Some health, freedom, and truth leaders seem to think that proponents of the “no-virus” position are belligerent and divisive. While I’m sure that there are divisive and belligerent people in the “no-virus” space (as there are in any space), I have to say that I completely disagree.

Again, there is no proof that strictly adheres to the scientific method or to logic that obligate intracellular parasites, “viruses,” exist or cause any sort of disease. This is not debatable. If you consider simulations, models, and logical fallacies as “proof,” that’s fine (you must think there’s proof of unicorns too). But in accordance with the scientific method and logic? No, not even close.

Is this a topic of contention? Yes, inherently so. Because on one side of the health freedom movement are those who oppose some/all vaccines while heavily promoting countless other pharmaceutical products and some measures surrounding so-called “viral pandemics” while asserting that this “virus” was made in a lab.

And on the other are those who’ve come to realize that virology and it’s claims are rooted in unproven, pseudoscientific presuppositions, and that everything built on top (vaccines, much of allopathic medicine, everything that’s happened the last 3 years for God’s sake) is questionable at best and completely fraudulent at worst.

Are we frustrated? Yes, maybe a little bit. Frustrated, at the least, that some of the top so-called leaders in the freedom space aren’t willing to broach this topic with their respective audiences, and instead shout from the rooftops “Lab made! Bioweapon!”

And as I stated in my recent article:

“within the context of germ hypothesis, which of the two has scarier implications for the future?: lab-made viruses funded by people with perceived nefarious intentions, shrouded in uncertainty and mystery, with greater lethal potential than their natural counterparts, or the one-in-gazillion chance natural virus that jumps from a bat to a pangolin to a human (is the pangolin still part of the story?) that rarely occurs across species? Again, neither of these are true whatsoever— both are completely unproven fantasies that make for great science-fiction movies. I believe “they” (whoever they are) are allowing gain of function to be discussed more frequently in mainstream conversations, and of course amongst the surface level alternative crowds where they’re carried by pseudo-celebrity alternative talking heads, to feint a controlled leak of the (completely false) “truth.” And all of the alternative talking heads and their followers shouted “see! Now the truth is out! The virus was made in a lab. Alas, we’ve solved the mystery of COVID.” 
But have we? Or are we just setting ourselves up for this nonsense to continue Ad Infinitum? And this time it’s even worse: it’s being paraded around by the 3-year-censored alternative pundits. And as the mainstream position continues to lose its popularity with the controlled demolition of the death-cult, pharmaceutical backed narrative, the alternative talking heads will rise in popularity, and those who’ve not resolved their consciousness of blindly outsourcing to anyone, regardless of whether they’re alternative or mainstream, will take the future bait hook-line-and-sinker.”

So again— topic of contention? Yes. Are we belligerent and divisive? No. Unless, that is, you consider requesting proof of positive claims, actual science that adheres to the scientific method, and “leaders” to do the job clearly stated in their respective mission statements divisive and belligerent.

And for those who think the “no-virus” position “isn’t a solution,” and are “disappointed” that I speak on it:

excuse me— what? If there is no virus, there is no need to be afraid of boogeymen particles, no need to be afraid that others will get you sick, and all past, present and future “health measures” are obsolete. And now, with this new understanding, we can begin to paint a more accurate picture and explore how health actually works (and yes, begin to scientifically explore the phenomenon of contagion).

Viruses are the body's natural reaction to toxins. The viral response such as phlegm etc is the body purging the toxins. Viruses are supposed to be inert protein strands that are somehow the toxic to humans, but this conclusion was reached because, when the body goes into immune response, scientists saw those proteins floating around and decided they were viruses. In fact, the proteins are part of the immune response to whatever toxin has built up too much.
Germ theory - the protein strands are a virus
Terrain theory - the proteins are part of the body's immune response to remove toxins.
This is why stopping symptoms such as coughs and phlegm is bad. You are stopping your body's natural process, thereby leaving traces of toxin that attack the body's cells.
PS contagiousness and transmission are a whole different issue

The green movement

Excellent research here

https://twitter.com/redicetv/status/1638798801967235073?s=46&t=NVFMfpz8cSQ4Bu-NwEK3hQ

This is the girl that was murdered by that fucking monster today in Nashville.

Her name was Hallie.

These demons are waking up a sleeping giant that they one day wished they didn’t piss off.

Top 3 search engine alternatives to Google:

1. yandex.com
2. search.brave.com
3. mojeek.com

Use at your own risk:

4. bing.com
5. duckduckgo.com
6. ecosia.org
7. startpage.com

ADL demands substack be censored and Twitter removes them days later. Not hard to see who controls Twitter.

Hey guys. Since becoming a dad I’ve become really passionate about helping others becoming embodied dads.
This video gives a short explanation as to what I mean, and I’ll also post a free ebook explaining more about what being an embodied dad means.