Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Jeremy Hammond on the Existence of Viruses, Isolation, Genomics, EM, Serology, and More!
377 Plays3 months ago
This week, we are joined by Jeremy Hammond to discuss the existence of viruses. Today, we are fortunate to present an opposing viewpoint to challenge the no-virus paradigm shift. This wasn't a debate, but rather an opportunity to explore differing perspectives. Listening to this episode will help you formulate your own ideas and responses on this topic, which may extend to discussions about exosomes.
Regardless of your stance on the no-virus movement, understanding and mastering opposing views can strengthen your position. This episode is worth listening to, no matter where you stand in this debate.
We began by discussing viral isolation, then moved on to genomics and variants. Our conversation progressed to cell culture and cytopathic effect experiments, where we examined Stefan Lanka's work and the concept of mock infection. We also covered serology/immunology, contagion studies, and Koch's Postulates.
We concluded by discussing areas of agreement, such as the flaws in PCR testing, inaccuracies in case numbers, and the concept of asymptomatic carriers.
Learn from me
https://www.instagram.com/beyond.terrain/
https://linktr.ee/beyondterrain
https://x.com/BeyondTerrain
Support the vision
Share!!!
BCH: bitcoincash:qq7eq276ylanluc5e39unrqshkvs9xsemg07yxezf7
ETH: beyondterrain.eth
BTC: bc1qqwc470ktgj3l4myqxr5hq67rnlqys0qm98u6f0
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/beyondterrain
How to support and Learn from Jeremy
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction and Topic Overview
00:00:02
beyondterrain
everybody to another episode of the Beyond Train podcast. I'm your host, Liam Dalton. Today we have a very special guest on. I'm very much looking forward to this discussion. We have Jeremy Hammond on and we're going to talk about viruses today. I'm really looking forward to this discussion. It's been it's been a long time coming. ah To be quite honest, it's been kind of difficult to get somebody on to to talk about this from the opposite perspective. So I'm really, really grateful for for Jeremy and his time today. um And if anything, you know, I think in a true and a true pursuit of truth and in real science, it's best to understand both sides of the argument. It doesn't matter where you fall and your opinion, ah it's best to know both sides to be able to not only strengthen your argument, but gives you a true holistic understanding of of what's going on. And um so I think that's really important. So ah if everyone keep open mind today,
00:00:59
beyondterrain
and be receptive to this, I think that's, that's one of the most beneficial, um, things that we can do, uh, moving forward. I don't care if you're no virus or not. Uh, I think that's really important. So anyways, I've talked enough, Jeremy, thank you so much for coming on today.
00:01:13
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure, thanks for having me.
00:01:16
beyondterrain
Definitely.
Understanding Health and the Body's Response
00:01:17
beyondterrain
Um, so the question I asked all my guests, the introductory question is what is health and sort of get a definition of, of what health is, what it means to you. um How does it manifest? And this gives us a good little baseline to work off of.
00:01:33
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Gosh, what is health? um yeah There's so many ways you could describe it and define it I guess basically I would say that health a state of health is a state in which your body is functional functioning as it was designed to do I Guess that would be my most simple definition Yeah
00:01:53
beyondterrain
Nice and concise. Perfect. That's awesome. Yeah. And I mean a great definition too, right? Cause that's, uh, that's sort of the goal. Like, um, you know, here we talk a lot about symptoms and, you know, we shouldn't necessarily demonize symptoms, right? Because their response, their body's response. And if, if you're getting symptoms at the right time and as a re as the correct response, that's, that's sort of a good thing. Right. So, um, anyway,
00:02:21
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Well, I'd share it in a caveat to to my little simplistic definition would be, yeah, it was sometimes your body ah functioning as it was designed to do can be harmful. ah You know, and immune overreactions are an example of that.
00:02:31
beyondterrain
Good.
00:02:35
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So, yeah, my definition is admittedly so simplistic, but, you know, I was thinking in terms of, you know, we have this ah this this paradigm of like mass vaccination and then pharmaceutical interventions. And it's like the idea of vaccination, for example, is that you it's almost as though it's premised on this assumption that you know We all require these pharmaceutical interventions for our immune systems to function. And this is kind of what I was getting at with my simplistic definition was kind of just to correct that misperception.
00:03:11
beyondterrain
Yeah, sort of like the idea, and correct me if I'm wrong here, but the idea that, you know, we are designed perfectly in a way, right? Would you agree with that?
00:03:20
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, and you know I think ah if if we give our immune systems, for example, what they need to function, you know thats you can maintain that state of health.
