Virus on trial

translated by Corona Investigative November 16, 2020

Author Dr. Stefan Lanka – March 11, 2015

Why there are no disease-causing viruses. Why people believe in them and vaccinate. The actual causes of the diseases. How a process can provide clarity.

On 03/12/2015, the continuation in the measles virus trial will take place at the Regional Court of Ravensburg from 9.00 am. Dr. Lanka published a competition in November 2011 and offered € 100,000 to anyone who submits a scientific publication proving the existence of the measles virus. The publication must come from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), must meet the requirements of the German Infection Protection Act (IfSG) and must specify the diameter of the virus. 

The background to the competition is that the federally owned Robert Koch Institute (RKI) has obtained findings that refute public claims about the existence of disease-causing viruses and the justification for vaccination, especially measles vaccination. The aim of the competition is to remedy these shortcomings. A young doctor submitted 6 publications which did not meet the criteria of the IfSG, which did not come from the RKI, went to court, triggered a nationwide press campaign to claim the prize money by circumventing the regulations.

The Court appointed an expert to check whether any of the 6 publications contained scientific evidence of the existence of the measles virus and whether the diameter was determined. The expert opinion concludes that none of the 6 publications contains proof of the existence of the measles virus and that the publications are deficient. However, a combination of statements from the 6 publications together would provide proof of the existence of the measles virus. 

In Dr. Lanka’s statement on the expert opinion, which we publish after the trial, Dr. Lanka refers to each of the 6 publications. In a comprehensible manner he shows that none of the 6 publications meets the clearly defined scientific requirements to be allowed to pass them off as scientific. The results and statements of the authors refute the existence claims of a measles virus. The 6 publications prove that the authors misinterpreted typical characteristics of cells as viruses.

Questioning the existence of disease-causing viruses seems irresponsible at first sight. People who have come to the conclusion that there is no proof of the existence of disease-causing viruses no longer have themselves and their children vaccinated and only use condoms to prevent pregnancy conflicts. People who believe in these viruses see this as a danger. But if it is really the case that there are no disease-causing viruses, there are obligations: People must be protected from risky encroachments on their right to life and physical integrity through vaccinations, antiviral chemotherapy and dangerous fear. 

This article shows why the scientific evidence of suspected pathogenic viruses has not been successful. Properties of cells in the test tube were misinterpreted as viruses. By understanding the misconceptions that led to the belief in disease-causing viruses, space is created for new scientific explanations of health, illness and recovery. The misconceptions, on the other hand, are the comprehensible result of Western attempts to explain collective and individual, painful and catastrophic events.

Can we doubt the existence of disease-causing viruses?

It is the duty of every scientist to doubt constantly and about everything that is claimed as a proven fact. This serves to guarantee progress because all the theories have subsequently proved to be incomplete, faulty or false. Scientific explanations are only valid until there are better explanations.

In Germany, since 2000, all scientists at government institutions and those receiving government research funding have been obliged to actively challenge their results. They must document the result of doubting in their publications, discussing the arguments of their critics and competitors and mentioning them appropriately. Applied consistently, this is the beginning of a scientific revolution that humanity needs in order to meet the challenges ahead.

Even today, statements are still being passed off as scientific, although the clear scientific rules have obviously not been applied. One of the reasons for this is that old existing theories and the publications on which they are based are not checked, but rather are presented as true and scientific. This is why people work with theories that have no scientific basis or are disproved without realising it themselves. A scientist, on the other hand, who follows the rules of scientific work, notices when a theory is based on false assumptions. 

The rules of scientific work

To work scientifically means first of all “lege artis”, to work according to the rules of art. Research must be carried out in accordance with the latest state of the art. This requires knowledge and exploitation of current literature, including criticism, and the application of appropriate methods and the latest findings.

Science requires honesty. It is the task of the scientist to consistently control and question results, while also presenting findings of others who question results and hypotheses. Control experiments are a central component of the scientific methodology in order to verify (to prove) applied methods and to exclude disturbing factors.

Quality assurance is an important feature of scientific honesty. When results are published, methods, work steps and results must be precisely described. A clear distinction must be made between the reproduction of findings and interpretation. Findings that reject one’s own hypotheses and ideas of other scientists must be communicated, and relevant publications of other authors and competitors must be cited appropriately.

