🚀 go-pugleaf

UNITE! Info #256en: 2/2 Another tool against the "bird flu" scam
[Posted: 11.04.2006]

[Continued from part 1/2]


[This translated article is also at:
http://rolf-martens.com/otherspubs/
060301_lanka_no_diseasecausing_viruses.html]

-------------------------------------------------------------

Newsletter klein-klein-verlag, 01.03.2006
There are no diseasecausing viruses

[Translation from the German by Rolf Martens, 08.04.2006]

[http://www.klein-klein-verlag.de/

http://klein-klein-verlag.de/pdf/
Es%20gibt%20keine%20Viren.pdf]

-------------------------------------------------------------


ARE THERE AND CAN THERE BE
DISEASECAUSING VIRUSES?

Dr Stefan Lanka


-------------------------------------------------------------

Here's an article which makes it possible for every layman to
check on whether or not a publication contains proof of the
existence of a virus:

-------------------------------------------------------------


Viruses are defined as small objects which are produced in a
cell, which can leave the cell and the organism and can enter
a cell again, in which they can again be multiplied.

Those objects which are called viruses consist of a coat of
proteins and contain a piece of nucleic acid.

The nucleic acid of the actually existing viruses consists of
double-stranded, circularly closed DNA.

In the case of the actually existing viruses, never have
diseasecausing properties been observed; on the contrary.

Anyone who takes note of the research results of Dr Hamer,
which are scientific and thus possible to check on and to
reproduce, will realize that there cannot be any disease-
causing viruses.

Anyone who takes note of the results of evolutionary biology
and matrices research, which are scientific and thus possible
to check on and to reproduce, will realize that there in more
complex organisms, such as humans, animals and plants, cannot
be any objects which you could characterize as viruses.

If you maintain that a virus exists, you must also publish
the proof of this in a scientific publication and describe
and document all the steps undertaken for this proof to be
obtained.

Only when statements in the form of publications are possible
to check on and the results described are possible to repro-
duce can you speak of science. Everything else is not
science.

A publication about a proof of the existence of a virus of
course must contain the photos of the isolated viruses and
those of the viruses which are in the body or in the bodily
fluids. This a layman can check on in a very simple manner.

In a virus proof, the biochemical characterization of the
proteins and the nucleic acid of the virus is particularly
important. The description of a biochemical characterization
of the proteins and the nucleic acid of a virus every layman
can follow.

Whether a typical stripe pattern is reproduced and is present
as documentation of the characterization of the proteins and
the nucleic acid in the corresponding publication, this every
layman can check on EASILY and AT ONCE too.

There are three easy possibilities for a layman to check on
statements about the existence of a virus.


1. THE PHOTO OF AN ISOLATED VIRUS:

The photo of the isolated virus is the simplest thing in the
whole job of virus isolation. It takes 20 minutes for the
photo to be taken, after the virus has been isolated.

To the photo there of course belongs an accurate description
of how and by what steps the virus was isolated.

Naturally, to this there also belongs my being able to pre-
sent a photo of the virus in the organism, and this of course
must have the same appearance and the same structures as that
virus which I isolated. Here too of course is necessary also
a description of how that photo came about.

The descriptions must be so clear and made in such detail
that anyone can repeat the steps in this process and also
carry it out him/herself.

To note concerning 1.:

In the entire scientific literature, there is no photo of a
purportedly diseasecausing virus which is maintained to be a
photo of an isolated virus!

Also there is not a single photo of a purportedly disease-
causing virus which is maintained to be a photo of a virus
supposedly existing in the organism, in the blood, in the
spittle or in any other bodily fluid.


2. THE PROTEINS OF THE VIRUS:

The most important thing in the isolating of a virus is the
biochemical characterization of its component parts. How else
will you be able later to maintain that a particular protein
or a particular nucleic acid originates from a virus? How,
then, can later an indirect test work, if the proteins and
nucleic acids have never been isolated and investigated.

The proteins are separated from each other, in accordance
with their respective lengths, by means of a process called
gel electrophoresis, and are then given colouring. There
arises a stripe pattern which provides information about how
many different kinds of proteins are included in the con-
struction of the virus and what different sizes they have.

The process of separating the proteins of the virus according
to their lengths is described in detail, and the stripe pat-
tern is photographed and published. The proteins can then be
investigated, even as to their respective individual composi-
tion, in further experiments.

To note concerning 2.:

Not in one single publication is there a photo of the stripe
pattern of such proteins, separated from each other with a
gel electrophoresis process, which would be included in the
construction of a purportedly diseasecausing virus.

In those publications which maintain that diseasecausing
viruses exist, nowhere does there appear any documentation
whatsoever of a biochemical characterization of proteins from
an isolated virus.


3. THE NUCLEIC ACID OF THE VIRUS:

The nucleic acid of the virus, which has been separated from
the proteins with a simple process, is separated by means of
a process called gel electrophoresis, in accordance with the
acid's length, and is then given colouring. On the gel, a
stripe becomes visible. Nucleic acids of known lengths, which
have been separated in parallel to the nucleic acid of the
virus, provide by comparison a first hint of the length of
that isolated nucleic acid.

For further characterization of the nucleic acid of the
virus, it is cut up biochemically and the resulting parts
again separated by means of gel electrophoresis. This pro-
duces a specific stripe pattern, which has become known also
to the general public as that seen in the so-called genetic
fingerprint.

In further investigations, the more precise composition of
the nucleic acid can be investigated.

