Germ Theory vs Terrain Theory / Pleomorphism / Béchamp, Rife, Naessens, Reich

Speaking about viruses that cannot be isolated the same way as bacteria, which leads some people to think that this is a proof that they do not exist... Most of bacteria from our intestines cannot be isolated either!

A typical human intestinal microbiota contains 100–1,000 bacterial species with tremendous compositional diversity between individuals, such that each individual’s microbiota is as unique as a fingerprint. Despite the taxonomic diversity, metagenomic sequencing has highlighted that a health-associated intestinal microbiome codes for highly conserved gene families and pathways associated with basic bacterial physiology and growth. However, many basic microbiota functions related to homeostasis, immune system development, digestion, pathogen resistance and microbiota inheritance have yet to be discovered. This formidable challenge to validate and decipher the functional attributes of the microbiota has been hindered because the majority of intestinal bacteria are widely considered to be ‘unculturable’ and have never been isolated in the laboratory.

www.nature.com

Culturing of ‘unculturable’ human microbiota reveals novel taxa and extensive sporulation - Nature

A novel approach is used to cultivate a substantial proportion of the human gut microbiota, representing an important step forward in characterizing the role of these bacteria in health and disease.
www.nature.com www.nature.com
Click to expand...

The large intestine is a complex microbial ecosystem harbouring more than 500 different bacterial species and around 75% of these remain uncultured (Eckburg et al. 2005; Flint 2006).

Click to expand...
 
if a virus is a living being that's a matter i think we won't answer soon

what we know is that viruses have patterns, if what creates this pattern is not easily visible, does it stop being a virus? how do whirlpools form? can you see or isolate the forces causing it? not sure if naming it something else would prevent someone from drowning..

their mode of action is to replicate infected cells in detriment of it's host resources, an infected cell being a cell with the aberrant behaviour, you could call it parasites, blobs, demons yet the markers are there, antibodies are there all following a pattern of sickness very real and measurable, maybe not as easily or accesible as one would like, maybe not in covid's case also if you"re trying to "isolate" it

meaning, it could well be a "keyhole" for the other millions of viruses in your gene pool(highly likely imho) and you'd never know unless you research deeply into how these things work from a point of improving your health rather than disproving a hypotesis

not saying it does not have value but when you make that your goal that's when things get out of track, something to remember for everyone every living day not just you
 
Thanks for the discussion. 2 cents. the multi/hyper dimensional aspect adds spice to the matter:-). Personally I read the finiteness of this 3d sts both in terms of limitations and launching pad. Even in such a let's say general and unspecialized version, it is quite obvious that we find ourselves in the midst of a war of conquest, where the various 3d 4d factions play simultaneously on different tables, with moves and countermoves and middlefingers. I caught the first wave covid. i'm of a certain age, and I've caught a lot of so-called viral stuff in my life. But right away, from the very first symptoms, i remember thinking this stuff is not "natural," especially because of the neurological implications. we know thanks to cs (and others) that this particular "virus" was destined to go under the radar, so it seems obvious to me that they had to come up with a fake test to detect it in the eyes of the public. by the way, it is a military lab product, so probably only the military has the proper instrumentation to work on it, assuming it exists. In any case, I'm mainly interested in the effects as well. If it is true that in the first wave we all or most of us caught it, even without realizing it, and if it is true that as pierre also well said in an old article on sott, it is the prefrontal cortex that is affected, I can pretty well identify why people later on completely lost their minds, and this I think also from an exclusively 3d sts and materialist point of view. Finally, I think that putting this to the 3d scrutiny is a good and right thing, while remaining aware that much of the betting on the gaming tables escapes us.
 
OK MI, your last posts are pretty full of contradictions. I think that this discussion can't progress much because what you are is angry at the lies, and as a consequence, you're dismissing everything that doesn't justify that anger. When in that state, you start "selecting and substituting data", ignoring some big details, etc. You are also saying that it's not about proving that viruses don't exist, yet in the next paragraph it is. It is about getting proof that they exist, yet it isn't. You're going in circles. Maybe re-read all the answers you got before continuing? Leave the government stupidities and malicious intent aside for a moment. That's another story, and we all agree there.
 
