The coronavirus: using 'animal models' as proof of infection; another lie

There are a number of badly informed scientists who believe current “animal models” prove SARS-CoV-2 is infectious. They’re wrong. First of all, I’ve been demonstrating that no one has proved the virus exists. But putting that aside for the moment and assuming it does exist, for the purposes of argument only…what is an animal model? Researchers take a group of animals and inject them with a serum which contains a purported virus. Then the researchers see whether the animals develop symptoms and (supposed) markers of the disease in question.

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed) So far, I have only found evidence that researchers are using mice and, perhaps, another similar species for their model. Yet they claim, because of the mice’s reactions, that, yes, the virus is infectious. This is absurd. The whole point of animal models is: you work your way up the tree of species, from mice, rabbits, dogs, cats, and so on, until you arrive at the species which most closely resembles humans, which would be chimps. The reactions of chimps are what you’re looking for. After all, the entire enterprise is geared to estimate whether the virus will infect humans. Since injecting humans with a virus is verboten, you work with chimps. So, asserting that infecting mice is proof of anything is a gross lie. Any conventional scientist would know that. Another issue: quite often, you’ll find that the mice in these experiments have been genetically altered. Why? Why can’t researchers work with ordinary wild mice? Obviously, because they want to prep the mice in a way that would make them more vulnerable to viruses. Another absurdity. In that case, the researchers are not really working with animals at all. They’re working with artifacts modified in the lab.

---

Using a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 to prove the virus is infectious is a con. A farce

Using a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 to prove the virus is infectious is a con. A farce. Back in 1988, when I was writing my book, AIDS INC., I looked into HIV experiments using chimps. I spoke with the man who was monitoring all the facilities in the US where groups of these chimps were held. Keep in mind, this was four years after HIV had been announced as the cause of AIDS. So the chimps had been in cages for a while. Cut off from their companions and families, in a completely alien environment, imprisoned, isolated. These circumstances alone would have contributed to a grossly reduced state of immune-system capability. And yet… The chief monitor over all these chimp facilities told me that, thus far, none of the injections of HIV (assuming the virus actually exists) had caused any symptoms which could be aligned with the wide-ranging definition of AIDS. This utter failure deterred no mainstream AIDS scientist. In other words, if the animal model fails, ignore it. Claim the virus is infectious anyway. Welcome to big-time research. ---Oh, and one other thing. Newsflash: Chimps are not humans. ALL animal models are false. Other than that, the system is perfect. (The link to this article posted on my blog is here.)