The results of these experiments of course are photographed
and published. Obviously you need proof for your statements
about how long is that nucleic acid which originates from the
virus and about what are its component parts.

The techniques mentioned here are so simple that unprepared
groups of schoolboys and schoolgirls and of journalists have
managed, guided only by the written instructions in the pub-
lications, independently and in the course of two afternoons
to isolate that virus which I isolated, to characterize it
biochemically (as described above) and to document the re-
sults.

(Including the electron microscope photographs of the iso-
lated viruses. The photographing of viruses in an organism
takes appr. 2-3 days, since the cells must be dehydrated and
chemically fixed before they are cut into waferthin slices,
which is a precondition for your seeing anything in them at
all.)

To note concerning 3.:

There is in no publication a documentation of a separation of
a nucleic acid about which it is maintained that it origi-
nates from a diseasecausing virus.

Also, there is in none of those publications which maintains
that diseasecausing viruses exist that typical stripe pat-
tern, resulting from a biochemical separation, which has be-
come known also to a broader public as that seen in the so-
called genetic fingerprint.


SUMMARY:

1.a) On the basis of a photo claimed to show a supposedly
isolated virus, any layman can check on whether something at
all has been isolated here or no: If there in that photo,
which is maintained to show an isolated virus, are parts
which differ in size, then it can be seen at once that this
is an untruth, since isolated viruses are all equally large.

It is only from the invention of the idea of an Ebola virus
on that, as is the case now with H5N1, there have been claims
about there existing sausage-shaped viruses. With H5N1 of
course, things are even merrier, since here there are circu-
lating the most different photos - all outside of scientific
publications - some of which show the purported virus as a
sausage, others showing it as an unshapely blister.

1.b) Photographs of viruses, maintained to be diseasecausing,
in a human or an animal or in a bodily fluid from any such -
in which of course such a virus is supposed to multiply and
in which it supposedly exists in vast quantities - do not
exist! This every layman can check on: Is there, or is there
not, a photo of a virus claimed to be diseasecausing, about
which it is maintained that it is found in a human or in a
bodily fluid?

All photographs of viruses which are maintained to be dis-
easecausing are photographs of quite normal component parts
of cells or of artificially produced particles. In all
scientific publications which claim that photos contained in
them are photos of diseasecausing viruses, this even is
described. Every layman who understands English can check on
this: By reading!

2.) Every layman can check on, whether in any publication
whatsoever, in which the existence of a diseasecausing virus
is maintained, the biochemical characterization of proteins
of the purported virus is described or documented. Such a
documentation and description does not exist. When proteins
with this or that property are mentioned, these never appear
directly but purportedly are being proved "indirectly".

To prove with indirect methods (for instance so-called anti-
bodies) the existence of proteins, which have earlier never
been directly proved to exist, is not possible.

The trick is easy to see through:

Proteins from the blood (globulins) simply are maintained to
be antibodies. Depending on laboratory conditions, globulins
will either combine or will not combine with other substan-
ces. If there is combining, then it is maintained that an
indirect existence proof has been obtained. This is a histo-
ric swindle with dramatic consequences.

3. Every layman can check on whether there concerning a virus
which is claimed to exist is a publication in which the bio-
chemical characterization of the nucleic acid of the virus is
described and documented. In the case of the purportedly
diseasecausing viruses, there is no such publication.

This automatically means that the so-called indirect methods
for proving the existence of a nucleic acid in the case of
the viruses claimed to be diseasecausing are only proving the
existence of such nucleic acids which were already in the
organism in beforehand. That's how simple this is!

In use today are the so-called nucleic-acid multiplication
method PCR.  That method makes sense only if there is no more
than very small amounts of nucleic acid present. If there
were just a few thousand viruses present, then there would
have been no need first very laboriously to multiply nucleic
acid in order then to say, here is the nucleic acid of the
virus.

With the indirect PCR method of proof, which today is being
claimed to constitute a direct virus proof method, arbitrary
manipulation can be undertaken: Depending on what kind of
nucleic acid you use, whether DNA or RNA as source from which
to proceed, you can cause people, as is being done in the HIV
PCR test, to test arbitrarily either "positive" or "nega-
tive".

The H5N1 PCR test now in use is testing every animal and
every human positive, because that nucleic acid which is
multiplied in it and which is maintained to be specific for
H5N1 is found in every animal and every human. Thus it came
about too that today the cat at the island of R�gen was
tested "positive".

Thus it in the next few days, as I assume, will also come
about that the first human, at R�gen or on the shore of Lake
Constance - someone who, through retardation of the essential
and vital neuramidase enzymes in his or her body by means of
Tamiflu dispensing, has been poisoned in advance - will be
tested "H5N1 positive", so that the pandemic plan and the
predictions are fulfilled.


-------------------------------------------------------------

To the forum Agenda-Leben:


-------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. I shall be happy to put my degree and doctoral disserta-
tion, written in German, and my English-language publications
about my virus discovery, isolation and characterization at
the disposal of any dedicated forum member who would like to
scan them in here in order to make them available in the
forum. I hope that by this the stealing of time and causing
of confusion by certain people here in the forum, who have
played at being critical and cynical, might finally come to
an end.

Of course you can also obtain my degree and doctoral disser-
tation via the inter-library loan service of the Konstanz
university library.


[END of the translation of the article by Stefan Lanka]


_____________________

Message posted by:
Rolf Martens
Malm�, Sweden
Phone and fax:
+46 - 40 - 124832;
rolf.martens@comhem.se
www.rolf-martens.com
______________________