00:03:26
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:03:28
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And you can be challenged by pathogens and toxins. And your body can function. Your body can detox. it has an immune so you know Your immune system can function. um And you can maintain a state of health. um And the problem that I see with the population today and in the epidemic ah proportions of of chronic illnesses and so on, is that people's people's um bodies are not functioning as they were designed to do. There's there's just too much ah environmental ah exposures that are are just ruining people's health.
00:04:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so um you know yeah the the body has limits in terms of what it's capable of doing, in terms of detox detoxification, um in terms of you know the the immune system and what it can do. And so we if we the I guess the further caveat to my simplistic definition is we need to give the body what it needs to be able to do that function.
00:04:33
beyondterrain
You know, like proper proper nourishment is sort of what you're getting out there.
00:04:35
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure, yeah nutrition, you know of avoidance of toxins, um yeah and and so on. Sure, exactly.
00:04:41
beyondterrain
Okay. Uh, just out of my curiosity, would you, uh, would you attribute some sort of psychological nutrition in a way, like what you can consume on a psychological level? Do you think that has an effect?
00:04:54
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um In terms of, explain further.
00:04:59
beyondterrain
Sure. Sure. So say somebody like an example would be if somebody undergone some sort of severe trauma, um, you know, if they experienced the traumatic upbringing, maybe physical abuse, and maybe that is a physical infraction, but
00:05:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. Yeah, yeah. Oh, absolutely.
00:05:11
beyondterrain
Uh, stuff on that level.
00:05:11
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, I mean, mental health absolutely ties directly into physical health. Absolutely. There's no question. Yeah, I think so.
00:05:18
beyondterrain
Awesome. Great. Appreciate that. Uh, let's dive in to today's topic
Virus Isolation and Misconceptions
00:05:25
beyondterrain
viruses. I'd love to hear, um, I think, I think an important place to begin, um, and, and I'd love your input as well. If you think that there's a better starting point, um, maybe we could begin with virus isolation. Love to hear your thoughts on that.
00:05:41
Jeremy R_ Hammond
various I'm sorry, what?
00:05:43
beyondterrain
Isolation.
00:05:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Isolation. Well, um sure, yeah there's this claim that viruses have never been isolated. and they have. And so, you know, when I first started hearing that claim, I i would, you know, ah as being ah inquisitive as I am, i you know, I would I would look into them and I would, you know, start investigating those types of claims. You know, and one of the first claims that was that I saw was the claim that um like the CDC had admitted
00:06:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. And let me be very clear about what I mean by that. ah yeah When I say that the virus causes COVID-19, what I mean is that it's a necessary but insufficient factor in the pathogenesis of COVID-19. So you know there's this kind of the debate between germ theory and terrain theory. And it's not one or the other, it's both. um Obviously, host factors are incredibly important, as we just discussed. And I discussed that with my definition of, my simplistic definition of health. um So host factors are absolutely important. And and to to discuss the idea of pathogens like viruses causing illness is not to deny that host factors are are determinative. um So that's when i when I say cause, I mean that, again,
00:07:11
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um to just quickly summarize that again, it's that SARS-CoV-2 infection or whatever virus infection is a necessary but insufficient factor in the pathogenesis of whatever infectious disease. um So anyways, I started you know just looking into these these claims. like the one that the first One of the first ones that I encountered um was this claim that the CDC had admitted that that SARS-CoV-2 had never been isolated. which, you know, you're looking into it and you you can you can see it's demonstrable that that claim was false. And so I just kept investigating these claims and every time I would look at them, ah it just it it came I came away with the conclusion that these claims are demonstrably false, um including the claim that Novar, not only SARS-CoV-2, I mean, it' so this was the like kind of the first one that I started seeing a lot. um Although I had been aware of these claims that
00:08:06
Jeremy R_ Hammond
no virus had ever been isolated like measles and so on. But I never really paid them too much attention before before the the COVID-19 pandemic. I had never really dug really deeply into those types of claims until 2020. um but But again, it's just every time I started digging into what these claims were and and and then looking at the sources that were being cited, to support those claims. Every time the sources are the the claims are actually contradicted by the cited sources. And so um you know i just I find it untenable.
00:08:49
beyondterrain
So when you say isolation, um, you know, is that, are you referring to, you know, some sort of purity? Is that what you're getting at with that? Or like, cause I guess my understanding of isolation virology is, you know, ah isolating the virus out of a host into a cell culture. Is that what you're referring to or.
00:09:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, ah cell culture is considered the gold standard as it's described in the literature of of virus isolation. Yeah.
00:09:17
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:09:18
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um but but But cell culture alone is not the only means that you know scientists have at their disposal to be able to characterize, you know to identify and characterize viruses.
00:09:18
beyondterrain
on
00:09:30
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um There's also whole genome sequencing is it for is another you know really um important example. um So it's not just that the cell culture you know that that is evidence of the existence of viruses, but you know that that is what's considered the gold standard for isolation.
