Common sense must prevail. You inject a "little" bit of the disease, you then can develop the symptoms of said disease. Not only that, but all throughout history, the CDC has recorded outbreaks among mainly the vaccinated. Did you know though, that, if you develop the disease within 14 days post vaccination, you are recorded as unvaccinated because they claim it has not protected you yet? Did you also know that if you develop the disease before completing the series of shots as recommended by the CDC, you are considered unvaccinated? Some of these are spread out over years...
DawnC raises a critical point that, if understood by parents, they would be less likely to subject their children to vaccines. It takes about 2 weeks for the immune system to mount a full response to what was injected, so they are jabbed but "unvaccinated" during that time. Here's the critical point: The proteins that are injected don't just float around in the bloodstream waiting for antibodies to be built. They are biologically active and will attach to cellular receptors on blood vessel walls and the myelin on nerve tissue. This causes an inflammatory immune response resulting in various vascular and neurological adverse reactions that can be serious and permanent. All in trying to prevent the temporary symptoms of mild childhood illnesses that can be easily managed.
Cool story, but live attenuated vaccines, like subunit vaccines, exhibit distinct cell tropism based on biological mechanisms, host interactions and delivery vehicles. Measles vaccine INFECTS RESPIRATORY EPITHELIUM, neurons and immune cells, mimicking wild-type infection to build immunity.
Please remind us how "bloodstream vaccines don't work for respiratory viruses." Also, something about "they said it would stay in the arm."
Yes, the CDC designated those who received an injection of the product fraudulently labeled as a "COVID-19 Vaccine" as "unvaccinated"' for 14 days after they were injected with it. To the best of my knowledge, this was not applied to any other vaccine.
Anthony Colpo's substack covered this and it was shocking. In the Pfizer trial, about 20K were in the Covid 19 vaccine tx arm and 20K were in the placebo. They each got 2 injections 3 weeks apart but while 60 subjects didn't show up for their 2nd placebo shot, over 220 subjects didn't show up for their 2nd Covid shot and these groups were dropped out of the analysis and nobody investigated if any of these people had been harmed by their tx. Obviously if nearly 4 times more subjects didn't show up after their active treatment vs the placebo tx, the suspicion is that something went wrong with the Covid vaccine subjects. Also Pfizer would not ascribe any death or side effect of a subject to the vaccine unless both shots had been taken; in other words if a client died a few hours after their Covid shot, Pfizer claimed it was not due to the "treatment" since the "treatment" consisted of 2 shots!!!
Thanks for the additional detail on the 'games' Pfizer played in how data was collected & presented on it's "COVID-19 Vaccine". Clearly, these are scientifically unsound practices, which also appear to be evidence that those making decisions for Pfizer were actively hiding evidence of harms caused by their product.
It is my understanding that efforts to hide wrongdoing or harm caused is generally considered strong evidence of a crime- or the perpetrator(s) wouldn't work so hard - playing all those games - to sweep the evidence that the product being tested was harmful.
Dr. Aseem Malhotra, and others, including the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, have been pointing out the deep flaws in medical studies, how the data is analyzed - as in the example you shared - and how it is reported to government agencies and in peer-reviewed journals.
Conflicts of interest, like the Pfizer trial of the Covid shots, are overlooked by the FDA, which allows corporations to design & conduct or pay another company to conduct trials of their products- and to decide which data to give the FDA. The FDA does not require companies like Pfizer to hand over all the raw data on the trials, but only the data the want to share.
It's no wonder that so many FDA approved drugs are later recalled, after the harms they cause can no longer be ignored.
Almost every contention in your comment is incorrect.
FDA requires full access to clinical trial data from companies like Pfizer before any approval or authorization decision. Legally required to provide all clinical trial data, not just what it "wants to share" - for FDA review.
Under US law, when a company submits a drug or vaccine application for EUA or full approval, the FDA requires:
Full clinical study reports (CSRs)
All raw datasets supporting safety and efficacy claims
Protocols and amendments
Investigator brochures
Individual Case Report Forms for every single serious adverse event.
Detailed, prospective statistical analysis plans
This means that Pfizer cannot selectively share data; it must provide comprehensive documentation covering all trial arms and all subjects.
