I'm writing this comment, Dr. McCullough only because I have great respect for your willingness to speak truth as you see it in the face of an establishment that doesn't want to hear it. I really hope you keep going with that attitude, because there's so much more to discover.

The article perfectly demonstrates how totally illogical conclusions and nonsense 'research' is passed off as scientific conclusions.

First, need I remind you that the 'vaccines' that are killing probably millions of people globally, and injuring many times more, are "well accepted" too? And I could make a long list of ideas "well accepted" that are very irrational, but I think you get the point.

The first two sentences are full of condescension, misrepresentation, and factually incorrect assertions. German virologist/microbiologist Dr Stefan Lanka has been exposing the fact that virology is all fraud for almost 30 years, so those who've actually studied the research are hardly motivated by "endless frustrations". And in fact nobody is "denying the existence" of anything. The "denying" allegation is your manipulative spin as a form of mockery. Those of us who've put in the work to go through a century of virology research and fully understand Lanka's conclusions are not denying the existence of anything. What we're saying is that there is no published research to date that demonstrates isolating a 'virus' from a sick person. It is the Rockefeller medicine establishment, which you represent, that's the party claiming there's a SARS-CoV-2 'virus' and "it" is the cause of the new disease. Therefore the burden of proof is on you and Rockefeller medicine, and that burden has not been satisfied. Because a few people have discovered the virology con, and have challenged the supposed proof that the establishment puts forward, we're labeled "virus deniers" as clueless people laugh, everyone assures each other that there's still 'consensus' that there's really a virus making everyone sick, and that's the end of it, in your view. No need to actually, honestly look at the research and answer the tough questions, because there's "consensus". What a profoundly cowardly reality...

Laboratory methods in virology do not "demonstrate cellular invasion, replication, transfer and repeated infection". The claimed 'virus' is only an end product of the culture of dying cells; there is no isolated 'virus' at the beginning, so the assertion of "invasion" is pure imagination. The same 'virus' can be produced with no sick patient sample added at the beginning, which is why the "well accepted" virology lab processes never include true controls. The so-called 'viruses' are exosomes, which you probably know are encapsulated genetic debris from the process of cell death. Virology has simply perfected the methods for reliably producing cell death via added toxins and inducing cell starvation in ways that trigger the release of certain types of exosomes, which are then photographed and touted as proof of 'viruses'.

And if the exosomes are then added to a new cell culture, that also receives the same cocktail of additives that poisons and starves the cultured cells, voila, more exosomes excreted by the dying cells, and 'proof of virus transmission'! No, it's only proof that people are being willfully blind.

Surely, Dr McCullough, you must be aware of Christine Massey's two-and-a-half year FOIA campaign to find the "well accepted" proof of isolation of a SARS-CoV-2 'virus'. With over 200 responses from government health agencies and scientific institutions all over the world, not one can cite any research proof of virus isolation. Their replies do not claim Massey misunderstands what constitutes 'virus isolation'; they simply admit they have no proof of virus isolation. This includes the US CDC.

So the photos you parade here are completely meaningless, utter nonsense, because you have no idea what the photographed particles are or where they came from. Revealingly, the article says nothing about where they came from, not even in the footnotes or references. The article simply asserts that they're SARS-CoV-2 particles without evidence, and you treat it as a scientific conclusion. I'll wager that if you find out where the particles came from, they're lab creations from cultures of dying cells that had no real 'virus' isolated from a sick person added at the beginning.

Which is why you started the article with the "well accepted" theme, and mocking the "virus deniers": because that's all you have, and something deep inside of you knows it.

It will be interesting to see which way you go, Dr. McCullough. You're in an interesting predicament of either conforming to what's "well accepted" in your field (which means telling the public that the 'vaccines' are good for them and everyone should go get boosted today) and keeping your prestigious professional standing, or recognizing that 'the emperor' has no clothes and is a pathological liar, and losing the establishment endorsement deal in order to find the inconvenient truths.

I wish you the best.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this evidence.

Further clinical observations that I've seen of COVID being a distinct disease from earlier coronavirus infections mainly consisted of

1) dyspnea with hypoxia of low 80's to low 90's oxygen saturation, and

2) anosmia, sometimes ageusia, of long duration and not correlated with nasal congestion.

People's frustration with the considerable and devastating scam aspects of the COVID era have inspired an unsubstantiated leap of tossing out all knowledge and clinical experiences of all coronaviruses, rhinoviruses, adenoviruses, and even all viruses altogether. That is much too far a leap.

As you so well explained to the world, Dr. McCullough, dilute povidone iodine applied nasally at first symptoms sends the viruses to defeat. I credit you with this on a flyer that I hand out to my patients.