With the help of these rules, it is possible for any layperson who is familiar with the methods and fundamentals of a field to check a publication for scientific validity. These rules to ensure good scientific practice were summarised and published in 1998 by the German Research Society (DFG) after a comprehensive science fraud in the field of infection, immune, gene and cancer theories became public, involving hundreds of renowned doctors, scientists and reviewers. 

These rules have long been in force in the scientific community, but until 1998 there was no one to monitor compliance and impose sanctions. Since 2000, every university and state research institution has had its own contact person who has to check reports of unscientific acts. With the publication of these rules, science has achieved that the offence of science fraud is not included in the criminal law. The so-called self-regulation of science remained in place, with the consequence that the state cannot control its scientists.

Historical information

The fear of disease and pain is particularly great in the West. Shortly after the founding of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation around the year 1000, rational methods for explaining and treating diseases were no longer used. From then on the church regulated all medical matters for 800 years. It interpreted illness as God’s punishment for the sins of mankind. It claimed illnesses which only became visible later or not at all. Since, depending on the clientele and diagnosis, treatment was aimed at casting out the devil, methods were also used that could lead to suffering and death.

Shortly after its foundation, arbitrary diagnoses of suspicion and illness, sanctioned by priests, were used throughout the Empire to neutralise, punish and kill unbelievers and sinners by “expulsion” them. From 1306 onwards, a brief ice age depopulated the hitherto warm and flourishing north of Europe, leading to hunger riots and revolts which were exacerbated by the millennium flood of 1329. A strong earthquake in 1348 shook the still reasonably well-functioning areas of the Empire, leading to a breakdown of public order and the collapse of the currency.

The secular power, which was dominated by the church at that time, reacted with exactly the same concept of “expulsion”, with the same health courts, which were evenly installed throughout the empire at that time, with the difference that expulsion was now called plague and whole groups could be isolated and killed to restore public order. Thus the pictorial representations of the plague show public torture and execution sites.

At the same time, from 1348 onwards, people with knowledge of birth planning were persecuted and destroyed as witches in order to quickly compensate for the extreme population decline through multiple births (1). This meant that the remaining medical knowledge was lost, which is why irrational good-evil interpretations of diseases have prevailed in the West since this time. A comparison with Chinese medicine makes this clear. Here there are no malignant diseases and infections. All states of illness are explained with comprehensible descriptions of processes, which are confirmed by the current knowledge of biology, chemistry, physics and medicine.

The explanation of diseases until 1857, the theory of juices 

Under the theological influence, the ancient doctrine of juices, according to which an imbalance of juices in the body produces various pathogenic substances, became the model of pathogenic poison and antidote. The body would become ill through a disease poison and would get well again through antidotes which it produces itself or which are given from outside. This is the basis on which vaccination has been and still is done. Observations that a person became resistant to it through the increasing intake of poisons, e.g. alcohol, apparently confirmed this model. Today we know that it is enzymes that the body produces to break down toxins and repair their damage.

Even after the church has lost its influence on medicine and science, the concepts of illness shaped by it have been and continue to be applied. In Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria, which had lost up to 2/3 of their population and almost all their livestock in the Thirty Years’ War and which were again severely damaged in the subsequent wars of succession, compulsory vaccination was demonstrably introduced in order to pursue population policy to increase birth rates. The problem of the later resulting overpopulation was countered by the epidemic methods of starvation through isolation and toxic drugs. 

Goethe, who himself still saw burning pyres, describes in FAUST I what doctors did to kill thousands of people and be celebrated as saviours by the survivors. The colonial states and the National Socialists misused the infection theories to actively practice euthanasia. Even today, the infection theories can be misused at any time and in any way to create panic, economic blockades, mistreatment and the administration of lethal drugs (2).

It is important to understand the good-evil explanation patterns that they were not invented on a whim, but rather psychological mechanisms that lead either to compulsive acts or depression and that have their causes in biological reflexes with which our brain and body react to existential events. Siegfried Mohr has used this view to analyse human history over the last 10,000 years, found astonishing results and presented and documented them in his book “Die Quellen des Göttlichen (The Sources of the Divine)”.

The new explanation of diseases from 1858, cellular pathology 

Through a momentous act of serious plagiarism, the old theories of disease poisons, malignancy of disease and infection were brought into a modern form. Rudolf Virchow, who is regarded as the founder of scientific medicine, first fought against the findings of two doctors of Jewish religious affiliation, Robert Remak and Friedrich Günzburg, only to suddenly, from 1858 onwards, in his work “Cellular Pathology”, pass them off as his own findings. Plagiarism brings with it several problems, including the fact that only part of the findings are understood and transported, but the larger context is not understood or suppressed, thus preventing possible progress.