The FDA also inspects a subset of clinical trial sites, comparing raw patient records with reported data.
Likewise, the comment you were responding to, and that whole blurb about dropped data. The truthful kernel there, is that subjects that subjects were dropped from some EFFICACY analyses if they had not received both doses.
Every randomized subject is included in the SAFETY database and analyses.
How is it a conflict of interest for Pfizer to study their own product in development?
I would not at all be surprised if the contents of the MMR have changed??? Giving an MMR that is causing an epidemic would only fair in their favor giving so many are losing trust in big pharma so they stir up some fear porn to put folks back on the "right track."
I think it is important to include the following, especially the finding that during the year of the 2014 Disneyland measles outbreak, 38% of the measles cases which were sequenced in California were found to be caused by the vaccine itself.
Rapid Identification of Measles Virus Vaccine Genotype by Real-Time PCR
"Since approximately 5% of recipients of measles virus-containing vaccine experience rash and fever which may be indistinguishable from measles (9), it is very important to identify vaccine reactions to avoid unnecessary isolation of the patient, as well as the need for contact tracing and other labor-intensive public health interventions."
"During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccines. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences [38%]."
Measles Outbreak with Unique Virus Genotyping, Ontario, Canada, 2015
"In one study of a measles outbreak in Ontario, Canada in 2015, health officials found that only 17 of 36 confirmed measles-positive cases were “wild type”– likely imported from abroad. Gene sequencing revealed that sixteen of the rest of the confirmed cases were from vaccine measles strain. Another two cases were thrown out before gene sequencing because they were from recently vaccinated individuals and assumed to be “vaccine-associated.”"
«There are 𝗻𝗼 𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗿-𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀 that confirm the virus in the measles vaccine is less infectious or replicates less in humans than the wild-type virus found in nature, meaning 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘴 for claiming the vaccine strain poses a lower transmission risk to the unvaccinated.»
No. The media 'fear porn' about "deadly measles outbreaks!" is the clue. When the first measles vaccine was introduced, around 1963, physician were outraged that the research and money spent developing the vaccine was wasted on "a trivial childhood disease". With almost no exceptions, the only children who died "of" measles - or lived in cities without clean water and with sewage running in the streets - or were severely malnourished.
People who get an actual case of measles, or mumps or rubella, are immune for life. People who get the vaccines do not have lifetime immunity.
Thx 4 sharing. The lifetime immunity issue becomes a generational problem since vaxxed mothers eventually lose immunity they could have otherwise have passed on to future generations for a childhood illness once shared with brothers, sisters & friends, but from which we all survived.
Absolutely! The other key factor is breastfeeding.
The "passive immunity" an infant receives from the antibodies in the colostrum, or first milk, is a major factor in protecting the child during the early part of it life, when it would be more vulnerable to illnesses like measles. Mothers who have had measles, mumps, and rubella produce protective immune factors in their milk that protect their offspring. Mothers who have been vaccinated can not.
Discouraging women from feeding their babies naturally was one of the most insidious things ever done to to the generations born since the middle of the last century.
Another key factor is the needless injection of foreign substances into babies within hours of their birth. Injecting anything into the body produces "an immune response" - which is not necessarily protective against anything. Repeated injections jolt the immune system, over and over. Could this be a contributing factor to the sharp increase in auto-immune issues? If the immune system is regularly activated by non-threats, like peanuts- or attacking the body itself- can it effectively protect against actual diseases?
Normal babies do not need Vit K shots, nor vaccines allegedly designed to protect them from a disease transmitted through sex or sharing needles with someone infected with Hepatitis B - both given to almost every infant born in hospitals in the U.S. within hours of birth.
We know the Vit K shots are unnecessary, because if they were, none of us would be here. These shots contain other substances, not just Vit K. And we may want to ask ourselves if it makes sense to routinely inject nutrition, instead of ingesting it.
Essentially all expectant mothers in the U.S. are screened for hepatitis B. There is no justification for vaccinating newborns for a disease they will not be exposed to. The immunity it is said to last only about 10 years. Some claim it could protect infants who need a blood transfusion in an emergency, but isn't blood screened for diseases like this?