00:09:47
beyondterrain
Got it. Got it. Okay. And I think that's one of the, I think, um you know, ah where where the argument, where people really get stuck on the argument there that that's not isolation, right? is where um when we start discussing like river's review of Koch's postulates, right? Like the um within it says there needs to be some sort of isolation, some sort of purity introduced to a host to prove that that is the causative agent in some sort of infectious disease. I think that's largely where um that is applicable um to this argument. The other one is that you just brought up is genomics, right?
00:10:28
beyondterrain
um You know, isolation of, and I would love to know if you agree with this. I don't necessarily think that isolation of viral genetic material, especially of a single species of virus is, is a possibility.
00:10:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um Well, there's actually, this is another another argument that I've seen repeatedly made is that um that it's not, that you can't, um do whole genome sequencing of a virus when that genetic material is mixed together with a bunch of genetic material from other things.
00:10:50
beyondterrain
Sure.
00:11:03
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And it's actually just plain incorrect. um They actually have what's called, you know, ah metagenomic sequencing.
00:11:09
beyondterrain
Who?
00:11:10
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And for an example of of the utility of metagenomic sequencing is scientists, um yeah you know, ah doing this type of sequencing on the gut microbiome to be able to identify hundreds of thousands of different types of viruses that reside in the gut. Mostly, you know these are these would be viruses that infect not your human cells, but um the the the ah bacterial microbiome. So viruses that infect bacteria are, um ah what's the word, what are they called? Macrophages.
00:11:46
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And so, you know, they they have done metagenomic sequencing, you know, for that purpose, for example. There's one example that leaps to mind where, you know, that it it demonstrates the utility of of metagenomics for um determining the whole genome sequences of a multitude of, of ah you know, viruses um without having to first isolate each one individually.
00:12:04
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:12:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So you can you can do metagenomic sequencing without actually isolating an individual virus.
00:12:16
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:12:22
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And then this is a big, again, it's just a big misconception and and there's a lot of falsehoods about that. People claiming that that's not possible, but scientists do it.
00:12:33
beyondterrain
I think where I would take that is not necessarily that it's not possible to run metagenomic experiments. I think I would question the validity of the results of the metagenomic process. I think that's where I would get stuck on, because saying you're sequencing is kind of the gold standard of ah genomic assembly right or you know genomic sequencing. so um And a purity would be necessary to run Sanger. like I don't think you can run Sanger with with viruses.
00:13:13
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um I'm not sure about Sanger sequencing in terms of whether ah you Dr. Sinhong Lee would be the expert on that and would be able to answer that question. um But, um you know, in terms of whether they do metagenomic sequencing with that technology.
00:13:25
beyondterrain
Sure.
00:13:31
Jeremy R_ Hammond
I'm not sure about that, so I can't speak to that exactly. like um But I think one of the the areas of confusion with, you know, accepting the results of of metagenomic sequencing is just kind of a misunderstanding of how whole genome sequencing works. um and And again, i'm I'm not a scientist. i'm not I'm not an expert on any of these things. I just know what I know from researching these claims about the non-existence of viruses and and just like digging into those things and spending a really extraordinary amount of time on it.
00:13:55
beyondterrain
Yeah. Thank you.
00:14:01
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And you so one of the one of the claims you know that is kind of made is that, well, one of the claims that that that I saw early on was that you know that you can't do whole genome sequencing without a reference genome. which is is kind of a logical impossibility. I mean, if you had to have first have a sequence genome, to be able to sequence subsequent genomes, to subsequently subsequently sequence other genomes, well, then then how did you sequence the the reference genome in the first place, right?
00:14:32
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:14:36
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so there's something called de novo sequencing, where it's like you the very first time um where you you where you sequence something for the first time.
00:14:37
beyondterrain
Hmm.
00:14:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And then after that, then you can use that sequence as what's called it a reference genome for subsequent um um you know types of ah genomic sequencing. But there's just there's de novo sequencing. And metagenomic sequencing is a type of de novo sequencing where, again, you don't even need to isolate a specific an individual virus to be able to do that type of ah sequencing. um you can you can You can sequence a multitude of viruses or or other pathogens directly from a patient sample, for example, um using this technology. And so another another kind of, I think, misunderstanding is is how it works in terms of,
00:15:24
Jeremy R_ Hammond
what it is. And so it's not the case that, as I've seen people claim that, you know, they just kind of randomly assemble the genome from these little snippets of, of genetic information. It's not randomly assembled any more than you randomly assemble, you know, a puzzle when you're, when you putting together a puzzle, I mean, the pieces locked together and in one way. This is why, I mean, the puzzle analogy of is, of course, imperfect, um but it's it's useful to kind of simplify the concept of that, you know, the the different ah sequences that they assemble with with this technology. You know, that they there's overlaps in in the sequences, and so they can assemble them in the way that they they fit together.
00:16:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so they do fit together in in you know a specific way. And you can't just like take these snippets of of genetic sequences and just randomly assemble them to just make up whatever. I mean, it doesn't it just doesn't work that way. And this is one of the biggest misconceptions that I've seen out there in terms of how it works is is the claim that they just kind of randomly assemble this genetic material to come up with whatever they want. And it's just it's just not how the the technology operates.
00:16:44
beyondterrain
Interesting. Appreciate that. Um, on the topic, you know, the idea, the concept of, of variance comes up in my mind.
Viral Variants and Sequencing
00:16:58
beyondterrain
Um, You know, because, because when we're talking about this de novo sequencing, you know, um, I would, I would probably agree that having a reference genome would be helpful in like validating this. Of course. Um, that just makes good sense. Um, is it absolutely necessary or I'm going against that, which I can appreciate as well. You know, um, when it comes to that de novo assembly, um,
00:17:28
beyondterrain
we see the variance, you know, that's, that's one of the things, the variations in these genetic sequences, slight variations. Um, you know, I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Cause to me, you know, and my sort of read of it is that that could be indicative of, of just an air in the, in the assembly, you know, like, um, because then maybe, maybe you could speak to this as well. I know, sorry to throw a few things at you here, but, um, you know, in the assembly, during that process, you know, I was under like, understood that these, these platforms, like these softwares that like put all of these genetic sequences together that sort of build the puzzle is probability based. um And that it it does synthesize a mass amount of sequences, like when you run it through these systems, you get get sort of
00:18:26
beyondterrain
ton of different sequences. And you may get two or three sequences that match you know the the length that you're sort of searching for. you know So if it's a certain amount of base pairs, if it's 30,000 base pairs, you have two sequences that were synthesized. So there's two variations of this virus. you know um That was sort of my understanding. ah Maybe you sort of just did clear that up. But if you want to clear that up anymore, I'd appreciate your thoughts on that.
00:18:52
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Well, when they speak of you know viral variants, viruses mutate and they evolve. right So um you know the original ah Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2 is different from the the subsequent um strains that were, I shouldn't use the word strain because scientists differentiate between strain and variant, but um you get you get my point, that ah you know the variants that were subsequent subsequently circulate circulating you know displaced the original the the original variant
00:19:15
beyondterrain
on it.
00:19:23
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Um, and, and so, you know, it's as the, as the virus, uh, you know, moves through the population as, as it infects people within ah individuals, it, it can evolve and mutate. And then it spreads to someone else and there's further evolution and mutation. Um, of the virus. So this is what is meant by variance is just their mutations of the virus. Um, and if those mutations become significant enough, then they they could describe it as, you know, as a new strain. Um, but the variants are kind of considered the same strain of virus.
00:19:57
Jeremy R_ Hammond
It's just that there are genetic mutations there that, um you know, may be significantly meaningful and it may not be.
00:19:57
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:20:05
Jeremy R_ Hammond
But, you know, typically they they name, you know, the variants of SARS-CoV-2, for example, based on what they consider to be significant um evolutions in in the viral genome. um you know, Omicron, for example, having, you know, a number of significant mutations in the spike protein that made it, um that ah enabled it to escape the antibodies from from prior infections and from vaccinations to it to a significant degree. So um that that's an example of what they refer to as variants. But, you know, I mean, you're right that there can be errors, you know, like in reads and things like this, but there's also
00:20:46
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um you know you can you can run sequencing multiple times. Scientists around the world, you know on a regular basis, sequence genomes of of the virus.
00:20:51
beyondterrain
And.
00:20:59
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And so there's this this kind of redundancy and um you know replication among scientists of of the genomic sequences. And so when you when you you know there's ah there's a very you know kind of insignificant um I would say ah basis to say that you know that the outcome of these ah you know these computations, which because of course, whole genome sequencing involves computation because as you explained, i mean it's just something that the human brain can't do.
00:21:33
Jeremy R_ Hammond
ah yeah It requires a computer.
00:21:33
beyondterrain
Thank you.
00:21:35
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So they have software for that. And you know so you know it's not the case that you're just getting these errors and it's just spitting out whatever. it's it's yet Yes, it's true that you can you can have read errors and things like that um or assembly errors. um But at the same time, you know when when scientists are replicating the process over and over and over again on a daily basis, um then you know yeah there's there's kind of a limited room there's kind of limited room to say that, well, we don't accept the outcome of the of the genomic sequencing, right as you know many people do. And it just dismiss whole genome sequencing altogether. um And i just I just find that just untenable and unsustainable.