Virchow took over only a part of the existing knowledge when plagiarizing, prevented the progress of these scientifically working doctors, suppressed their knowledge about the tissues, the so-called cotyledons, among other things. While cellular pathology and medicine still assume today that damage to individual cells or pathogens that multiply is the cause of most diseases, research and deliberations on tissues have produced quite different findings. The changes do not originate from individual damaged cells, but always simultaneously and in a meaningful way from an entire organ part and the nerve network with which the affected organ area is mapped in the brain. 

Through Virchow’s plagiarism, the individual cell became the starting point for considerations and experiments, but the importance of tissues as functional carriers and impulse generators was lost. It was only from 1981 onwards that it became clear that knowledge of the cotyledons and their properties was crucial for the explanation, correct diagnosis and treatment of diseases. The tragic thing is that the German doctor who made these discoveries from 1981 onwards, realising that no one is to blame for acting in extreme situations because of the activation of reflexes, did not get his own “one against all” fighting reflex under control. He sweepingly slandered people of Jewish descent and also all those who did not share his tirades of hatred. This hatred results from unspeakable humiliation by both parents, legal persecution for his discoveries and is perhaps also useful to distract from his own misconduct and responsibility for failure.

Cellular pathology has been and still is used to explain that diseases are caused by damage and degeneration of individual cells. Damaged and degenerated cells are stronger than healthy ones and will assert themselves to cause senseless illness and destruction in their assumed malignancy. The opposite is the case, as was to become clear from 1981 onwards. Increased function and cell structure or reduced function and cell breakdown is always the targeted attempt of an affected control circuit and all its involved cells, nerves and brain areas to maintain its function in an existential situation.

Functional changes, formation and degradation of tissues do not originate in one cell, but always in a coordinated, meaningful way and by all the cells involved in a control loop simultaneously. This ensures the function of the affected part of the organ in an existential situation that has called into question the functioning of that part of the organ and thus of the whole organism. If, on the other hand, only individual cells are damaged or killed, they are replaced by cell division or by stem cells, as is the case with the processes of cell rejuvenation and recycling. 

The theory of infection 

Because cells from the body can survive in the test tube under certain conditions and stimulation, it was believed, under the influence of cellular pathology, that by observing cells in the test tube, the cause and course of diseases could be studied. This was and is a great mistake and is partly responsible for the fact that cancer medicine cannot make any progress either. Cells in the test tube change very quickly and then have nothing in common with those from which they originate in the body (3).

When cells come from the kidney, they very quickly have nothing in common in the test tube with cells from the kidney. This is why cells from a certain tumour cannot be used to learn anything about the cause and treatment of cancer growth. Due to the misinterpretation of growth processes as malignant and the misinterpretation of cell characteristics in the test tube, processes in and on the body are wrongly diagnosed as malignant or irreversible and many people suffer and die unnecessarily.

In the case of the theory of infection, doctors believed at the beginning of the 20th century that viruses must exist when cells die in the test tube without bacteria becoming visible. However, the researchers involved did not and do not take into account the fact that the treatment of cells with antibiotics and other substances demonstrably leads to exactly the same cell death because cells have organs similar to bacteria and cell death is caused by many factors in the test tube.

It has been proven by an important and highly regarded publication from 1956 onwards that all infectiologists knew that cells die even without any treatment, i.e. without being “infected”. This fact was also ignored in an unscientific way and is still ignored today. The combination of false assumptions and suppression of undesired results led to the erroneous assertion of the existence of almost all “disease-causing” viruses, from polio to measles to HIV. Even today, as can be seen in the example of the measles virus, cells in the test tube are still claimed to be infected when they change and die. This is the basis of all current research on disease-causing viruses. The proteins for the vaccines are obtained from human or animal cells claimed to be infected.

The false assumptions also become obvious when the precursors of the cell experiments in the test tube are taken into account. In these experiments, which are still being carried out today in the case of the alleged influenza viruses and to obtain these vaccines, chicken embryos in the egg are injured and die by the injection of extracts and by the needles. Control experiments using exactly the same extracts, but from non-“infected” cells or body fluids, to rule out that the method does not cause the chicken embryos to suffer and die have not been and will not be carried out. Compared to humans, this would be like using 3-centimetre tubes to force one litre of extract of dead tissue and chemicals into an organ, body part or tissue.

