Are you also convinced by the "viruses don't exist" arguments?
I think if you examine germ theory & virology critically you're likely to conclude there is no possible benefit from vaccination
(and thus no reason to take or recommend them, regardless of any safety study)
There are still things I need to reconcile regarding this, but I do now lean into the idea that viruses don't exist. The claim that something isn't alive but is able to replicate via a host that sounds sci-fi to me, then of course there is the whole cell cultures used to proof viral material...
I am not convinced that terrain theory makes sense without germ theory, I think it's some mix of the two. Things spread in a way that is far too coincidental for germ theory & virology to not have some validity. But I do understand & agree that there is a lot to question about virology beyond just the adjuvants in vaccines. Some vaccines do actually work to protect against the viruses they are designed to protect us from though, they just aren't worth the long term health consequences. The body doesn't care about dead viruses, so you have to inject something with it that is worse than any virus in order to initiate an immune response.
Though arguably the very idea of a "dead virus" does kinda go against what they teach to begin with
Are you familiar with the Spanish Flu experiments?
Healthy volunteers spent time in a Spanish Flu ward and none took sick
Yeah, there are lots of interesting cases where things don't pass from one person to another, but I think how often they do is more instructive. We are surrounded by germs all the time & it is generally the case that things don't get us most of the time. But a cold just went through a number of people at my grandfather's assisted living facility & then my parents who visit him every day got it, & then I got it from them even though I haven't been to see my grandad in a few weeks. So it just kinda makes sense that things are spreading through interaction of some sort, even if succeptibility differs from person to person.
Ivermectin which has immediately knocked out syptoms for some things, did very little this time. Which makes me think the explanation about how it prevents replication or maybe the idea of replication itself is nonsense. It does something for some things, so there must be different mechanisms of infection. This one seemed completely isolated to my sinuses & upper respiratory system. My throat hurt & then my nose ran & then for a day or so all of the sinus cavities in my face seemed to hurt, even my ears. But it hasn't really caused much of a reaction from the rest of my body.
The idea that A caught something from B is a theory
What is actually observed is clusters of illness
It could also be that you were all exposed to some toxin or shared some deficiency
Imagine some nearby field was spraying pesticides and you were all poisoned - it would look like you all got sick around the same time
But that doesn't make sense in this scenario. My grandad is on the other side of a larger city, my parents & I don't eat the same things or even do a lot of the same things. If everyone in our neighborhood got sick then it might make sense that it was something in the environment, but if they then get people in other parts of the town sick how are they spreading the toxin? With polio it was clear that the lead arsenic pesticides were on the food & you can track that the "infections" spread with the distribution of the food.
I had a situation where I attended a kid's bday party & the mom & kids had been sick earlier in the week, I stayed at their house the night before the party, the dad got sick the day of & literally had to miss the party, I am pretty sure around the time everyone started eating I had a fever & chills but I seemed to be over it in about an hour. Everyone else ate cookies & cake & they all had 24-48hrs of puking & diarrhea in the week following the party. But it wasn't caused by the cookies or cake because they came from outside the house & the same illness was already present in other people earlier in the week. And I think I was over it quicker because sugar (among other things) feeds bugs & weakens us, & I was the only one who didn't eat any sugar the whole time.
If you rule out any toxin exposure, the germ spread of disease is still a theory
In fact, I should correct myself - it is not even a theory, it is merely a hypothesis
To upgrade to a theory you would need to present (or generate anew) some body of experimental evidence supporting it
I don't claim to know the specific cause of every illness
I just know that many experiments have disproven the germ hypothesis (eg Koch's own cholera experiments)