Last edited:
Oxajil said:
Quite a few problems with 'The Contagion Myth' as these researchers point out:



Apologies if this was posted already. It seems that Cowan and Fallon Morell have poorly researched the topic (either intentional or not) and seem to be quite limited in their thinking. I think it should be noted that if these authors are misrepresenting research studies, I'd be wary of their ability to research objectively and accurately and of any conclusions they formulate based on that 'research'. I haven't read the book, but I'd look into the papers and sources they refer to if you find their ideas interesting. FWIW.
Click to expand...
That's just the tip of the iceberg. Lanka, Cowan and Kaufman are cranks. Along with the whole 'New German School'. It's new age world salad that invites you to wishfully believe you need only not fear illness to avoid illness.

There's no easy way to say this, so I'll just say it. Obsession with this 'line of research' is akin to the onset of mental illness. You will end up giving yourself an 'intellectomy' if you don't extract yourself from this rabbit hole.
 
Over the past two years, I have done a little research into the "German New Medicine" model, and soon came to the conclusion that it can aptly be described as a type of ideology. They encourage followers to believe that they have THE answer for every health issue. Everything shall be viewed through the terrain theory, with any inconvenient facts sweeped under the rug. Perhaps the best way to get a genuine sense of a movement is to look at the effect it has on its adherents, which in this case is dogmatism and a denial of observable facts.

But transmissible contagious illness is part of objective reality, without question. Many of us here recently experienced this. It is simply irrefutable. We all experienced mostly the same symptoms, at a similar time, and recovered at a similar rate. How can anyone is their right mind claim that outbreaks of disease, presenting with exactly the same symptoms, at almost exactly the same time, is merely because of some toxic exposure or some collective psychological phenomena? This is a prime example of "coincidence theory" in action.

The ironic thing is that Lanka and co make valid points. It is clear that conventional virology has no clue what viruses actually are, how they function, or what their purpose is. But that is not really surprising, is it :huh:? Look at any other field of study... with a little digging, we can see that many "experts" in many fields also have things completely wrong. This is the case with virology, but also conventional medicine as a whole, psychology, climatology, history, archaeology, etc...

That said, "a broken clock is right twice a day" as the saying goes. These guys might not understand the fundamentals of viruses, but can still observe how they behave in living organisms. And what they have characterized appears to match with observable reality quite nicely, it seems. From a practical perspective, I can attest that if a person tests positive with high viral IgM antibodies on bloodwork, they usually respond positively to antivirals. Coincidence? Maybe, but probably not.

The terrain is obviously a very important part of maintaining health, and no one here disputes this. However, terrain and germ are not mutually exclusive. The problem I see is that people are being forced into one camp or the other, when it is absolutely unnecessary. Black and white thinking at its best.

If what the C's say about viruses is correct, then it doesn't surprise me that a virus might not conform to standard analytical measurements. Like others have mentioned earlier in this thread, there is good reason to assume that living tissues and cells behave very differently to tissues cultured in the laboratory.

Look at cells, for instance. Cells in the living system are embedded within a dense matrix of extracellular proteins and collagen fibers, all of which are bound tightly with water clusters. This setup can hold and transmit light energy and forms semiconducting circuit with piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties. There is abundant evidence that the actions of the cell are governed and directed by the local environment of the surrounding extracellular matrix. However, this has been so difficult to identify because experiments are performed on isolated tissues. If you remove the cell from this environment and isolate it, the cell behaves differently. The same could easily apply to viruses. When you remove them from the living system, they might cease to exert the same effects.
 
Yep, these guys are downright dangerous. Dr. Andrew Kaufmann for example flat-out refuses the use of antibiotics. This is crazy and potentially lethal.

To add to Keyhole's excellent post, here's my plead (again): can we please stop denying that contagion is real, and does happen? Again, I myself and many others have direct experience of this. Diseases can spread geographically. People did quarantine pre-science. Epidemiology is a thing. Etc.