Virchow became the pioneer of Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch through his plagiarism, through unscientificity from the beginning, through shortening, distorting and suppressing the research results of others. Although these two also transported and developed important and correct knowledge, they demonstrably committed scientific fraud in order to enforce the theory of infection. The two and others applied the claimed principle of malignancy to bacteria and fictitious invisible pathogens called viruses (from Latin poison) that would pointlessly destroy cells. Unconsciously, some researchers in this field are aware that they work in an equally unscientific way, defending the obvious violation of logic and scientific rules with emotional and/or unverifiable and therefore unscientific arguments.

Today it is known that microbes are a central component of all bodily functions and can only become active when the body’s energy level falls, so that the body’s own tissues can no longer perform their functions on their own. The assertion that bacteria produce toxins is also refuted. Toxins that can be produced by bacteria, e.g. in spoiled sausage, can either not be produced in the body at all or only in such small quantities that they cannot be held responsible for symptoms of illness.

Virchow observed this development, even claiming that he had contributed his own and important findings to the theory of infection, but ignored the contradictions of the infection theory and suppressed the numerous and well-founded scientific criticisms of not only the infection theory. To this end, he actively excluded empirical medicine and empirical science, which criticised his concepts and plagiarism in state recognition and state funding through his political influence in legislation. To this day, orthodox medicine still rejects criticism of its concepts with arguments that are inadmissible because they are unscientific, instead of accepting them dutifully. It was only the National Socialists, by eliminating top-class Jewish scientists, the last scientists to publicly refute the infection claims, who succeeded in turning the infection theory into a globally recognised dogma that is still effective today (4). Thus, even today, politicians, states, the media and third parties can still misuse the infection theory in a pseudo-legitimised way.

The current declaration of diseases since 1981, the New Medicine 

Apart from the way orthodox medical views have been and are being enforced, there is a fundamental reason why good-evil explanations of diseases and the theory of infection are popular. They explain how suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere, individual and collective pain and disease can arise. These explanations are apparently proven to those affected by the fact that antibiosis and other toxins of all kinds can effectively suppress symptoms and pain.

One doctor, Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, who was existentially conflict-ridden by the death of his son and in the course of which he developed a swollen testicle, which he had amputated, came up with completely different explanations as a result of these events. He was able to prove these explanations to be correct by using the latest research technique at the time, computer tomography, and successfully apply it to many other diseases. This resulted in an amazingly different and, in principle, simple system of explanations for physical and mental illnesses, which has been successfully tested scientifically on several occasions. 

This system of knowledge, which he first called the “New Medicine”, explains exactly when and why symptoms occur individually and collectively that were previously interpreted as damage, degeneration or infection and how these can be treated causally. It must be said that what we usually perceive as diseases are in reality processes of rebalancing previous, often unnoticed special programs. With special programs of increasing or decreasing the function of tissue build-up or breakdown, affected tissues react to existential events. 

Existential-conflictive events that trigger special programs are existential deficiency, poisoning, accidents but also information and situations that an individual perceives as existential. The changes do not originate from individual damaged cells, but always simultaneously and in a meaningful way from an entire organ part and the nerves with which the affected organ area is mapped in the brain. The tissues that serve for digestion and protection react to an existential event by increasing their function until new tissue is formed. If the stimulus continues, this is diagnosed as a tumour or cancer, for example. In reality it serves the body to digest and protect better.

Tissues used for movement and contact to the outside and inside react to an existential event with reduced function to tissue breakdown, so that the body can move and maintain contact better, which is diagnosed as necrosis or bone loss if the stimulus continues, for example. After the dissolution of the existential events, the tissues that have been increasingly formed are broken down again and the broken down tissues are rebuilt. In the skin, for example, depending on the type and intensity of the existential events, this results in typical, distinguishable changes, and what this theory of disease additionally proves to be scientific, in exactly predictable changes. These biological special programs are designed for short-term reactions as they occur in nature. They can become problematic and in need of treatment if, as is the case in our culture, they last too long and are overlaid or intensified by other programs.

The role of the brain 

One cause of severe and recurring symptoms and pain is processes in the brain during the rebalancing phase after long-term special programs. The metabolism of the affected tissue part and the associated brain area is switched from cell respiration to fermentation by an existential and persistent event. Cellular respiration is the metabolic process in which the cell uses oxygen to obtain energy and substances; no oxygen is used in fermentation. During this process, the so-called connective tissue (matrix) of the brain also changes in order to optimise the fermentation processes. If cell respiration starts again after the dissolution of an existential event, the matrix of the affected tissue area and brain area must first be optimised for respiration. There are obvious limiting factors, especially those affecting the brain, which can cause the special programs to be triggered or even restarted with fatal consequences.