Expand full comment

I'm curious about what your "knowledge and clinical experiences" with viruses consists of. Have you ever taken a sick patient fluid sample and had a lab isolate 'virus' particles directly from the sample? Do you know any other doctor who has done that? Or do you know of even a single published study that's done that and provided a method that's transparent and repeatable?

Isn't it obvious that since no one has yet proven they're adding a 'virus'-laden sample to the virology lab culture, then there's no evidence that the exosomes excreted as the culture cells die were due to any 'virus', especially considering that the lab method is designed to kill the cells whether a patient sample is added or not?

So what is the "knowledge" that you speak of that's being thrown out? Wouldn't the more honest description be that the established "beliefs" are being thrown out by many?

If we could all be brutally honest, doctors and non-doctors alike would admit that the 'virus' story has been accepted as truth because it seemed to fit the illnesses that we see, and there's no better explanation that we know of so we'll stick with the 'consensus' explanation although there's no scientific evidence to support it.

But is it 'scientific' to say that there can not possibly be a completely different explanation for the symptoms that you see, especially in light of the century-long failure of Rockefeller medicine to prove their 'virus' theory?

The bottom line is that it just seems to be human nature that people will stubbornly refuse to let go of a deeply-held belief system if there's not something 'better' to replace it. We just can't bring ourselves to admit that we just have no idea, and not even a good theory.

Funny thing is, that insecurity-based, stubborn refusal to look at beliefs and admit they're just beliefs is that it locks us into a paradigm represented by those beliefs, and we cannot grow out of it until we let go and accept that we don't really 'know'.

Maybe the people who've been paying attention to the "devastating scam aspects" of the covid era and are therefore realizing that the purveyors of the "accepted" narrative are a bunch of

sociopaths and con artists are the smart ones, for refusing to believe their stories any longer?

And yes, it does seem like a far leap, but only because you and everyone else have been domesticated and robbed of the knowledge that you can actually jump right over the fences.

Expand full comment
Nov 24, 2022·edited Nov 24, 2022

This is not evidence for the existence of viruses, though, right? These pictures in themselves in no way add or subtract to the strength of the arguments for or against the existence of viruses, right? If you disagree then perhaps explain how these images constitute evidence in your mind?

Expand full comment

These pictures are excellent. Thanks for sharing. I've run into a few people who deny the existence of Covid. Part of their skepticism probably comes from the deceptions that government and health agencies exercise around the pandemic. This probably causes them to doubt everything about it. But definitely the deaths are real, and where there is death, there must be a cause.

One unfortunate consequence of doubting the existence of Covid, is that these people might not take steps to strengthen their immune system and learn what they can do to protect themselves from the virus. I myself recently had Covid (probably Omicron), and was unvaccinated. I found it to be subtly different than any other kind of flu I had experienced in the past. I had some supplements and treatments I had gathered together from reading the regimens of doctors who were doing early treatments, and I think these things helped. Didn't have any Ivermectin, unfortunately, but that is hard to get.

Expand full comment
Nov 24, 2022·edited Jan 12, 2023

In my experience, most people holding anti-government corruption and deception narratives don't bother with the scientific debate over the existence of viruses. They are much more likely to believe in lab-leak or bioweapon conspiracies. The real virus debate is led by scientists and intellectuals, who so far have unfortunately not been able to find rational partners from the establishment with whom to engage the issue in any serious way.

As this posting and most of the comments clearly show. A picture of something labelled as a "virus" is not evidence for anything, it's a red herring. We are not denying the existence of pictures. Unless it can be proven that there are no other known structures or artifacts that these pictures could be depicting, then labeling them as viruses is immediately invalid. For example, there are several papers in the kidney disease field pointing out that what are labeled as viruses are confused with common cellular components seen routinely in experiments where no alleged viral infections are involved.

Expand full comment

Yes, many thanks. I was one of those who argued (in March 2020) that without the Koch’s postulates, lab isolates, and so forth that the virus could not be “real”. It simply failed to fit into my frame of reference at the time. But gradually it was revealed to be quite real and no figment of any one’s imagination. The mainstream argument got framed as if the virus itself was what the “story” - unfolding all around us - was actually about. Although now we know there is a virus, interpreting the story at that time was about the use of the virus to create a crisis, a crisis used to control the planet. Used by nefarious forces to effect an insane plan so diabolical. Despite all we know about the virus, the overarching and critical threads of the story lie there. We projected a story to try to reason and persuade people to stay away from the tests, from hospitals, from the vaccines. That it was wrong was not as important as our intent. But the story, as all good stories do, demanded to be told. Being willing to be wrong to tell it wasn’t as important as telling it. Now we have the entire, truthful, horrifying story. We have lived this one. It is tragic.

Expand full comment

So how about sharing the evidence that's proven to you that 'the virus' is real?