It is at this point that the discussion gets into a flat-earth... terrain. The hardcore contagion deniers have all their bases covered, just like the flat-earthers:

People quarantined in the past? -> Must be superstition.
Diseases spreading in a geographic area? -> Must be some kind of toxic cloud, 5G tower, whatever...
Disease spread among groups? -> Must be in their heads.
People got sick in the past without 5G, toxins etc.? -> Must be hygiene.
You get a disease out of the blue that strikes you down after you visited some people who had the same thing the next day? -> ?? I'm sure there is some far-fetched theory about that.

Reminds me of the Darwinists: "Altruism clearly goes against your theory." -> Nah, back in the days, when tribes did tribey things, Colossus The Spear-Thrower figured out that he can get all the ladies if he behaves like a good guy, yada yada.

If it quacks like a duck...

Just as people demand "irrefutable proof of isolation and causality" (which is a non-starter to begin with) I demand that too of these "alternative" explanations for contagion. Not some speculation. Not some theory. Not some stories. But the direct, detailed process, proven by detailed studies, taking into account all other known cases for statistical purposes, historical records, and lab-traceable material influences, establishing 100% causality. Isolate it!
 
Niall said:
There's no easy way to say this, so I'll just say it. Obsession with this 'line of research' is akin to the onset of mental illness. You will end up giving yourself an 'intellectomy' if you don't extract yourself from this rabbit hole.
Click to expand...

It is a very important warning, and it might be literally true: I urge those who feel "sucked" into that sort of thing to read McGilchrist's book "The Matter With Things", the first few chapters in particular.

The thinking patterns at play here are literally resembling those of schizophrenic patients. Contrary to popular belief, these deluded people are not lacking in logical thinking, on the contrary: they rely exclusively on logic. So they will see a shadow in the bushes that looks like a face, and then infer that it could be a CIA agent spying on them. When you confront them with common sense, they think about it and come to the conclusion that you have no "irrefutable proof"... They cannot see the big picture, common sense based on genuine life experience, they don't have genuine intuition.

It's exactly the same mode of thought that those schizoid philosophers use when they question that the world exists, that anything is real, that truth exists, and conclude that we're all living in our heads, in a simulation etc. "Provide irrefutable proof that the table in front of me is real!" At some point, you can't. Skeptical arguments of this sort are nonsense, but not because they are not logical. You can always argue anything away using that sort of logic. But it's still a delusion.

The only remedy is to reconnect with your actual experience as opposed to theories, with your common sense intuition, with the realm of non-verbal, deep, loving perception.
 
I often think of the cs statement "don't embrace, unite." I think especially at this moment in history it is of utmost importance. We are indeed very fortunate (I try to see the glass half full :-)) . In the last two years much of what was sensed to be "true" has come to fruition. We have seen everything at work and in real time. From the insertion of "false timelines " to the intervention in genetics with the cession of sovereignty that normally belongs to the right hemisphere to external authority, to mind control, to the psychology of the masses to neurosemantics and the changing (or false updating) of history and meanings. I think this experience is priceless. We are well served I think, just at the level of knowledge. On the one hand it is a big experience of humility, and on the other hand we are experiencing in real time that any kind of mandate even at the level of knowledge is bankrupt. I am sorry that we end up accusing each other of insanity. It is not the kind of "don't embrace, unite" that I consider effective especially in a hostile environment. I personally look favorably, for example, at Montaigner's experiments on resonance (radiance). Again in my experience, I have always recorded a direct relationship between illness, soul, and needed change. More generally, I think it is a fine line on which we all balance. Falling, one way or the other, is a split second, so i think the focus to be maintained is balance.
 
fifty_five said:
Again in my experience, I have always recorded a direct relationship between illness, soul, and needed change. More generally, I think it is a fine line on which we all balance. Falling, one way or the other, is a split second, so i think the focus to be maintained is balance.
Click to expand...

Agreed. However, sometimes, when things get out of balance, you need to push in order to regain balance.
 