00:22:20
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:22:23
beyondterrain
um You know, it seems as though this conversation is quite far away from life, you know, we're in the computer with this. um
00:22:34
beyondterrain
There may be, you know, this is the interesting thing, you know, if we can, if we accept that the gen to the genomics, the metagenomics is accurate representation of what is in some sort of sample biologically. um It still seems as though it's quite far away to make claims about these um about these little particles. you know that where The you know but isolation process is not really some purity, um especially when it comes to making claims about their pathogenicity. If it's going to cause disease, if it plays a role in disease,
00:23:18
beyondterrain
um You know, I'm curious what your thoughts are on that because it just to me, it seems like it's quite far away from life. You know, we're we're not, we're not even just in the test tube now, we're in the computer. um And we're going off the assumption that, you know, this computer represents life, like these models represent life. And I guess there's a long history there, but ah
Evidence for Virus Existence and Disease Causality
00:23:38
beyondterrain
just hears hear your thoughts there.
00:23:38
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. Well, yeah, the the question of whether a virus causes disease or is pathogenic is a separate question from whether the virus exists.
00:23:49
beyondterrain
Certainly.
00:23:49
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So we have to separate these two questions.
00:23:51
beyondterrain
certainly
00:23:51
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um You know, you can prove that a virus exists, doesn't mean that it causes the disease, you know, that the people suspect it causes. um And that this was acknowledged in the initial papers on SARS-CoV-2, when they first isolated and sequenced SARS-CoV-2, those initial papers um you know so you expressed their opinions that this was the likely culprit. This was likely what was causing people's illnesses you know and in Wuhan, China.
00:24:25
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But you know but they they said right in there that you know Cox postulates haven't been fulfilled yet. you know They acknowledged that they acknowledge that it it was yet to be determined.
00:24:31
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:24:35
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So they had found a key suspect, essentially. They found a SARS-like coronavirus. um And so that this was, in their opinion, probably not a coincidence that this was the likely um cause of of this illness that they were seeing. um which was which was a reasonable conclusion to draw. um But cocks postulates were subsequently fulfilled. Their animal chitlat challenge studies, you know hamsters, macaques, different species of animals that um they did challenge studies and demonstrated the transmissibility and the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in those studies. In fact, there's even been a human challenge study.
00:25:22
Jeremy R_ Hammond
so
00:25:23
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:25:23
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So um you know the first question is, you know, what is the cause of, you know, when with this this is what investigators were asking themselves. There's this this um strange pneumonia-like illness. What's causing it? They took patient samples. um You know, and typically what what they'll do is, you know, you take the patient sample, you filtrate it or centrifuge it to purify it. There is a purification step. And and this is another false claim that that's widespread out there is that there's no purification. Well, but there is. They purify the sample.
00:25:57
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And then they take the supernatant from that purification um and then that's what they inoculate um the cell culture you're with. And then there's another false claim out there that they never do controls. Scientists never use controls when they do cell culture, also completely false. um they They do use controls and so they have the um the inoculated cell culture and then a control culture that's given the exact same treatment um only without the the inoculation with the supernatant from the patient sample.
00:26:29
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So, you know, they, they, they treat the cells, you know, they have to give um food for the cells.
00:26:30
beyondterrain
Thank
00:26:34
Jeremy R_ Hammond
There's antibiotics to prevent bacterial contamination in the cell culture.
00:26:35
beyondterrain
you.
00:26:39
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So they're, they're given the exact same treatment, and except they're just, they're not exposed to the, to um to the the supernatant containing, you know, potentially containing a virus. And then they watch and they observe that the cell cultures side by side and you um to to what to observe for cytopathic effects, which would be indicative of the presence of a virus um in the infected sample, in the affected cell culture, compared to the uninfected control.
00:27:11
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so they can compare, you know the you know you have this this cell culture here that's got cytopathic effects and the uninfected control does not. Well, that's an indication that that there was a virus in the patient sample. And then they they did they do further analyses um from there to ice to to to characterize the virus, including you can look at it under and underneath an electron microscope. You can do whole genome sequencing, et cetera.
00:27:36
beyondterrain
Yeah. Can I chime in? Because we'll get to the electron microscope.
00:27:39
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, really.
00:27:40
beyondterrain
I just want to chime in on that. I'm curious about your thoughts on Stefan Lanka's experiments, in which um you know in his experiments claim that he showed that the the procedure of of using um of starving the cells as well as using anti- antibiotics or streptomycin, I think, is commonly used, um actually was able to create cytopathic effects. I'm curious about your your thoughts on those experiments, if you've looked into them at all.
00:28:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure, my first thought is he should publish his research.
00:28:12
beyondterrain
Sure.