More 'Vaccine Facts' with Dr. Paul Thomas,including references:
Your instincts are right- in that those manipulating us for power & profit want to keep us 'off balance', unsure, and stressed out. Which depresses our immune systems. Which helps drive up demand for "vaccines", an other drugs.
But, 'Knowledge is power.'
So I try to share what I have learned, in case it might help someone else.
I guess you could look at onset of measles cases and their timing in relation to vaccination and when and why there was an uptick in vaccination numbers.
Did the vaccinations jump in response to the measles outbreak or did it occur the other way around as you seem to imply? You have presented no data to support your chronological thesis that this is what has occurred in Texas and New Mexico.
You have cunningly suggested that 2+2 does in fact equal 5 because they are all numbers.
The Question about Viruses, Covid-19 etc.? Do they even exist, and if Yes? This post contains also an article on how they make you infertile and poison you with food and drinks in addition to the vaccines. Their goal is the 90% depopulation of the earth and the establishment of their jewish-satanic NWO, according to Talmudic Teaching https://mile7bar.substack.com/p/the-question-about-viruses-covid
Jon, before you posit "gain of function" measles viruses making people sick from various pox conditions, should you not find proof of existence of measles "virus"?
There is none. Stefan Lanka PhD of Germany first exposed to the world the lack of proof for a measles "virus" in 2016, after he was compelled to demonstrate this in court. All five "court virology experts" had to agree that the studies presented to the court by a medical doctor DID NOT prove the existence of any such virus. Lanka won the court case.
In a nutshell, here is the problem with measles virus "proof". They can never find a horde of identical "virus looking" particles in fluids or tissues of a sick person. They see nothing noteworthy to distinguish a sample form a sick versus well person through electron microscope. So they cannot find viruses, gather and isolate them. They must do this, however, in order to prove or characterize anything about an alleged measles "virus" (or any other "virus").
Instead of tossing away bad thinking, they look for "indireect (circumstantial) evidence" of "virus infection". They make a concoction of artifical cell culture, usually with monkey kidney cells, infused with antibiotics, antifungals, chemical dyes, serum from cattle and horses, all based in a liquid medium thata provides starvation-level nourishment. When they inoculate the artifical cell culture which contains thousands of unidentified substances, because unpurified, with fluids or snot or urine from a sick "infected" person, also unpurified, they wait for a week. About 1/3 of the time they see cells dying and decomposing, which they announce as proof of viral infection.
Aside from the fact this does not prove anything about unseen and unproven viruses being present. there is a more obvious hurdle. The same cell culture NOT INOCULATED with so-called infectious stuff ALSO yields the "cytopathic effect" seen sometimes in the "infected culture".
This finding of cytopathic effect in uninoculated culture has been observed and reported in journals by virus enthusiasts in every decade starting from the forties thru today! In the last 18 months, Jamie Andrews of UK has demonstrated "non-infected" cell lines (never inoculated) produced fully as many dying cells as in the so-called infected culture. 94 times!
The method is proven false. But this is the method used to sell the idea of measles viruses (and all other so-called viruses, none of which ahs ever been isolated).
With no virus in nature, the calim that mad scientists can hype up more infectious danger is superstition. They probably imagine that is what they are engaged in doing, but these are "thinkers" not troubled by the lack of proof or evidence for virus existence in nature.
Of course, people get sick with pox conditions, of which there are many varieties, often indistinguishable clinically. Injecting people with poisonous substances taken from cell cultures containing sick fluids of pox conditions...this is hardly to be recommended as a sound health promoting procedure.
But lose the "mad scientists are unleashing virus hell" story. It's not true.
Common sense must prevail. You inject a "little" bit of the disease, you then can develop the symptoms of said disease. Not only that, but all throughout history, the CDC has recorded outbreaks among mainly the vaccinated. Did you know though, that, if you develop the disease within 14 days post vaccination, you are recorded as unvaccinated because they claim it has not protected you yet? Did you also know that if you develop the disease before completing the series of shots as recommended by the CDC, you are considered unvaccinated? Some of these are spread out over years...
DawnC raises a critical point that, if understood by parents, they would be less likely to subject their children to vaccines. It takes about 2 weeks for the immune system to mount a full response to what was injected, so they are jabbed but "unvaccinated" during that time. Here's the critical point: The proteins that are injected don't just float around in the bloodstream waiting for antibodies to be built. They are biologically active and will attach to cellular receptors on blood vessel walls and the myelin on nerve tissue. This causes an inflammatory immune response resulting in various vascular and neurological adverse reactions that can be serious and permanent. All in trying to prevent the temporary symptoms of mild childhood illnesses that can be easily managed.
Cool story, but live attenuated vaccines, like subunit vaccines, exhibit distinct cell tropism based on biological mechanisms, host interactions and delivery vehicles. Measles vaccine INFECTS RESPIRATORY EPITHELIUM, neurons and immune cells, mimicking wild-type infection to build immunity.
Please remind us how "bloodstream vaccines don't work for respiratory viruses." Also, something about "they said it would stay in the arm."
Yes, the CDC designated those who received an injection of the product fraudulently labeled as a "COVID-19 Vaccine" as "unvaccinated"' for 14 days after they were injected with it. To the best of my knowledge, this was not applied to any other vaccine.
The CDC has done it with every vaccine for years.
Good to know. I'll look that up.
Anthony Colpo's substack covered this and it was shocking. In the Pfizer trial, about 20K were in the Covid 19 vaccine tx arm and 20K were in the placebo. They each got 2 injections 3 weeks apart but while 60 subjects didn't show up for their 2nd placebo shot, over 220 subjects didn't show up for their 2nd Covid shot and these groups were dropped out of the analysis and nobody investigated if any of these people had been harmed by their tx. Obviously if nearly 4 times more subjects didn't show up after their active treatment vs the placebo tx, the suspicion is that something went wrong with the Covid vaccine subjects. Also Pfizer would not ascribe any death or side effect of a subject to the vaccine unless both shots had been taken; in other words if a client died a few hours after their Covid shot, Pfizer claimed it was not due to the "treatment" since the "treatment" consisted of 2 shots!!!
Thanks for the additional detail on the 'games' Pfizer played in how data was collected & presented on it's "COVID-19 Vaccine". Clearly, these are scientifically unsound practices, which also appear to be evidence that those making decisions for Pfizer were actively hiding evidence of harms caused by their product.
It is my understanding that efforts to hide wrongdoing or harm caused is generally considered strong evidence of a crime- or the perpetrator(s) wouldn't work so hard - playing all those games - to sweep the evidence that the product being tested was harmful.
Dr. Aseem Malhotra, and others, including the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, have been pointing out the deep flaws in medical studies, how the data is analyzed - as in the example you shared - and how it is reported to government agencies and in peer-reviewed journals.
Conflicts of interest, like the Pfizer trial of the Covid shots, are overlooked by the FDA, which allows corporations to design & conduct or pay another company to conduct trials of their products- and to decide which data to give the FDA. The FDA does not require companies like Pfizer to hand over all the raw data on the trials, but only the data the want to share.
It's no wonder that so many FDA approved drugs are later recalled, after the harms they cause can no longer be ignored.
Almost every contention in your comment is incorrect.
FDA requires full access to clinical trial data from companies like Pfizer before any approval or authorization decision. Legally required to provide all clinical trial data, not just what it "wants to share" - for FDA review.
Under US law, when a company submits a drug or vaccine application for EUA or full approval, the FDA requires:
Full clinical study reports (CSRs)
All raw datasets supporting safety and efficacy claims
Protocols and amendments
Investigator brochures
Individual Case Report Forms for every single serious adverse event.
Detailed, prospective statistical analysis plans
This means that Pfizer cannot selectively share data; it must provide comprehensive documentation covering all trial arms and all subjects.
The FDA also inspects a subset of clinical trial sites, comparing raw patient records with reported data.
Likewise, the comment you were responding to, and that whole blurb about dropped data. The truthful kernel there, is that subjects that subjects were dropped from some EFFICACY analyses if they had not received both doses.
Every randomized subject is included in the SAFETY database and analyses.
How is it a conflict of interest for Pfizer to study their own product in development?
I would not at all be surprised if the contents of the MMR have changed??? Giving an MMR that is causing an epidemic would only fair in their favor giving so many are losing trust in big pharma so they stir up some fear porn to put folks back on the "right track."
Thank you for reporting the truth, so we have the facts with which to refute the vaxx converts who cannot think rationally.
Thank you!!
I think it is important to include the following, especially the finding that during the year of the 2014 Disneyland measles outbreak, 38% of the measles cases which were sequenced in California were found to be caused by the vaccine itself.
Rapid Identification of Measles Virus Vaccine Genotype by Real-Time PCR
https://jcm.asm.org/content/55/3/735
"Since approximately 5% of recipients of measles virus-containing vaccine experience rash and fever which may be indistinguishable from measles (9), it is very important to identify vaccine reactions to avoid unnecessary isolation of the patient, as well as the need for contact tracing and other labor-intensive public health interventions."
"During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccines. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences [38%]."
Measles Outbreak with Unique Virus Genotyping, Ontario, Canada, 2015
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5512469/
"In one study of a measles outbreak in Ontario, Canada in 2015, health officials found that only 17 of 36 confirmed measles-positive cases were “wild type”– likely imported from abroad. Gene sequencing revealed that sixteen of the rest of the confirmed cases were from vaccine measles strain. Another two cases were thrown out before gene sequencing because they were from recently vaccinated individuals and assumed to be “vaccine-associated.”"
Great observations. The 4 sharing.
That or two states awash in unvetted illegals. Nah, couldn't be that.
Correlation is not proof of causation - but it IS evidence of it.
That’s a fair way to put it!
I should have put that statement in quotation marks, and given credit to attorney Jeff Childers. I read it awhile back on his CoffeeandCovid.com blog.
Of course, the stronger the correlation, the stronger the evidence.
Thanks for your consistently thought-provoking Substack, Jon.
«There are 𝗻𝗼 𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗿-𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀 that confirm the virus in the measles vaccine is less infectious or replicates less in humans than the wild-type virus found in nature, meaning 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘴 for claiming the vaccine strain poses a lower transmission risk to the unvaccinated.»
𝙉𝙤 𝙨𝙘𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙛𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬, —𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸!
If I had young children now, reading this and so much more that's out there would increase my jab hesitancy. But that's me. :/
Is that what they're going for??
Thank you!
No. The media 'fear porn' about "deadly measles outbreaks!" is the clue. When the first measles vaccine was introduced, around 1963, physician were outraged that the research and money spent developing the vaccine was wasted on "a trivial childhood disease". With almost no exceptions, the only children who died "of" measles - or lived in cities without clean water and with sewage running in the streets - or were severely malnourished.
People who get an actual case of measles, or mumps or rubella, are immune for life. People who get the vaccines do not have lifetime immunity.
More on measles myths, with references:
https://rumble.com/v6pwpn8-del-dispels-misinformation-about-measles.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
Their is evidence that the rate of death among children who get the MMR vaccine is significantly higher than children who get measles.
https://rumble.com/v6skjxt-vax-facts-with-dr.-paul.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
Thx 4 sharing. The lifetime immunity issue becomes a generational problem since vaxxed mothers eventually lose immunity they could have otherwise have passed on to future generations for a childhood illness once shared with brothers, sisters & friends, but from which we all survived.
Absolutely! The other key factor is breastfeeding.
The "passive immunity" an infant receives from the antibodies in the colostrum, or first milk, is a major factor in protecting the child during the early part of it life, when it would be more vulnerable to illnesses like measles. Mothers who have had measles, mumps, and rubella produce protective immune factors in their milk that protect their offspring. Mothers who have been vaccinated can not.
Discouraging women from feeding their babies naturally was one of the most insidious things ever done to to the generations born since the middle of the last century.
Another key factor is the needless injection of foreign substances into babies within hours of their birth. Injecting anything into the body produces "an immune response" - which is not necessarily protective against anything. Repeated injections jolt the immune system, over and over. Could this be a contributing factor to the sharp increase in auto-immune issues? If the immune system is regularly activated by non-threats, like peanuts- or attacking the body itself- can it effectively protect against actual diseases?
Normal babies do not need Vit K shots, nor vaccines allegedly designed to protect them from a disease transmitted through sex or sharing needles with someone infected with Hepatitis B - both given to almost every infant born in hospitals in the U.S. within hours of birth.
We know the Vit K shots are unnecessary, because if they were, none of us would be here. These shots contain other substances, not just Vit K. And we may want to ask ourselves if it makes sense to routinely inject nutrition, instead of ingesting it.
Essentially all expectant mothers in the U.S. are screened for hepatitis B. There is no justification for vaccinating newborns for a disease they will not be exposed to. The immunity it is said to last only about 10 years. Some claim it could protect infants who need a blood transfusion in an emergency, but isn't blood screened for diseases like this?
More 'Vaccine Facts' with Dr. Paul Thomas,including references:
https://rumble.com/v6skjxt-vax-facts-with-dr.-paul.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
Thank you!
You are welcome, Elusive One.
Your instincts are right- in that those manipulating us for power & profit want to keep us 'off balance', unsure, and stressed out. Which depresses our immune systems. Which helps drive up demand for "vaccines", an other drugs.
But, 'Knowledge is power.'
So I try to share what I have learned, in case it might help someone else.
All the best!
I guess you could look at onset of measles cases and their timing in relation to vaccination and when and why there was an uptick in vaccination numbers.
Did the vaccinations jump in response to the measles outbreak or did it occur the other way around as you seem to imply? You have presented no data to support your chronological thesis that this is what has occurred in Texas and New Mexico.
You have cunningly suggested that 2+2 does in fact equal 5 because they are all numbers.
The Question about Viruses, Covid-19 etc.? Do they even exist, and if Yes? This post contains also an article on how they make you infertile and poison you with food and drinks in addition to the vaccines. Their goal is the 90% depopulation of the earth and the establishment of their jewish-satanic NWO, according to Talmudic Teaching https://mile7bar.substack.com/p/the-question-about-viruses-covid
Jon, before you posit "gain of function" measles viruses making people sick from various pox conditions, should you not find proof of existence of measles "virus"?
There is none. Stefan Lanka PhD of Germany first exposed to the world the lack of proof for a measles "virus" in 2016, after he was compelled to demonstrate this in court. All five "court virology experts" had to agree that the studies presented to the court by a medical doctor DID NOT prove the existence of any such virus. Lanka won the court case.
In a nutshell, here is the problem with measles virus "proof". They can never find a horde of identical "virus looking" particles in fluids or tissues of a sick person. They see nothing noteworthy to distinguish a sample form a sick versus well person through electron microscope. So they cannot find viruses, gather and isolate them. They must do this, however, in order to prove or characterize anything about an alleged measles "virus" (or any other "virus").
Instead of tossing away bad thinking, they look for "indireect (circumstantial) evidence" of "virus infection". They make a concoction of artifical cell culture, usually with monkey kidney cells, infused with antibiotics, antifungals, chemical dyes, serum from cattle and horses, all based in a liquid medium thata provides starvation-level nourishment. When they inoculate the artifical cell culture which contains thousands of unidentified substances, because unpurified, with fluids or snot or urine from a sick "infected" person, also unpurified, they wait for a week. About 1/3 of the time they see cells dying and decomposing, which they announce as proof of viral infection.
Aside from the fact this does not prove anything about unseen and unproven viruses being present. there is a more obvious hurdle. The same cell culture NOT INOCULATED with so-called infectious stuff ALSO yields the "cytopathic effect" seen sometimes in the "infected culture".
This finding of cytopathic effect in uninoculated culture has been observed and reported in journals by virus enthusiasts in every decade starting from the forties thru today! In the last 18 months, Jamie Andrews of UK has demonstrated "non-infected" cell lines (never inoculated) produced fully as many dying cells as in the so-called infected culture. 94 times!
The method is proven false. But this is the method used to sell the idea of measles viruses (and all other so-called viruses, none of which ahs ever been isolated).
With no virus in nature, the calim that mad scientists can hype up more infectious danger is superstition. They probably imagine that is what they are engaged in doing, but these are "thinkers" not troubled by the lack of proof or evidence for virus existence in nature.
Of course, people get sick with pox conditions, of which there are many varieties, often indistinguishable clinically. Injecting people with poisonous substances taken from cell cultures containing sick fluids of pox conditions...this is hardly to be recommended as a sound health promoting procedure.
But lose the "mad scientists are unleashing virus hell" story. It's not true.