Niall said:
There's no easy way to say this, so I'll just say it. Obsession with this 'line of research' is akin to the onset of mental illness. You will end up giving yourself an 'intellectomy' if you don't extract yourself from this rabbit hole.
Click to expand...

I would expand the bold part to any research that appears to require an understanding that we are possibly incapable of in this reality - 'obsession' being the key word.

It's totally fine to ask questions, but when you end up with more questions than answers, and you spend a LOT of time looking into it, and you still have only questions and no answers, that's when it's time to say, "Well, it's interesting, but we simply don't know - yet."

Information field is a big one. If anyone can explain to me what the "information field" actually is, you get a cookie!

Or: What is a woman? A woman is an adult human female. DONE! Now, is there more to being a woman than that? Sure! But for the purposes of existing in 3d and not going crazy, a woman is an adult human female. As I've said before, ultra-lefties who refuse to answer that and other questions are not living in the here and now. It's like they're trying to force some kind of 4d thinking into 3d. In 4d there is gender fluidity (or so the theory goes). In 3d, there isn't. Oops!

The abstract part of that thinking is not itself a bad thing, but it literally drives them insane to the point where they are unable to apply common sense and simply live their lives and learn and grow.

Or electrons... Is electricity electrons flowing in conductors, or is it the electric field that 'carries the energy'? Or maybe even none of the above? While interesting to think about, at the end of the day when there's a power surge and stuff starts exploding, I don't really care. I just need to solve the practical 3d-level problems and carry on. The current accepted theory of electricity helps me to do that. I still keep Woo-Woo in mind (always), which often helps to solve problems because it forces me to think outside the box. But I never lose sight of the very nuts-and-bolts issues I'm trying to fix.

I love theorizing about darn near everything. On the other hand, what good is any of that if I'm ignoring very down-to-Earth needs in the here and now?

So: Learn to think outside the box, but remember that this reality is all about boxes, so don't get lost! 🧭
 
Thanks for the heads ups being too sucked in and becoming too obsessed with knowing every last detail of something, and especially something that (as Scottie just pointed out) is probably impossible for us 3D humans even to start to comprehend. I come to think of, for instance, how I'd like to know everything about UFO:s. It always bugs me how those images that people take are not crystal clear; maybe you could a bit tongue-in-cheek say that UFO:s are not 'isolated' either! :-D Some years ago I was very into researching UFO:s but at some point I realized that the semi-obsession wanting find out 'everything' about them wasn't good for me (plus that it isn't even possible!). Still, after a longer 'abstinence' from the topic, I find it occasionally fun to learn something new about it but I don't think I'll ever want to hit those thick books on the subject again. :-)

Having said that, I've learned some useful things following and participating in this discussion, so I don't think it has been in vain. :cool2:
 
In addition to the issue of narrow obsessiveness already developed, one can also mention the issue of attributing everything to a single cause. What causes illness? Infectious agents (microbes, bacteria, viruses, etc.) or terrain (genetics, environmental stress (chemical, radiations, electromagnetic effects, etc.), physiological (age, fatigue, diet, illness history, immune system, etc.), psychological)?
What if it is caused by both, to varying degrees and through some interdependence, and maybe to a certain degree their contributions and sub-contributions are also confounded by other factors, some of which being a little more "out-there" (hyperdimensional interference, mind-body effects, past lives, polymorphic resonance, karmic imperatives, etc.) or some unknown confounds?
Theories are attempts to describe or explain reality through simplifying models. Because of the complexity of the world, these models are always wrong to some extent, but some models are more useful than others under certain circumstances.
So in practice, what do these models tell us in the realm of health? Maybe a few heuristics like: take care of diet, avoid poisons and exposition to dangerous stressors as much as possible, avoid infectious agents as much as possible, allow exposure to benign infectious agents when the immune system is not compromised, take care of your mental state, sleep well, heal trauma, exercise body and mind, help immune system when needed, etc. A theory or model that pretends to explain everything with a single cause is almost always a huge red flag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom