Contagion has never, ever been proven

It's a pseudoscience myth to keep us afraid and dependent on the medical system

As soon as you start to take apart the assertions of the disproven germ hypothesis and question the existence of “viruses,” you inevitably come up against another pseudoscientific concept: contagion. The disproven germ hypothesis and virology both depend on and are intertwined with the concept that “diseases” are passed between people. Sick people, according to the contagion model, can and do “spread” their “disease,” making well people sick through, usually, either breathing or contact. Well people “catch” what sick people have, and that is how anybody gets sick. We all grew up with this as a core assumption about what disease is and how we get it.

But if germs don’t make people sick and “viruses” don’t exist, there’s nothing to pass between people, so contagion becomes nonsense (but nonsense that has great potential for control and profit).

For most of us, “infectious diseases” which are “contagious” is how we have understood various sets of symptoms that we experience: mainly what we have called “colds” and “flu,” which are extremely common and usually not life-threatening, but also including more serious “diseases” such as pneumonia, yellow fever, and meningitis (and measles, mumps, chickenpox, polio, smallpox, rubella, etc. etc. etc. down the vaccine schedule).

We have been taught throughout our lives to “cover your cough” because you’re coughing out “germs” or “viruses” that could cause others around you to “catch” whatever it is you have. The entire regime of masking during the recent plandemic (as well as previous ones) was predicated, first, on the existence of a “virus,” and second, on contagion. The entirely false notion of the “asymptomatic carrier,” which was used to enforce “social distancing” and lockdown and redefined “in perfect health” as “sick without symptoms,” is a corollary of “viral contagion.”

The search for invisible causes of disease goes back centuries, as do efforts to attribute various sets of symptoms to these invisible causes. The case of scurvy, which we all learn about in school, is instructive. Sailors who were on ships at sea for months at a time became ill with the same symptoms—teeth falling out, weakness and pain in the joints, bruising. Since it happened to many men who were all together in close quarters, it looked like something contagious passing between them.

But it turned out that the cause was a deficiency of Vitamin C. When crews took barrels of limes on their voyages, the symptoms disappeared. Scurvy is just an example of how easy it is, when we have been programmed for generations about contagion and invisible causes of disease, to jump to the conclusion that “people getting sick at the same time in the same place proves there are invisible contagious particles that cause disease.” And how easy it is for that assumption to be just plain wrong.

Photo by Acton Crawford on Unsplash

But, sailors and scurvy and limes notwithstanding, contagion is one of those aspects of the false narrative about what makes us ill that seems to be confirmed practically every day by our own experience. We have all seen or experienced people who were together one day get sick in the same way with the same symptoms a few days later. Everyone who has lived with children has seen them become ill with the same symptoms as their classmates, all of whom who live in different homes with different environments, and then others in each of their families also have the same symptoms within a day or two. And what about the plague–wasn’t that the hugest and most horrific example of contagion in history?

No evidence has ever been found. Ever.

And yet, in countless scientific experiments attempting to find evidence of contagion, none has been found. In many of these experiments, each involving hundreds of people, not a single well person was made ill by being exposed to sick people. Daniel Roytas, an Australian naturopath, has just this month published his book entitled Can You Catch a Cold? which details his research into scientific evidence for the existence of contagion. Spoiler alert: he found none. (I don’t like to buy anything from Amazon, but purchasing this book there at the link above boosts its ratings, which is positive for a book that challenges accepted “science” and chops at the foundation of “pandemics.”)

Dr. Tom Cowan read passages from the book on his recent webinar, if you’d like a taste of what Roytas says in the book along with Cowan’s commentary. (Substack apparently will not embed videos from Rumble. But please do copy and paste this link and listen.)

https://rumble.com/v4n1xux-conversations-with-dr.-cowan-and-friends-ep-77-daniel-roytas.html

An interview with Roytas by Dr. Sam Bailey contains additional information from Roytas himself about his research, including some very interesting information about the origin of “the germ theory.”

Dan Roytas: Can You Catch A Cold?

Roytas looked at all the familiar papers on this topic, of which there are quite a few, as well as many which he needed to dig out of various archives and libraries. One of the most familiar of these experiments, which many who are doubting the existence of viruses have probably come across, is the one conducted by the US Public Health Service and the US Navy and overseen by Dr. Milton Rosenau, a professor of public health, during the “Spanish flu” in 1918. Rosenau had 100 healthy soldiers sit in the hospital wards where soldiers who were the sickest with this “flu” were being cared for. He had the well soldiers sit close to the sick ones, shake hands with them, and allow themselves to be coughed on and breathed on. Nasal secretions from the sick soldiers were rubbed inside the healthy ones’ noses. He even injected blood from the diseased men into the healthy men’s bodies (obviously not a mode of “transmission” that would ever happen in real life).

Not one healthy soldier got sick. Not one. Mike Stone explains this experiment in his article entitled The Infectious Myth Busted Part 1: The Rosenau Spanish Flu Experiments (1918).

During the 1918 Spanish Flu, which is considered to be the most contagious “virus” of all time, researchers for the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy tried to determine what caused the flu and how infectious it truly was. However, the results of their experiments proved that the flu is not infectious at all.

This type of experiment has been done numerous times since then with the same results. Even injecting blood from a sick person into a well person has not produced the disease. Of course, this is certainly not the type of contagion that is meant when someone coughs on someone else, or touches a surface that supposedly had a sick person’s bodily fluids on it. But even such an extreme effort to prove contagion has repeatedly failed to do so.