00:28:12
Jeremy R_ Hammond
second My second thought is he's not explaining why scientists all around the world have done this experiment over and over and over again. And guess what? They do use controls, and they can compare uninfected controls that don't have cytopathic effects. And he's claiming, well, no matter what, you're going to get cytopathic effects just from how they treat the cell cultures. It's just demonstrably false.
00:28:35
beyondterrain
I think one of the big problems from my read of the literature at this point, you know, a lot of the studies on steidopathic effects, um, you know, when it comes to describing their use of mock infection, um, which is what you're talking about here as the control mock infection would be like, uh, similar or same setup in theory, it should be the exact same setup, same parameters, same cell culture, same whatever, without virus or sample from the, ah individual added. One of the problems is that they sort of they say a mock infection was used as a control, um and they don't actually describe what was done in the mock infection. Now, um maybe they think you know maybe the scientists at that point think, you know we shouldn't have to you know if you're reading a paper, you should know what a mock infection is. We did the exact same thing.
00:29:30
beyondterrain
um Personally, you know, when it comes to the literature, I think that is, that is something that should be done. I agree with Stefan Lanka's work. Like you mentioned, I think you should publish this research. I agree. I agree with that. I believe in transparency. And one of the things I learned about the use of the scientific method in writing scientific papers is that the method section should be extremely, extremely clear that you can reproduce the results because reproducibility, of course, is the cornerstone of science, as you've alluded to a couple of times here. Um, that is, that is one of my main problems is that they, they're not describing the steps in mock infection.
00:30:03
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yep.
00:30:08
beyondterrain
And I think that's where a lot of people get hung up.
00:30:08
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure.
00:30:10
beyondterrain
That's a place that I get hung up on. Definitely.
00:30:13
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, there's this claim out there that when they refer to mock infected cells, that that's not a control. But again, it's just it's just simply false. Mock infected is literally defined as an uninfected control. So it's given the same treatment. The only the only difference between the the infected and uninfected um cell cultures is that the uninfected control is not inoculated with the supernatant from the purified patient sample. It's that simple.
00:30:43
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:30:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
That's what mock infected literally means. And so when scientists use the term mock infected, yeah, of course they don't feel the need to define their terms because it's just ah understood within the scientific community. Everyone knows what a mock infected culture is. It's the literal definition. So this is again, it's just kind of a, ah it's one of those claims that are made out there that mock infected is not ah is not a control, but it's it's that's literally the definition of mock infected cultures. It's a control.
00:31:14
beyondterrain
I wasn't going to ask there.
Scientific Controls and Experimentation
00:31:22
beyondterrain
So, so I'm curious, um, you know, there, there, there's a, there's a group out there now that it's coming to light, uh, and it's not published lot yet, but, um, I hope to stay in contact with you. Um, and would love to hear your thoughts on this. They've, they've reproduced Stefan Lanka's experiments. Um, and, and. I think they're they're going to publish their research and one of this more out in the open. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. you know Is that something that that is is convincing to you at all? like if there If there is some sort of step in that process that that does produce you know through electron microscopy visible viral particles or
00:32:04
beyondterrain
access or whatever you want to call them, extracellular vesicles, visible on an iphone or platforming units and cytoplasm. Is that something that's convincing to you?
00:32:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um They would have to explain why why there's so many published studies of cell culture experiments in which the uninfected controls didn't have cytopathic effects. that This is their claim that, oh, well, the cytopathic effects, and then this ties right into their false claim that they don't that scientists don't use controls.
00:32:39
beyondterrain
Hang on.
00:32:40
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um so it's it's I'm sorry, i but it's a hoax. It's a hoax claim. um Because again, they're not explaining why scientists all around the globe do these these experiments and they do use controls and guess what? They can compare the infected and uninfected controls. um The infected cell culture with the uninfected control culture and there's no cytopathic effects in the uninfected control. And so it's not the case that the treatment given to the uninfected control is what's causing the cytopathic effects. It's observably not true. So they they can you know they could publish this supposed experiment of theirs. I'd love to see it you know if they if they want to publish it.
00:33:24
Jeremy R_ Hammond
andll I'll take a look. I'll look at their methodology. or First of all, out are they doing the same are they following the same steps that scientists all around the world are doing? That's number one. I want to see it. Show me. um and then And then they would have to explain why they're getting a different result from everyone else ah all around the world.
00:33:40
beyondterrain
Mm hmm.
00:33:41
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So it just my view of it is that it just like other claims, just like the claim that the CDC admitted SARS-CoV-2 wasn't isolated, um just like the claim that scientists never purify patient samples before they do cell cultures, just like the claim that ah they never use controls when they do cell culture. These are all hoax claims. They're false. And these are all the types of claims that are used to support this belief in the non-existence of viruses.