Expand full comment

After checking out your writing, KW, my question to you has changed.

Recognizing that 'covid' is about "use of the virus to create a crisis, a crisis used to control the planet", and seeing the pervasive lies from government and the medical, pharma, and academic establishments, why do you believe their narrative about the 'virus'?

Do you realize that modern virology was essentially a project of the Rockefeller cabal, spearheaded by the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, and institutionalized as they created the current medical monopoly that really has conquered the planet?

Do you really still think this dark ruling cabal wouldn't lie in order to gain that much power and wealth?

Where does the faith in the story come from, that's so powerful that people won't even look at the glaring lack of scientific proof of a virus?

And BTW, I love your writing, and have subscribed.

Expand full comment

Will answer. It is an important question. There was a reason to be discussed, an important one. Thank you for the question.

Expand full comment
Nov 23, 2022·edited Nov 23, 2022

A picture of something proves that our ideas about what it is are correct.

It amazes me that otherwise apparently intelligent people cannot see the inanity of this "argument".

"Seeing the virus up close makes it difficult to deny its existence"... no it does not, obviously.

Let us now see if anyone on this list is capable of rational, courageous and polite debate. Would anyone like to defend the claim/implication that a picture of something proves that our ideas about it are correct? I am also ready to debate any aspect of virus existence claims you can offer.

And yes, I do value the remarkable courage Dr McCullough has shown to date, but the next step is even harder. Will he, like Michael Yeadon who now agrees there is no legitimate evidence for the existence of viruses, dare to critically examine the network of premises and procedures that has undergirded his entire career, or will he continue to evade the issue and offer empty arguments like this. It is a terrible bind, I do sympathize with the challenge of placing intellectual and moral integrity over material benefit and social status, but this is the nature of our time.

Expand full comment

Please furnish links to the science you follow on this matter. I do believe this weaponized virus exists although do not believe it was the crux of what has happened. I also have believed since March 2020 that the point of this "plandemic" was control, the use of a good "crisis" to impose planetary totalitarianism and to cull the population. A monstrous charge and have always believed it is the plan. I argued fiercely to try to keep people from getting tested or vaccinated. It was not about the virus.

Expand full comment
Nov 26, 2022·edited Nov 26, 2022

Hi KW, That there were many more motives and forces beyond a sincere desire to protect public health in the Covid experience, I think is beyond question at this point, even among mainstream commentators, scientists and researchers, though details and emphases vary considerably.

Due to censorship, there is quite a wide patchwork of information sources and platforms, so I have found you have to be willing to assemble a collage of papers, videos, interviews depending on exactly what it is you want to know, or what threads you want to follow.

The main "names" currently in the virology science criticism community are Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, Drs. Sam and Mark Bailey, Dr. Stefan Lanka and a few others. I'm giving you the names so that you can search titles from their work according to your preferences. Kaufman and Cowan will take you claim by claim through virology papers in video format, Mark Bailey writes opinions, Stefan Lanka has written in full standard scientific discourse mode for decades on virus existence, there are group statements, control conspiracy contexts, critiques of allopathy to explain how so much error could possibly exist, the context of Terrain Theory, and so on. And all of them basically do all of the above, to different degrees.

So it should not be hard for you to find something that catches your eye by title. Most of these doctors have been banned from Youtube, so are using Odysee, Bitchute (Cowan), Rumble, but they are not all up to date across all platforms, nor on the same platforms, and they probably won't come up in Google searches either. They all have their own websites as well and various presences across social media. So let me know if this is insufficient advice and what exactly you are looking for. Also would be very interested to hear your reflections if/as you go through this material. Thanks for your openness. It really is quite fun once you get into it, if you're the type that actively enjoys science, investigation, learning...

Expand full comment

Thanks I will work to get up to speed with these. But yes I do enjoy all of these things, but fun with science, investigation, learning via Mr. Google, AWS, globalists - not so much. These platforms are radically insufficient and unreliable. I have followed many of these people for nearly three years. Not that comfortable with internet searches under the circumstances. I am pretty limited in capabilities in this respect. No staff, no researchers, just two hands, a brain, language and some misguided grown kids to convince. And a lot of faith that there are no coincidences. Thanks for responding in detail. The lives these suicidal kleptocrats save may be their own - long enough to stand trial anyway. I am only comfortable with seeing this episode through. We are being massively played.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this. I have had friendly arguments with those who do not believe viruses exist and up to now I was using Steve Kirsch's line of 'well give me another hypothesis for 80% of the kids at a school my kids attended all going down with norovirus' The answers were astonishing. On another topic I don't know what to think about these apparent 'self assembly nano particle' articles which are doing the rounds - do you have any information or ideas on that?