From this knowledge, which is being further researched, completely different, mainly gentle and cheaper ways of preventing, diagnosing and treating so-called physical and mental illnesses are emerging. What we still call cancer today, but also depression, mania, unnecessary aging and much more, is understood, preventable and causally treatable. These are avoidable complications in the rebalancing of the special programs, in which the kidney also plays a decisive role, often leading to severe symptoms, pain and fatal outcomes such as heart attack and stroke (5).

The most important thing about this new system of knowledge is that with this knowledge a sustainable life for all people is possible. Every person has the chance to understand himself and the other in all situations. Good-evil condemnations and corresponding courses of action that lead to conflicts and wars are avoidable because they are understood. If this knowledge is generally known and applied, problems can be avoided from the outset and existing ones can be solved better and faster. Humanity has the task to live in peace. The previous good-evil faith of people and the resulting ways of perception and action can be dissolved through understanding. 

New explanations for so-called infectious diseases

The infection theory was also successful because it has not been possible to explain why pain and symptoms suddenly appear out of nowhere. The theory of infection has found an explanation why, after the onset of fatigue, fever, redness, swelling, pain and specific symptoms often appear. It explains it by microbes that, after infection or its activation, would first cause fatigue and then the other symptoms. 

The majority of the population has accepted the theory of infection as true, although in the case of the disease-causing viruses, they have never been seen in a human being, photographed, isolated from it, photographed again and then biochemically characterised, and in the case of the disease-causing bacteria, the claims that they caused the disease have been refuted. The theory provided a comprehensible explanation for symptoms of infectious diseases. 

In order to explain the exceptions – that some people never get sick, although everyone around them is sick – the auxiliary hypothesis of the formation of anti-disease toxins in the body, the theory of an immune system, was already put forward in the Middle Ages. This auxiliary hypothesis of a fighting, bodily system agrees with people’s experience of violence and war, especially with the experience that poisons can suppress pain and symptoms in the short term, so that this auxiliary hypothesis was also accepted as the truth. Almost all so-called alternative medical systems have also adopted this auxiliary hypothesis.

In reality, this is how illness happens. The body and its organs consist of 4 different types of tissue that either digest, protect, move or keep in contact. The first two increase their function after an existential event, and if that is not enough, they increase their tissue type, and only that type, and not wildly, uncontrollably, degenerately, malignantly, as Western cancer theory claims. The other two tissue types with movement and contact, do it the other way round and reduce function and cell count. After the existential situation has been resolved, or if it has lost its meaning, it always takes a certain amount of time, depending on the type of tissue, before the symptoms appear, which are caused by the body returning to its original cell number and function.

Latency period

The theory of infection explains the latency period as the time between the resolution of the existential event and the appearance of symptoms, which varies according to tissue type. This is the time that the pathogen needs after an infection to begin its work of destruction. In reality, this latency is given by how quickly the 4 different areas of the brain to which the 4 tissue types are connected can switch from the fermentation metabolism of the existential situation back to breathing. These different times are explained by the different supply situations of the 4 brain areas brain stem (digestion), cerebellum (protection), cerebrum (movement) and cerebral cortex (contact).

If, on the other hand, the duration and intensity of the conflict-active phase is short and low, hardly visible or hardly noticeable symptoms will occur. If, on the other hand, the duration was long and the intensity high, the nerve areas involved are in a state of oxygen and/or sugar and/or substance deprivation due to the conversion processes. Symptoms and pain therefore become very severe. It can also happen that the healing stops or these processes are repeated again and again without coming “over the hill”, i.e. without a complete healing. Dr. Hamer has recognised these processes exactly as a hanging or recurrent healing phase. Explanations and therapy options for this have been developed through further research, which is continuously published in WissenschafftPlus (6).

In terms of infection and immune theories, these observations are explained by different levels of (“virulent”) pathogens and immune functions. In reality, biological theory also explains the phenomena that people can become ill simultaneously and successively. In these cases the conflicting events acted simultaneously or consecutively and were resolved simultaneously or consecutively. In family and school situations, but also in times of war, such triggers and then the solution phenomena occur regularly. This is also the reason why so-called infectious diseases against which vaccination is administered, including and especially measles vaccination (7), were already at a low level before vaccination was administered (8).


