Is COVID-19 Caused by a Virus or a Mycobacterium?

Quote from: JackAlexander on April 23, 2020, 06:50:22 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on April 11, 2020, 01:21:34 AM

Quote from: sandokhan on April 11, 2020, 01:15:09 AM

“The virus causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is not the same as the coronaviruses that commonly circulate among humans and cause mild illness, like the common cold.”

Of course is not the same.

It is mycobacterium avium/mycobacterium tuberculosis.

No! SARS-CoV-2 is not a "mycobacterium avium/mycobacterium tuberculosis" that is not a virus.

Do viruses respond to antibiotics?

If you put them together in an autoclave the virus will stop functioning.

Quote

"Also, TB is not as destructive as this, TB does virtually nothing if your immune system is in check.
TB is dangerous only if you are immune system compromised."

Totally incorrect.
Also, who said this was just all about TB? Mycobacterium avium, a zoonosis.... much like the zoonosis spoken of with COVID, simulates the signs and symptoms of COVID-19 in every way, and has also been implied, either superimposed on an initial tubercular encounter earlier in life or a mixed infection, which can happen.

Quote

Also, they did try to make a vaccine, but they did exactly what Sandy wants to do, and made a vaccine for the wrong thing instead.
The wrong thing was Pfeiffer's bacillus, a bacteria, and not a virus."

A virus? In 1918, "Influenza" had not yet even been formally discovered. That came circa 1932. Furthermore, at that time "Influenza" was not even a reportable medical condition. It was not known to kill. That was until suddenly, young people in Haskell County as well as soldiers in nearby Fort Funston, in seemingly excellent health, and with no immunodeficiency started to die like flies. Furthermore, they tried many vaccines during the Great Pandemic. But the BCG tubercular vaccination was not used in humans until 1921, after the carnage.

 Antibiotics have no effect whatsoever on viruses.

Quote from: JackAlexander on April 23, 2020, 07:29:57 PM

 Antibiotics have no effect whatsoever on viruses.

Nobody has ever said that antibiotics have any effect whatsoever on viruses.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on April 24, 2020, 02:11:17 AM

Quote from: JackAlexander on April 23, 2020, 07:29:57 PM

 Antibiotics have no effect whatsoever on viruses.

Nobody has ever said that antibiotics have any effect whatsoever on viruses.

OK.

Quote

And?

How did doctors diagnose those tb cases?

Quote

And none of these are used today?
Your picture is from a little later than 1918.

https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/04/23/french-doctor-didier-raoult-cites-flaws-scientific-misconduct-in-recent-va-study-on-hydroxychloroquine/
Dr. Didier Raoult has uncovered major flaws in the VA study.

The State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology (VECTOR) in Russia has discovered two major types of the passenger virus SARS-Cov-2: S-type and L-type.
https://academic.oup.com/nsr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036/5775463
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236544-coronavirus-are-there-two-strains-and-is-one-more-deadly/

Quote from: sokarul on April 24, 2020, 08:54:48 AM

Still no indication they are one in the same.

Quote from: sokarul on April 24, 2020, 08:21:21 AM

Quote

And none of these are used today?
Your picture is from a little later than 1918.

Did I say that none of these are used today?

There are far better tests as well, such as next-generation PCRs.

In fact tubercular infection generates lots of RNA detected by the same RT-PCR that is currently being used as the mainstay of COVID-19 RNA detection, and for that matter the two could easily cross-react.

Apparently the main manufacturer of the present COVID RNA detection kit in the US is well aware of this, but for some reason will not release the data regarding such possible cross reaction.

Now let me ask you a question: Can you show me any studies looking for mycobacterial elements through PCR or RT-PCR in clinical COVID specimens? I know of no such studies looking for M. avium or M. tuberculosis in any manner....and certainly both would have to be looked for....as the signs and symptoms of COVID run parallel with those of M. avium or MAC.

In Whuhan, in Northern Italy (a major pork center) and more recently in the United States, animal processing of potentially mycobacterial diseased animals has come to the fore. But of course, the USDA, much like the CDC and the NIH does not want to be bothered testing for mycobacterial disease......after all, everyone knows that "COVID-19" is a virus. So what is the sense in going any further?

One other thing. Are you aware that the preferred form of the mycobacteria are their cell-wall-deficient (CWD) forms, which are viral like, and not at all in appearance like the bacillary form shown earlier in this thread?  If not then I suggest you read a book by the late Nobel nominee Lida Mattman [Mattman LH Cell-wall-deficient forms- Stealth Pathogens 3rd Edition CRC Press]. A picture from that book is just below, showing the viral-like forms (yes, viral-like, cell-wall deficient forms) of a close relative to the non-tubercular mycobacteria (NTM) called Mycobacterium avium, also known as "fowl tuberculosis", found frequently in the swine and poultry processing plants that they have been having to shut down, as we speak, in certain areas of the United States.



Cell-wall-deficient forms of mycobacteria isolated from the brain of a child, post-mortum

Quote

Quote from: sokarul on April 24, 2020, 08:54:48 AM

Still no indication they are one in the same.

Excuse me. Anthony Fauci is a Virologist. Madam Birks is a virologist. Robert Redfield, the head of the CDC is a virologist. To virologists, if it's a pandemic or epidemic, its a virus. So you can be sure that there will be not only "no indication", but no attempt.

https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/04/23/french-doctor-didier-raoult-cites-flaws-scientific-misconduct-in-recent-va-study-on-hydroxychloroquine/
Dr. Didier Raoult has uncovered major flaws in the VA study.

