neighborhoods were generally also the hardest hit by cholera.

"Von Pettenkofer's main cause was drinking water, which, due to the lack of sewage treatment plants, was often so visibly and severely contaminated that people regularly complained about the stench and discoloration of the cesspool, which was permeated with industrial chemicals and excrements. And so, studies also showed that in the households that were connected to clean water, there were hardly any cholera cases, if any at all. Yet von Pettenkofer did not deny the presence of microbes in this cloaca; rather, he argued that these organisms could contribute to the course of the disease, but only if they were given the breeding ground to thrive."

But even the authority of Pettenkofers could ultimately not prevent the followers of the microbe theory from asserting themselves at the end of the 19th century, and even pressed cholera into their monocausal explanation claim. Thus the bacterium "Vibrio Cholerae" or its excretions were labeled the sole culprit and the measures taken in the sense of this microbe theory were wrongly attached to the order for having pushed back cholera. "But actually, the credit should have gone to the improvement of living conditions, which has been advancing significantly since the middle of the 19th century."

Clustering

After World War II, tuberculosis, measles, diphtheria or pneumonia no longer caused mass deaths in industrialized countries such as the USA. According to the authors, this had become a huge problem for institutions such as the US epidemic authority CDC, which corresponds to the RKI in Germany, as it threatened to become superfluous. In 1949 it was even supposed to be dissolved. But the CDC did not want to stand idly by and start looking for epidemics. "But how do you find epidemics where there are simply none? You do clustering."

Clustering is an analysis to discover similarity structures. So you look around and are satisfied if you have found few people who show the same or similar symptoms. "This is enough for the virus investigators to declare an imminent epidemic. It is also irrelevant whether the patients ever had any contact with each other or whether they had become ill at intervals of weeks or even months. This makes it clear that these clusters cannot provide conclusive evidence or indications of an existing or imminent microbial disease. Especially since the fact that some people have the same clinical picture does not necessarily mean that a virus is at work." Provided that one could detect viruses at all, which has not happened until now.

Those affected could be on the same disease-causing diet, struggle with the same disease-causing environmental conditions (chemical toxins etc.) and much more. And even if one assumes that an infectious germ is at work, one could at best say that a certain group of people is susceptible to a certain disease, while many others remain healthy. Therefore, epidemics would simply not occur in affluent societies because they offer conditions (sufficient food, clean drinking water, etc.) that enable the vast majority of people to keep their immune systems so fit that such diseases and microbes in their wake simply don't stand a chance.

Clustering is completely unsuitable for detecting epidemics. According to the authors, this was already evident in the search for the causes of scurvy, beriberi and pellagra at the beginning of the 20th century, where clustering was used in a completely misleading way. They cite the HIV=AIDS dogma as the most important example from recent times because it laid the foundation for total corona/COVID-19 madness. At the beginning of the 1980s, an attempt was made to create a virus epidemic from a small number of patients who showed similar symptoms after they had all been living a lifestyle that destroyed the immune system for years (2). In any case, CDC official Bruce Evatt admitted that the CDC had come forward with statements "for which there was almost no evidence - it was more conjecture than evidence. We had no evidence that an infectious (AIDS) pathogen was involved." (In "Virus mania" p. 57)

In 1995, the CDC sounded the alarm about an impending Ebola virus pandemic. With the help of the cluster method, some cases of febrile patients were sorted out in Kikwit, a town in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and this was declared an outbreak of an Ebola epidemic. The US Time magazine had shown spectacular pictures of "CDC detectives" in germ-proof spacesuits and colorful photos, which allegedly showed the dangerous pathogen. But "a publication in which the Ebola virus is characterized (with its complete genetic material and virus envelope) and shown under an electron microscope is still not to be found."