Since pathogenic viruses are no longer used to explain so-called infectious diseases because they could never be detected, and bacteria are no longer used as pathogens because the explanations for their cause have never been scientifically proven and refuted by simple logic, it remains to be investigated whether vaccinations can have the desired effect at all. Doctors have to ban vaccination for existing diseases because this leads to particularly increased and severe vaccination damage. This is understandable in the light of biological explanations. If poisons are implanted during a biological recovery process, i.e. in a healing process, which have a permanent effect and are contained in every vaccine, this can complicate or prevent the healing process.

The vaccination itself can lead to conflicting situations for the vaccinated person, especially with small children, which can lead to cramps in the healing phase but also to psychological changes of all kinds, including and demonstrably to autism, even in the active phase. As the healing phase can only begin very late, when the existential fear of vaccination lasts for a long time, it is explained when vaccination damage occurs even very long after the vaccination. In addition, the body can react allergically to all substances that were present during a conflict event. 

Because vaccines, especially the measles vaccine, contain human components such as ribosomes, the body may develop allergic reactions to its own structures and proteins when these are released, such as during recycling and injury. Ribosomes are the structures in the cells that are used to produce proteins. Ribosomes are particularly common in nerves and the brain. If the body reacts allergically to ribosomes, damage can be caused to important processes in the body, especially to nerve cells and the brain.

The toxins themselves, which are contained in a vaccine, can kill an adult person if they are injected into a blood vessel instead of deep into a muscle. These toxins, which are called adjuvants in vaccines, are proven nerve toxins that are transported to the brain via the nerves. This explains brain and nerve damage of all kinds that is attributed to viruses, but which does not actually exist. The fact that these toxins are still contained in vaccines today is also a relic of the old good-evil, poison and antidote interpretations of medieval theological medicine.

As toxins of all kinds put the body on the alert again, this generally slows down or even stops all healing processes. In this way, antibiotics work, but only until bacteria learn to digest them and use them as a source of energy and substances. As long as these toxins move freely in the body towards the brain – the brain is the organ with the highest metabolism – they act poisonously and suppress symptoms. This could explain some of the positive effects of vaccinations, but in reality they are just symptom suppression. It is worth noting that there is no global scientific research on the benefits and risks of vaccinations, which indicates that the damage caused by vaccinations is greater than the claimed benefits. At the same time, however, it is also clear that vaccination damage does not occur until long after the vaccination, when bound toxins are released and become effective due to energy deficiency, injuries, growth spurts and energy-intensive healing phases.

The importance of virulent and virus

Since the Middle Ages and up to the present day, diseases for which medicine has no other explanation have been and continue to be issued as being caused by disease toxins. Pasteur, in order to claim that toxins (virus = lat. toxin) exist, committed scientific fraud and entrusted his diaries with the details of why, when and how he manipulated them. Although he decreed that they should never be published, they were published by one of the most renowned universities, Princeton University in the USA (9). In response to the publication of the manipulations, which continue to this day, leading infectiologists have stated that these manipulations must be overlooked, as Louis Pasteur succeeded in putting the theory of infection on a theoretical foundation and making it popular!

On the other hand, long before viruses were invented, all diseases that suddenly became more intense, more dangerous or could occur in several people were considered virulent. Virulent means “poisonous”, which in the theologically influenced theory of juices was used to explain diseases and to treat them with “counter poisons”. Bloodletting also served to dilute and eliminate the alleged disease toxins in the body, which was a legal means of further weakening weakened and old people. Mozart died in this way (10).

Still unnoticed by the public, a change of heart is taking place in science today. Today we know that structures that actually exist and look like “viruses” should not be called such, because firstly they are harmless and obviously at the transition from apparently inanimate life to visible life. “Virologists” advocate that these structures be given their own order of life alongside the primordial bacteria, bacteria and cells (11).

In order to verify that the alleged disease-causing viruses do not play a role in disease or health, claims about their existence must be checked for validity. It is striking that precise methods that have been available since 1945 to prove the existence of viruses have not been and are not used for unexplainable reasons. Viruses (phages) that do exist and are not associated with disease have been photographed at their point of origin and in all fluids, isolated, re-photographed, their biochemical composition determined and then experimented with.