The State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology (VECTOR) in Russia has discovered two major types of the passenger virus SARS-Cov-2: S-type and L-type.
https://academic.oup.com/nsr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036/5775463
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236544-coronavirus-are-there-two-strains-and-is-one-more-deadly/

Population genetic analyses of 103 SARS-CoV-2 genomes indicated that these viruses evolved into two major types (designated L and S)

The differences between the two identified strains are tiny. In fact, they can’t really be considered to be separate “strains”, says Jones. And many of the genetic differences won’t affect the production of proteins, and so won’t change the way the virus works, or the symptoms it causes, he says. One is not more deadly than the other.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236544-coronavirus-are-there-two-strains-and-is-one-more-deadly/#ixzz6KafeW9M1

There are no images with SARS-Cov-2 which fulfill Koch's postulates; i.e., no virus.

Unless these postulates are satisfied, the virologists have nothing.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#status-of-covid-19

Status of COVID-19

As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK.

There are no images with SARS-Cov-2 which fulfill Koch's postulates; i.e., no virus.
Unless these postulates are satisfied, the virologists have nothing.

Koch’s postulates in the 21st century 22 JANUARY 2010
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Koch applied these criteria to show that anthrax, a common disease of cattle, was caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthracis, and that tuberculosis in humans was caused by a different bacterial species. His postulates provided a framework for proving the role of microbes in disease. As a consequence of his work, the study of infectious disease was placed on a secure scientific foundation, which ultimately made possible rational treatment and control.

Despite the importance of Koch’s postulates in the development of microbiology, they have severe limitations, which even Koch realized. For example, he believed that cholera and leprosy were caused by microbes, but could not fulfill all four postulates. Furthermore, Koch knew that the putative agent of cholera, Vibrio cholerae, could be isolated from both sick and healthy people, invalidating postulate #2.

The limitations of Koch’s criteria are even more obvious when we consider viral diseases, which were not yet discovered when the postulates were formulated. Thomas Rivers, who has been called the ‘father of modern virology’, wrote:

‘‘It is unfortunate that so many workers blindly followed the rules, because Koch himself quickly realized that in certain instances all the conditions could not be met. . . . Thus, in regard to certain diseases, particularly those caused by viruses, the blind adherence to Koch’s postulates may act as a hindrance instead of an aid.’’

Many viruses do not cause illness in all infected individuals, a requirement of postulate #1. An example is poliovirus, which causes paralytic disease in about 1% of those infected. Further compromising postulate #1 is the fact that infection with the same virus may lead to markedly different diseases, while different viruses may cause the same disease. Postulates #2 and #3 cannot be fulfilled for viruses that do not replicate in cell culture, or for which a suitable animal model has not been identified.

The application of nucleic acid-based methods of microbial identification has made Koch’s postulates even less applicable. Polymerase chain reaction and high-throughput sequence analysis have revealed a great deal about microbes that are associated with pathology or disease, but proving causation has become even more difficult as the number of uncultivable viruses rapidly multiplies. Nucleic acid based detection methods are so sensitive that they detect small numbers of viruses that may occur in the absence of disease. The use of these new methods have lead to revised versions of Koch’s postulates that are fundamentally sound: both hepatitis C virus and human papillomaviruses were convincingly shown to be causative agents of hepatitis and cervical cancer, respectively, long before methods were developed for propagation of the viruses in cell culture.

Here are Koch’s postulates for the 21st century as suggested by Fredricks and Relman:

• A nucleic acid sequence belonging to a putative pathogen should be present in most cases of an infectious disease. Microbial nucleic acids should be found preferentially in those organs or gross anatomic sites known to be diseased, and not in those organs that lack pathology.
  
  
• Fewer, or no, copy numbers of pathogen-associated nucleic acid sequences should occur in hosts or tissues without disease.
  
  
• With resolution of disease, the copy number of pathogen-associated nucleic acid sequences should decrease or become undetectable. With clinical relapse, the opposite should occur.
  
  
• When sequence detection predates disease, or sequence copy number correlates with severity of disease or pathology, the sequence-disease association is more likely to be a causal relationship.
  
  
• The nature of the microorganism inferred from the available sequence should be consistent with the known biological characteristics of that group of organisms.
  
  
• Tissue-sequence correlates should be sought at the cellular level: efforts should be made to demonstrate specific in situ hybridization of microbial sequence to areas of tissue pathology and to visible microorganisms or to areas where microorganisms are presumed to be located.
  
  
• These sequence-based forms of evidence for microbial causation should be reproducible.

The RNA which has been sequenced is that of a passenger virus. Mycobacterium have RNA as well.
There are direct and indirect proofs, these have already been listed.

The differences are not tiny.
CORONA VIRUS SPLITS INTO TWO STRAINS

The differences between the two identified strains are tiny. In fact, they can’t really be considered to be separate “strains”, says Jones. And many of the genetic differences won’t affect the production of proteins, and so won’t change the way the virus works, or the symptoms it causes, he says. One is not more deadly than the other.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236544-coronavirus-are-there-two-strains-and-is-one-more-deadly/#ixzz6KafeW9M1

The Russian microbiologists at VECTOR say that azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine work perfectly with the S-type. They have ongoing studies regarding the L-type.

Let us remember that CWD mycobacterium are also called L-form/L-phase.

Here is a technical study from 2005 which proves that wearing masks for more than 30 minutes is very dangerous (more CO2 is inhaled, dizziness):

https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/602557/602557.pdf...https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/602557/602557.pdf?fbclid=IwAR15d29nImlVAtBRcrqxp0suMHyx1TwBzr5BfpVhTY66hWkaY7YcMc221a0

Here is a study which says that the mycobacterium/pathogenic agent can enter the body through the ears and eyes:

https://www.jpost.com/health-science/can-a-mask-protect-me-from-coronavirus-622411

You have some explaining to do.

So that you can claim you are a destroyer.

Here you are, posting dozens of videos on youtube (as bobby shafto),