00:34:12
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:34:12
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And so my point of view is this, it's that you know there's you know if somebody wants to propose some alternative hypothesis for the pathogenesis of what are called infectious diseases, I'm all ears. But it's a situation where you know you have to accept the hypothesis that best fits the totality of available evidence. And the entire body of relevant scientific literature is consistent with this idea that viruses exist and they in some, not all, some can cause diseases in humans.
00:34:50
beyondterrain
Mm hmm.
00:34:54
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And i don't I'm not aware of a single study, not a single one, including um including all of the studies that are cited by proponents of the no virus theory, hypo thought the no virus belief, um including those papers, there's not a single paper that I've ever encountered that supports this idea, not one, not one. All of the lemetical literature supports the hypothesis that viruses exist and they can cause disease in humans.
00:35:27
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So it's a matter of competing hypotheses.
00:35:27
beyondterrain
um
00:35:29
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Are you going to accept the hypothesis that has no evidence or the hypothesis for which literally all of the evidence points to?
00:35:38
beyondterrain
I'm
00:35:38
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so I just have to accept the hypothesis that literally all of the scientific evidence points to.
00:35:41
beyondterrain
sure. Yeah. So, Electromicrospy is another method that's used, of course, to visualize viruses.
00:35:54
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yep.
00:35:54
beyondterrain
um Maybe you can speak to that a little bit and then we can dig into that.
00:36:00
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. Well, um you know, that this there's that claim too as well that, you know, what what scientists, you know, because there's published papers and you've seen it in the media where they show electron microscopy images of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, for example. um With this characteristic spike proteins, you know, which give it that, what you know, this why it's called coronavirus, corona meaning crown and in Spanish um or Latin. And you know so it's got that it's called the coronavirus literally because of the appearance that the the spike proteins give to it of the appearance of a crown. So this crown-like appearance is why it's literally called the coronavirus. um And so we've we've all seen those images, I think. um And there's a claim that, well, that's not really a virus that that scientists are ah photographing.
00:36:50
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um it's It's exosomes. well um You know, this this gets into additional claims that are demonstrably false. So, for example, you know, the claim that, well, scientists can't distinguish between exosomes and viruses. And you can go and look up that paper that's cited to support that claim. And you can see that actually the
Distinguishing Viruses from Similar Structures
00:37:11
Jeremy R_ Hammond
entire thrust of that paper was that actually um it's true that if you just are using electron microscopy, they're difficult to distinguish, granted.
00:37:23
Jeremy R_ Hammond
But the whole the throw whole thrust of the paper is how scientists can and do and should distinguish between exosomes and viruses. So there's additional, you know, analyses that scientists do to be able to distinguish, you know, yes, just looking at the electron micro microscope um images, ah you know, an exosome could look very similar to a virus.
00:37:41
beyondterrain
Thank
00:37:45
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Absolutely. And so this is the point that was made in the paper, but it's completely that, you know, statements like that from the paper are taken completely out of their context.
00:37:46
beyondterrain
you.
00:37:53
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And if you can just go and read the whole paper, um you know, the the whole point of the paper is is is about how scientists um ah can and should differentiate between the two. So the the claim that that you know that again, the the the claim being made this ah the the claim that this paper is being cited to support is that scientists can't distinguish between the two. And you go and read the paper and it talks all about how scientists can distinguish between the two and how they should do that. um So this is an example of kind of like these hoax claims that are out there. um And again, claims that are actually contradicted by the sources that are cited to support them.
00:38:32
Jeremy R_ Hammond
yeah
00:38:33
beyondterrain
Gotcha. Yeah. Um, nah, and I appreciate that honest take. Um, I, I would agree that, um, with what you're saying there about electron microscopes, it's not, it's not It's not enough. It's a piece of the puzzle for virology's claims.
00:38:50
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Precisely. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, again, and again that's a really important point. it's not just like It's not just about isolation or just about electron microscopy or just about whole genome sequencing. you know There's a variety of different tools um and analyses that scientists do to be able to identify and characterize viruses.
00:39:14
beyondterrain
Yeah. Um, definitely. And the last big one is, uh, immunology, serology, antibody research. That's, that's sort of the last big one, uh, used to identify antigens, uh, things like SDS page, um, electroparesis stuff, different, there are many different types of ways to do that.
00:39:26
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah.
00:39:37
beyondterrain
Western blot is a big one. Um, there's a ton of different types of blots too. Anyways. Um, that's another big one, you know, and, and that's one of the the things it's, ah it's all very reliant on, on each other to sort of prove each other correct. That's, um, um, like you were pointing out there, um, with antibodies, you know, one of the big things, and, and then this may be out of our scope here, you know, um, one of the the main claims, curious if you've heard about this, uh, how many thoughts, um, antibodies displaying.
