Whatever the number of times I read and re-read the sentence you quoted, I don't manage to read that "viruses don't exist".
Explained the way you did, with more context, it could be read as you did. And taking into account his other writings on the weticco virus, of course. But without it, as I wrote,
Unless I'm not understanding it well, it could be interpreted as "viruses don't exist".
Just that paragraph I quoted.
"Covid-19 [Sars-CoV-2] is a field phenomenon, which is to say
it doesn’t exist as an isolated entity that independently exists on its own, walled off from the environment, but rather, it exists in relation to and as an expression of the field in which it arises. When we get right down to it, the boundary between where the virus ends and the world begins becomes indistinguishable."
That it does not only exist on its own as materialistic state. It does not mean to me that it does not exist at all.
Ok. But that's not how it reads above to me. Maybe I'm too dense! But as far as I understand, even science isn't that sure that viruses don't exist "independently".