How virologists try to prove contagion

In fact, because “viral” illness is by definition “infectious,” virologists conducting animal studies to prove that certain “viruses” or bacteria cause “disease” have had to also prove the disease in question was contagious. The vast majority of these have used extreme and unnatural methods of “transmission” that would never happen in nature—even more unnatural than injections of “infectious” blood into someone’s arm. These shockingly cruel and inhumane experiments (made famous by Louis Pasteur and continuing to this day; look them up and read about them if you have the stomach) involve injecting fluid supposedly containing a “virus” into a poor anesthetized animal’s abdomen, nose, trachea, or even their brain. And when some of the animals thus abused do become ill or die, voilà, there is proof of a “virus.” How these ridiculous experiments are accepted as proving anything except the bizarre level of cruelty that a scientist can stoop to in order to prove what they think is going on, is entirely beyond comprehension.

We know that the whole idea of vaccines to prevent illness is tied up in false narratives of “contagious viral diseases” whose “spread” can be stopped if enough people get vaccinated to create “herd immunity.” And we also know that ever since 1986, when pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines were given legal immunity so they could not be sued for the harm caused by their products, vaccines have become a bigger and bigger profit center for these companies. But vaccines are not the only product whose entire existence and validity requires public acceptance of the idea of contagious and infectious diseases.

Some of us, from the 1940s on, grew up in families where we learned germ-phobia at our mother’s elbow as she scrubbed the kitchen floor and scoured the bathtub. Cleaning products were being developed at that time with highly toxic ingredients to “kill germs,” and advertisements for them implied that floors, even in the bathroom, should be as clean as the kitchen table where the family ate. Cleaning products are still heavily advertised as “anti-bacterial,” and persons (almost always women) in charge of keeping the house clean are expected be vigilant about ensuring that no surface can harbor bacteria.

More toxic chemicals in our homes than a chemistry lab

Back in the mid-1990s, when I was involved in environmental work, I read that the average home in America had more toxic, dangerous chemicals under the kitchen sink than a typical chemistry lab 50 years earlier. What was—and is—the need for this arsenal? (Here we are back at the war metaphor.) Of course we should keep our houses clean. Toxic chemicals are not required for this—vinegar, lemon juice, baking soda, castile soap, and other benign substances, many of them edible, do the job just fine and do not cause headaches, raw throats, brain fog, lung damage, or even more serious reactions that the heavy-duty cleaners often do.

So it isn’t just the very lucrative vaccine industry that requires the public to believe in the disproven germ hypothesis and contagion, but also the manufacturers of cleaning and body care products, such as the hand-sanitzer that was ubiquitous in public places during the plandemic, designed to kill germs and “viruses.” I didn’t look up the annual amount of money spent on all of these cleaning and sanitizing products, but a peek down the aisle(s) where they are sold in supermarkets makes it clear that this is a massive market. There’s a lot of money riding on this belief in illness being contagious. And, of course, the indoctrination of the public to fear “germs” on an everyday basis makes us susceptible to fear-mongering around “novel coronaviruses” and “Disease X” and other such nonsense.

And I have to say once again that an underlying purpose of all of this propaganda is to disempower us into believing that we are victims of microscopic organisms against which we always need to be in defensive mode. We can only survive and be healthy by getting all the injections and slathering every surface in our home with toxic chemicals (???). Feelings of safety and protection achieved by applying toxic, poisonous substances inside and out in a vain effort to protect oneself from “disease” are delusional. True safety and empowerment come from transcending the fear of pathogens and realizing how powerful and strong the human body really is, and how much agency we have in its level of health day to day.

But why….?

But if there’s not something contagious passing between people that explains how a whole family gets sick with the same symptoms at the same time, then what does cause this phenomenon? This is the big question that everyone who has been fully indoctrinated with the disproven germ hypothesis, “viruses,” and “contagious illnesses” always asks—and rightly so. We want to know what sickness is and what causes it so we can try to avoid it!

I don’t have an answer for that, and I don’t think there is just one answer. I did suggest a few possibilities in my previous articles, ‘Germ theory’ hooks us to drugs and needles, and Why our terrain is the key to health. Mainly, it seems reasonable to me that what we call “disease” is rightly understood as the body’s effort to eject unwanted toxins and repair damage, in order to return to balance. And though it is not always possible to avoid such symptoms, keeping our terrain as clean as possible through healthy living habits will avert some if not most experiences of “disease.”

But there’s much more to it than that, and the question opens up a fascinating inquiry that Western medicine is unlikely to ever undertake. This is because of the money involved in convincing people to continue believing in contagion and “viruses,” as well as the power and control that the medical establishment would have to let go of if we didn’t depend on it to fix and save us. And it is also because Western medicine is stuck in a materialistic model of life—it does not acknowledge and is not interested in the non-material aspects, such as energy, magnetism, resonance, and vibration, to say nothing of structured water. Without including these, it is impossible to understand how the human body works. Ignoring them is only one of the ways that allopathic medicine is making itself irrelevant and losing customers in droves.

Thanks for reading this article! I appreciate your presence. Next week another surprise, as I am not sure yet what the topic will be. But here are some thoughts, just as a teaser so you’ll come back again (I’ll cover all these eventually, just not sure which one is next):

• Herbalism and its subjection to germ theory

• The vaccine program and its falsehoods

• How seeing the falsity of the “virus” narrative leads us into seeing that the “legal system” is full of false narratives that enslave us

• Detoxing and “symptoms”—deeper dive

• Parasites, fungi, and mold

• Logical fallacies and not believing everything you hear

More reading/viewing on contagion:

For a look at why the Plague in 14th-century Europe, called the most deadly pandemic in human history, was not a contagious illness caused by a bacteria:

What We Weren't Taught About The Plague

And, if you didn’t read Copper Vortex’s expose of Louis Pasteur the previous times I linked it, here it is again so you can get a flavor of the type of animal experiments Pasteur favored, which became a standard in virology.

Louis Pasteur the Fraudster, Part 1