The pictorial representation of pathogenic viruses

If we look at the images that are issued as pathogenic viruses in cells, we see that they show sections of completely normal cells, as well as particles that cells produce during their differentiation, nutrition, excretion and death (12). This becomes clear when we look at images of “normal” cells during these processes and compare them with images of apparently infected cells. These images of normal cells, which contain structures that infectiologists claim to be viruses, can be found in large numbers on the Internet. Keywords for the search are: electron microscope, images, cilia, phagosome, endocytosis, exocytosis, phagocytosis, transferrin, cell death (apoptosis), etc. .

Isolated, disease-causing viruses are shown to be either cellular structures that appear circular on an average through cells, or artificially produced particles that are made from cell fragments and chemicals by concentration techniques or pressing through small pores. To make matters worse, the biochemical analysis of such man-made particles has not been carried out, but this is a prerequisite for them to be allowed to be identified as specific viruses.

After the measles virus process, we will publish photos and text from the publications, which will be issued as proof of the existence of the measles virus. Anyone who reads this will see that the criteria of scientific work have been seriously violated. Anyone who reads this will see that the authors themselves assume that they are dealing with cellular structures. Only by combining statements about different experiments, which cannot be combined in terms of content and logic, the authors come to the conclusion that the photographed structures must be a disease-causing virus. A combination of statements that are themselves not scientifically proven cannot and must not be presented as scientific evidence. Here, however, the authors refute themselves by statements in their own publications which they have again forgotten or neglected when interpreting the data.

Proof of the existence of a virus 

In reality, the experimental steps to prove scientifically that a suspected virus exists are quick and inexpensive. As all the methods required for this are standard today, there is no excuse for not using these methods. The first step in proving the existence of a pathogenic virus is to see and photograph the suspected virus in a human being, at the site of its origin and action, in the body fluids, especially those through which transmission is to take place. This has not yet been done for any of the pathogenic viruses. 

Then the viruses must be isolated from body organs or body fluids, purified and photographed again to prove that a viral structure and not the body’s own structures and components have been isolated instead of a virus. To date, this has not been done for any of the viruses that cause illness. Instead, cell cultures are made to die in the test tube, claiming that this is the first step in proving the existence of a disease-causing virus and at the same time isolating the virus. Isolation is not isolation in the literal sense of the word, but the creation of an effect outside an allegedly infected person. This is misleading.

After isolation and photographic documentation of the successful isolation and purification, the viruses are biochemically characterised by breaking them down and separating their constituent parts from each other and examining them individually. In the case of the “disease-causing” viruses, this has never been done until today. 

Individual molecules are isolated from a mixture of dead cells and released as a component of a virus. Here too, all the necessary control experiments are lacking to rule out the possibility that the particles are cell-specific components.

When particles are given out as isolated, disease-causing viruses, you can see that only one was photographed at a time and that this particle consists of cell fragments and membranes. The accompanying text actually describes that and how these particles were artificially produced. It has never been claimed in the publications that particles produced and photographed in this way have been biochemically characterised. For the biochemical characterisation of alleged “disease-causing” viruses, different and unsuitable methods are always used, namely methods for isolating individual biomolecules rather than the standard techniques for isolating whole viruses. 

Reproduction experiments and animal testing

In order to scientifically prove that a definable structure is a virus, isolated, photographed and biochemically characterised viruses must be applied to cells and organisms and their re-forming, reproduction and release must be observed and their recharacterisation carried out. For existing viruses (phages), this has been achieved thousands of times. In the case of “disease-causing” viruses – even during the time when arbitrary experiments were carried out with prisoners or orphans – it has never been possible to produce the disease symptom or to isolate a virus from it again.

Instead, for all pathogenic viruses, only animal experiments have been and are carried out, where it is obvious to everyone that it is the way of the experiments that leads to the symptoms that are interpreted as infectious diseases. These “similar” symptoms in animals are equated with the diseases in humans. Control experiments have never been and are never carried out – and if they are, they are not published – where animals are treated in exactly the same way, but with “non-infected” starting material.

In typical experiments, which infectiologists refer to to claim the presence of e.g. measles or influenza viruses, animals are given fluids from dead cells and chemicals dripped into their lungs to pass off the reactions they produce as measles or influenza. No control tests have been or will be carried out. However, to claim that viruses can cause illness, body fluids are taken from animals treated in this way and mixed with chemicals, including antibiotics, to kill cells in the test tube again.