Expand full comment

Using Steve Kirsch's line is not an argument; it's changing the subject. Because none of the people you've spoken to have an explanation for 'contagion' that's acceptable to you, that somehow means virus theory is proven scientifically?

Expand full comment

I disagree but are you saying contagion is a myth?

Expand full comment

There are no controlled experiments that demonstrate contagion by transferring a substance from a sick organism to a healthy organism causing the healthy organism to become sick with the same condition. See if you can find one. So it's not proper to say "contagion is a myth", but it is proper to say that contagion has not been scientifically proven. And while it is common sense to ask "well why do people get sick at the same time" not having an answer does not mean we should fall back on an unproven theory. Though the temptation to do so is strong, it's not rational.

Expand full comment

What about the experiment by Richard L. Riley and William F. Wells in 1956 with guinea pigs where only the study group and none in the control became sick with TB? And what about gain of function research when the H7N1 virus was made more contagious in ferrets back in 2014?

Expand full comment

Similarly with Janine's response, regarding the "H7N1 virus" it's pointless to try to debate what was 'contagious' in the ferrets without first looking at whether or not any such virus has ever been isolated and sequenced.

So I took a quick look at the ferret research, and all of the more current papers simply state that they obtained an "isolate" of the H7N1 virus, with no documentation describing what that "isolate" really is. Working backward to find the source of the mysterious isolate, I found this 1993 paper that describes where the animal isolates actually come from:


As the paper reveals, what virologists call an "isolate of H7N1 virus" is nothing more than minced organ tissue from sick, dead animals, that were merely alleged to have been sick from a 'virus'. The dead animal tissue is then injected into developing chicken eggs, and when the chicken fetus dies and its cells are excreting exosomes, now we have the previously invisible 'virus'. No virus particles were actually isolated from the sick animals, and thus using the terms "isolate" and "isolated" is blatantly dishonest.

If you can read that paper objectively and look at what they're actually doing in the lab, where do you see any actual isolation of a virus, or any indication whatsoever that there's any virus involved in making the animals sick?

And if you really dig into virology research, what you'll find is that this paper represents the rule.

It's not science. It's a combination of idiocy and dishonesty masquerading as science.

Expand full comment

Interesting. I haven't dug into it in any great depth. So your assertion is, and please correct me if I am wrong, that viruses have never been proven to exist? If that is correct do you have an alternative theory as to why almost 80% of the kids and teachers at my children's school plus many parents all developed violent vomitting the same weekend beacuse it is these kind of events that make me believe in viruses.

Expand full comment
Nov 24, 2022·edited Nov 24, 2022

Hi Thanks for responding. I did a quick search for this paper, but so far have only found journal articles discussing the results of the paper without providing the actual reference. We really need the exact paper you are referring to in order to proceed as Riley, for example, has produced more than one commentary on TB and guinea pigs. If you would like to find the paper, I am happy to discuss it with you!

Expand full comment

Hi Janine I can't find the full paper for download either but I will keep looking. Here is part of it:


and here is an article by Riley giving some background:


Expand full comment

Thank you for this.

Expand full comment

How do we know that the thing in the photograph is SARS-CoV-2? If so, how do we know that entity is the disease-causing agent? You cannot just say here's a photo, we have it you fools. This has to be carried all the way through to making sure that the amplicion of the PCR is looking for an actual bit of genetic code from the thing that is causing the disease. Can you show me where that has been done?

If it is so easy to snap a photo of SARS-CoV-2, why do 213 governments and institutions still deny that they have a sample of the virus taken from a human host? Why is every claimed sequence really a metagemonic transcript, contrived virus, mimicked clinical specimen or in silico script?

Expand full comment

Read article Dr. McCullough and effort in the financing to make it down to Puerto Rico I think we would have a very enlightening and helpful conversation should we speak together because as I said before and as you already know we fight for the same cause and I just amplify your voice and add my own together we win where we go when we go walk hope this note finds you well your supporter Dr. Jeffrey 🌎🕊❤️🇺🇸🌞🌻🙏😇

Expand full comment

Is there a list of sympathetic MDs in the boise Idaho area? I don't know where to start.

Expand full comment

I have never quite understood the purpose of asserting that viruses don't exist. Good to see then imaged which is not an easy thing to do.

Expand full comment
Nov 24, 2022·edited Nov 27, 2022

The purpose is the search for the truth. What you are seeing are images of something, but how do you know they are "viruses"? What arguments and methods are used to support the claim that these pictures are viruses. Just from superficial common sense skepticism, one might wonder if these pictures could be mis-labelled standard cellular components. Right?

Expand full comment

It's not that they don't exist. It's that they have never been shown to exist; the theorized allegedly contagious particle as NOT been found or sequenced.

Expand full comment