Or maybe as “a source familiar with the matter” you happen to know of any properly documented cases of virus isolation and proof of its contagiousness? Would be interesting to see if you know of any.
Discussion
This is a link to a number of papers, most of which are behind a paywall. But from what I can see, they did not perform an appropriate scientific isolation (according to the dictionary definition of the word isolate) and did not conduct experiments proving the contagiousness of the supposed virus (which cannot be done without first actually preforming isolation and characterising the “viral” particle). I am not even talking about the complete lack of any controls preformed. If you want, you can select a specific paper and we can discuss it further in detail.
OK that's fine, I had assumed you meant isolation from a laymans perspective because this is the actual virus vs isolation which is simply identifying the immune reaction. Here is measles isolation in mice.
I am not sure you understand the term isolation in relation to so called virology. From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: “to isolate is to separate from another substance so as to obtain pure or in a free state”. So they have to collect samples of bodily fluids from supposedly infected persons, then using various techniques separate the viral particle from all other cellular waste in the samples. Then when it becomes the only thing left in the sample in its purest form, it needs to be properly characterised. And finally it has to be scientifically proven to be contagious which must include conducting proper control experiments.
The last paper you sent does nothing of the sorts. It just takes some supposed viral samples (who knows how they were originally obtained) from 3 different sources and basically just injects them straight to mice brain. Which personally I think is completely pointless animal cruelty. What is interesting, the authors themselves write that they could not make any mice sick by natural means of propagation, only with brain injections. Duh 🤦♂️
You said scientific isolation. That 2nd link literally refers to isolation. If you're going back to the dictionary definition, how exactly do we have the genomic sequence of the virus without getting it in its "pure or free state"? Here is measles under the microscope. You are attempting to use weasel words to cope.
I said “scientific” isolation in a sense that it should be confirmed by proper control experiments. Did you even read the 2nd link? It literally lacks all the necessary steps and just takes some random samples of unknown origin. It says so itself, it is not like I just randomly come up with all of this.
> how exactly do we have the genomic sequence of the virus without getting it in its “pure or free state”?
Now, that’s a very good question. You are starting to dig in the right direction with it. The reality is that those sequences are half characterisations of a genetic soup consisting of hundreds if not more random particles and other cellular waste, and half just purely theoretical generations of a specific computer software used by virologists.
Regarding the photo of the supposed measles “virus” that you just sent, what is the source with all the documented processes conducted to make that image? Again, what is the proof that the pictured particle is contagious in any way? But even just by looking at it you can see there is some other genetic material around it in the sample 🤷♂️
Unknown origin? They bred mice, gave them measles intranasally, the mice developed all of the symptoms of measles and then the scientists isolated the virus in the lung tissue of the mice.
So are you also throwing out the field of genetic sequencing? The human genome has been sequenced as well, as has the neanderthal genome, resulting in a nobel prize.
Source is the CDC for the photo
https://phil.cdc.gov/details.aspx?pid=10707
Some links to explain how TEM works is on this page:
https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/105125
The photo is not supposed to show the virus in isolation, it is to demonstrate that we have the ability to identify the specific virus as a distinct entity. You can create as many hurdles as you like, but they will continue to be cope. You use this cope to "prove" your theory with no evidence that something else causes measles infections.
Remember evidence of issues with certain supposed viruses does not equal evidence that all viruses do not exist.
> Unknown origin?
Yes, they only say that “CAM/RBH strain and the wild-type wtF strain were kindly supplied by S. Niewiesk, Würzburg, Germany. The wild-type Chicago-1 strain was kindly supplied by D. Griffin, Baltimore, Md.” without any links to further information about how those supposed strains were originally isolated and their pathogenicity proven.
> gave them measles intranasally, the mice developed all of the symptoms of measles
They only say “natural respiratory route has a limited propagation”, which in my guess means that they were unsuccessful in propagating the supposed virus naturally. As for the brain injections they say that half of the mice died after they *injected* supposed viral sample coupled with a buffer solution *straight to their brain*. Duh. Obviously, they did not perform any controls of injecting only buffer solution to the brain, because it would show the same results as the supposed virus.
> then the scientists isolated the virus in the lung tissue of the mice
This is blatantly not true. They never did isolation, only did meaningless PCR sequencing.
Genetic sequencing is a separate large topic, but it also has a lot of problems. Regarding PCR testing used by virologists to determine viral infections, it is not a proper way to use this technology whatsoever. The creator of PCR, Kary Mullis (Nobel Prize winner if that matters to you) said it himself multiple times. And it definitely does not constitute in any way a proper substitute for actual isolation.
As expected the photo that you provided comes with the complete lack of any documentation regarding it. For all we know it can show a particle from a freshly created turd by the scientists that made the photo. It is absurd to use it in any serious manner whatsoever.
> The photo is not supposed to show the virus in isolation, it is to demonstrate that we have the ability to identify the specific virus as a distinct entity.
This is a complete nonsense. You cannot prove the existence of a virus (or identify it), without isolating it and properly proving that it is contagious. This is just getting silly, some random photo of some random particle is not a proof of anything. This is elementary school level logic, I don’t know how any grown man could argue otherwise in good faith.
It seems to me that the only one coping is yourself, and the only ones weaseling words are the supposed virologists who somehow manage to completely change definition of simple words and totally avoid doing any proper control experiments (which is unheard of in real science).
It is not me trying to prove some theory. It is all the people claiming that some microscopic independent particles exist that are able to make anyone sick. And they have never properly done it even a single time throughout the whole history. All the field of virology is just one gigantic fraudulent cope.
IDK
But I do know there's some very interesting evidence from the early years of vaccination
For example smallpox got worse in the Philippines during USA occupation amid forced vaccinations, with the worst outbreaks in the most heavily vaccinated areas