The death of the cells, without the method of cell death being backed up by control experiments, is presented as proof of the existence of a pathogenic virus. The mere fact that no control experiments have been and are published obliges every scientist, science editor and supervising official to reject this type of experiment as deeply unscientific and to reject its interpretation. Since in Germany the scientific rules are clearly defined and are part of the employment contract of state-paid researchers, no understanding can be shown for such misconduct and misinterpretations.

Successful isolations and scientific proofs of the existence of viruses have so far succeeded a thousand times over in the case of bacterial viruses and in the case of single- and multi-cellular organisms, without it being possible to establish the cause of the disease. On the contrary: the processes cannot objectively be interpreted in any other way than that the formation of these viruses and the processes of their multiplication serve to maintain and increase life. It may and can even be assumed that “viruses”, which can be scientifically described as the building blocks of life, develop autocatalytically, i.e. through self-organisation, from biomolecules in water.

The measles virus process

As the Court has expressly stated, the measles trial is “only” concerned with whether the six publications submitted contain scientific proof of the existence of the measles virus. The opinion concludes that none of the publications contains sufficient proof of the existence of the measles virus. The expert opinion explicitly identifies shortcomings, including the lack of all control experiments to validate the methods used. Nevertheless, he concludes that a combination of statements from the six publications, all of which are required, would provide evidence of the existence of the measles virus.

Among the 6 publications, each of which, according to the reviewer, does not contain any scientific proof of the existence of the measles virus, there is, however, the one to which all measles specialists refer when they claim the existence of the measles virus. And: With his statement, the expert refutes all 16 authors of the six publications and hundreds of other authors who are cited, because they each claim to have individually proven the existence of the measles virus. On the next day of the trial, March 12, 2015, the expert witness will have to answer questions from 9:00 a.m. at the Ravensburg Regional Court to justify his statements in the expert opinion and his conclusions. The statement on his expert opinion and the questions were sent to the expert for the preparation of the trial in time for the deadline of February 10, 2015. 

Apart from the fact that this is the first time that the question of the existence of a disease-causing virus is being heard in court, it is also significant that state authorities and a wider public are now aware that in Germany the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), which is responsible for infectious diseases, has evidence and indications that refute the statements about disease-causing viruses and especially about the harmlessness of measles vaccinations. It remains to be seen what level of knowledge on vaccination the possible candidate for the next office of the President of the USA, the doctor and Senator Rand Paul, who testified in the pre-election campaign that measles vaccinations in particular cause mental disorders in children, has.

Translated, adapted & reblogged Version – Original here________________________________________________

Telegraph main page with overview of all articles: Link

Visit our Telegram Channel for additional news & information: Link

Chat with like-minded in our Telegram Chat Group: Link

Please support to keep this blog alive: paypal________________________________________________


(1) Gunnar Heinsohn und Otto Steiger: Die Vernichtung der weisen Frauen. 366 Seiten, Neuauflage 2005 (Gunnar Heinsohn and Otto Steiger:The annihilation of the wise women. 366 pages, new edition 2005).

(2) Stefan Lanka und Karl Krafeld: Lehr-DVD Impfen (Stefan Lanka and Karl Krafeld: Educational DVD Vaccination).

(3) Gerald B. Dermer. The Immortal Cell. Why Cancer Research Fails. 1995.

(4) Annette Hinz-Wessels: Das Robert-Koch-Institut im Nationalsozialismus. 192 Seiten, 2008 (The Robert Koch Institute under National Socialism. 192 pages, 2008).

(5) See the articles on the heart in WissenschafftPlus Nr. 1, 2, 3 /2013.

(6) WissenschafftPlus. The two-monthly magazine of the WissenschafftPlus Akademie in LK-Verlag.

(7) Veronika Widmer und Stefan Lanka. Der Masern-Betrug. 208 Seiten, 2006 (Veronika Widmer and Stefan Lanka. The measles scam. 208 pages, 2006).

(8) Gerhard Buchwald. Das Geschäft mit der Angst. 384 Seiten, 2000 (The business of fear. 384 pages, 2000).

(9) Gerald L. Geison: The private Science of Louis Pasteur, 1993.

(10) Prof. DR. Anton Neumayr. Musik und Medizin. 155 Seiten, 1992 Music and medicine. 155 pages, 1992).

(11) Stefan Lanka. Das erste Riesenvirus und die Entstehung des Lebens (The first giant virus and the origin of life). WissenschafftPlus Nr. 1/2014.

(12) Macht Impfen Sinn? Info-Nr. 1, 72 Seiten, 2005 (Does vaccination make sense? Info no. 1, 72 pages, 2005).