In the current corona hype, the current Minister President of Bavaria from Germany, Markus Söder, also revealed his knowledge of the cluster method. On July 6, 2020, he said in explanation that the obligation to wear a mask (against the non-existent virus) would not be abolished under any circumstances. He said that the only strategy was still: "Extensive testing to quickly identify regional clusters and then to be able to dry out infection chains" (3). It would be so absurd and ridiculous if it were not so tragically serious for society.

For example Polio

So-called polio did not appear until the 19th century in the course of industrialization, and in the first half of the 20th century it spread like a bush fire only in the industrialized West - but not in the developing countries. As with most diseases, there are several possible causes. Some experts, the authors describe, see one factor in the high consumption of refined foods such as granulated sugar. Others cite mass vaccinations, and in fact paralysis has often occurred on the side of the body on which the vaccination was administered. Also, the falling number of polio cases increased dramatically in the 1940s after mass vaccinations against diphtheria and whooping cough.

But negative environmental influences such as poisoning by industrial and agricultural pollution are particularly pressing. Toxic heavy metals such as lead, arsenic or mercury were suspected early on to cause polio. "And the first accumulation of polio cases occurred in Sweden in 1887 - 13 years after the invention of the nerve poison DDT in Germany and 14 years after the invention of the first mechanical atomizer, which sprayed a mixture of water, kerosene, soap and arsenic onto plants. Just under ten years earlier, neuropathologist Alfred Vulpian substantiated the poisoning theory by finding that dogs that had been poisoned with lead suffered from the same symptoms as human polio victims. While the Russian Popov showed in 1883 that arsenic can also produce the same paralysis symptoms - study results that should have shaken up the world, considering that the arsenic-based pesticide Paris Green was widely used in agriculture since 1870 in the fight against 'pests' like the moth caterpillar."

But instead of banning it, it was replaced in 1892 in Massachusetts, for example, by the even more toxic pesticide lead arsenate. And only two years later, the first recorded polio epidemic occurred there, and Dr. Charles Caverly, who headed the investigation, stated that the cause was more likely to be a toxin than a virus: "It is almost certain that this is not a contagious disease." Nevertheless, Lead Arsenate has quickly become the most important pesticide in fruit growing in the industrialized world. In 1907, Massachusetts added "calcium arsenate", which was used in cotton fields and factories. Months later, 69 healthy children had suffered from paralysis. But the microbe hunters, with their narrow-minded tunnel vision, didn't want to know anything about all this and instead set out in search of a responsible virus.

"The foundation for the theory of the polio virus was laid in 1908 by the two scientists Karl Landsteiner and Erwin Popper, who worked in Austria, with experiments that the WHO still describes as one of the 'milestones in the eradication of polio'." However, a polio epidemic that reappeared in the same year, again involving toxic pesticides, did not lead to the evidence being investigated. The medical authorities, who only think in chemical terms, even used the pesticides as a means of alleviating the poisoning by administering them to children suffering from paralysis.

And in order to prove the disease-causing effect of the imaginary virus, they started, according to the authors, to feed diseased spinal cord parts of paralyzed patients to monkeys and other animals or to inject them into extremities, stomach or brain. Few were paralyzed, others died, many fell ill elsewhere or remained healthy. - However, this "slug" can absolutely not be called a scientifically isolated virus, apart from the fact that no one could have seen a virus at all, because the electron microscope, with which it could be made visible according to today's opinion, was only invented in 1931. "And even in 1948 it was still not known 'how the polio virus enters humans', as the expert John Paul from Yale University stated at an international poliomyelitis congress in New York City." (S. 62)

Although everything spoke against polio being an infectious viral disease, these studies became the starting point of a decade-long struggle focused exclusively on an imaginary polio virus. "And where the virus hunters were active, the vaccine manufacturers were not far away." And despite the proof that the paste in monkeys did not cause paralysis via the mouth, but only through injections into the brain, and despite the proof that no animal gets the disease from another, i.e. no virus causes an infection - the virus and vaccine hunters did not appreciate anything that lay outside their narrow virus path, not even a glance. The researcher Jonas Salk announced in the middle of the 20th century that he had found the polio virus and a vaccine that would defeat it, which was celebrated in the USA as one of the greatest discoveries of the 20th century.

However, the polio vaccine had already caused severe paralysis in experiments with monkeys. And even children who were vaccinated developed symptoms of polio in increasing numbers. Finally, experts in the United States determined in one region that only children vaccinated against polio developed polio. In nine out of ten cases, paralysis occurred in the arm into which the vaccine had been injected. "On 8 May 1955, the U.S. government halted all vaccine production. Shortly thereafter, another 2,000 cases of polio were reported in Boston, where thousands had been vaccinated. In 'vaccinated' New York, the number of polio cases doubled. In Rhode Island and Wisconsin, it even quintupled." According to Wikipedia, the Salk vaccine "did not work sufficiently". This is not only trivializing, but deliberately distorting the truth.

In any case, the Salk vaccine was not the big winner of the alleged polio virus. According to statistics, by 1953, when the vaccine was introduced, the number of polio victims had already fallen drastically by itself, by 47% in the USA and 55% in England. Nor will it be the later defused vaccine that caused the further sharp decline in polio, but the successive bans on highly toxic pesticides, including DDT. However, this cannot be explained further here. (See p. 67 in "Virus mania")

Conclusion

The outlined fundamental misguided development in modern medicine is based on the adoption of monocausal thinking from inorganic nature, where it is justified in the human living organism. This has been favored by a materialistic thinking, which can see the cause of physical diseases only in the influence of again physically material things, even if they are so small that they are no longer perceptible. But here one leaves the ground of exact science and rises into the windy air of scientifically disguised speculation (4). But even if viruses, like bacilli and fungi, were perceptible, there is no scientifically accurate proof that they are the pathogens and cause of infectious diseases. This is only conjecture and assertion. The simultaneous occurrence of harmful microbes with certain diseases rather shows that they need the breeding ground of the disease in order to be able to develop, i.e. that they are conversely causative for the occurrence of these microbes. That is what clears the way. To focus on the actual causes of disease.

That the microbe-killer theory has been able to establish itself on a broad scale in the last hundred years would not have been possible without deception and fraud in research, without corruption in the state health authorities, without the lavish money of the up-and-coming pharmaceutical companies and, not to forget, without the supporting unscrupulous media in this way.

Even the virus researcher Luc Montagnier (5) fears "that the scientific community is increasingly losing public confidence due to its corrupt intertwining with government and corporate interests." These corrupt spheres would "hide scientific truths from the public as soon as they could run counter to economic interests."

Often people say that the criticized one-dimensional microbiological model has achieved great success in healing the situation. But what is the overall picture? According to the authors of "Virus Mania", "the whole thing goes so far that the American 'health' industry with its pill mania is responsible for about 800,000 deaths a year - more than any other disease (including cancer and heart attacks). And in Germany, too, an estimated ten thousand die from incorrect treatment and the wrong use of medication. In the U.S. and Europe, prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer," said Peter C. Gotzsche, professor of medicine and co-founder of the renowned Cochrane Corporation." (S. 15)

What kind of medicine is this?

Translated, adapted & reblogged Version - Original here

Telegraph main page with overview of all articles: Link

Visit our Telegram Channel for additional news & information: Link

Chat with like-minded in our Telegram Chat Group: Link

Please support to keep this blog alive: paypal

References:

(1) Die „Wissenschaft“ vom Virus, das einfach nicht nachzuweisen ist (The "science" of the virus that simply cannot be detected)

(2) Challenging BOTH Mainstream and Alternative AIDS Views

(3) Söder: „Werden Maskenpflicht auf keinen Fall abschaffen“ (Söder: "Won't abolish compulsory masks under any circumstances)

(4) see 1

(5) ebook Plague of Corruption: Restoring Faith in the Promise of Science