Immune Response and Memory
00:40:14
beyondterrain
all antibodies displaying some sort of nonspecific behavior. And so shouldn't be used again to as a, you know, gold standard to detect whether or not there is some sort of virus or viral material present. I'm not sure if you've encountered that claim whatsoever, but.
00:40:34
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So non-specific in terms of that an antibody might bind with... um so So in other words, the assumption might be, okay, well, this antibody bound with this this particle, therefore that particle is such and such virus when actually that antibody might also bind with other particles. is that Is that what you mean? Is that the thrust of it?
00:40:56
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:40:57
Jeremy R_ Hammond
and Okay. um Actually, i don't don't I don't know that I've heard that. um But you know that's a legitimate that's a legitimate ah you know point that, yeah, sure, not antibodies might be not necessarily specific. that They might be nonspecific. But you know in general, um you know you know antibodies do have specificity to ah whatever they are developed to in response to. So for example, when you know when you have when you first experience an infection with SARS-CoV-2,
00:41:32
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And I'm just picking that because it's kind of at the forefront of my mind when I want i talk about this issue, but pick your virus, but I'll speak on that also because.
00:41:37
beyondterrain
Not in the version.
00:41:41
Jeremy R_ Hammond
ah because I've researched it so extensively.
00:41:43
beyondterrain
Sure.
00:41:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um You know, because in one of the reasons I spent a lot of time researching the immunology on SARS-CoV-2 was because of the claims that were, you know, throughout all of 2020, in the summer of 2020 through the fall, right up into the point when the um the vaccines reserve received emergency use authorization, we were bombarded with all these headlines claiming that people were losing their immunity to COVID-19. um And and i was you know I was writing to debunk all those propaganda claims that were of course designed to create fear and into to manufacture consent for the experimental vaccines that were under production.
00:42:18
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But anyhow, so I'm just picking this particular virus because it's in front of my mind when we talk about this issue and also because I just and know so much about the immunology of it.
00:42:22
beyondterrain
You get.
00:42:28
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But pick your virus, but I'm just gonna pick that one. so So when you're infected for the first time with SARS-CoV-2, You know, um it although there is some there is some level of cross you know across um reaction with prior infections from common cold viruses, common cold coronaviruses. So your body does have some, because you've experienced coronavirus infection with, you know, common human coronaviruses that cause the common cold, you've got some immunity to those those um those viruses, and there are are some,
00:43:04
Jeremy R_ Hammond
there is some like cross reaction in terms of your immune response from that past experience. um Not necessarily terribly protective against SARS-CoV-2 because it is quite different from the common cold coronaviruses. um And so it can take a a couple of weeks for your body to actually develop antibodies to that that infection. It can take several weeks. um but but the but and the body So the body starts going through this process of producing antibodies. so And you know it might start out producing antibodies that really don't have high affinity to the virus. But in time, the the antibodies that that are effective in binding to and neutralizing the virus are selected for
00:43:52
beyondterrain
Uh
00:43:52
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so the body learns and trains it trains itself, the immune system trains itself in how to produce an effective response. And so um and then what happens is um you know once you have essentially cleared the infection with SARS-CoV-2, also what happens is you you develop, yeah which is typical for you know infectious diseases, is you develop long-term immune memory.
00:44:14
beyondterrain
huh.
00:44:17
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So you have long-term bone marrow plasma cells. And this is one of the claims that they were making and ah in you know and in the media and the you know the headlines where you know people were losing their immunity. And that was based on this observation that, well, people had high level of antibodies after the acute phase of infection, and then it just started to plummet. And so people were losing their antibodies. And so therefore, they were losing their immunity. And this was a bunch of ridiculous nonsense that just it was like contrary to like immunology 101. And again, I'm no expert, but it's just like basic, basic immunology. that, well, that's completely normal for that to happen after the acute phasing infection.
00:44:50
beyondterrain
Thank you.
00:44:51
Jeremy R_ Hammond
It happens with every infection, where, yeah, they're they you know, you don't maintain that high level of antibodies after the acute. Yes, there's always going to be a a decrease in the antibody levels, but every study that looked at it after that found a continuation of of detectable antibodies in people's blood who had recovered from COVID-19. um And scientists also confirmed that, yes, that infection induces long-term bone marrow plasma cells. So you have long-term immunological memory so that if you ever encounter that virus again, your your body to your immune system doesn't need to learn all over again how to fight it off. It already knows. And so those cells are able to rapidly produce um antibodies again.
00:45:38
Jeremy R_ Hammond
to that that are high affinity to that that infecting pathogen. And this is where, you know, we talked about variants earlier. This is where, you know, another issue with the variants is that so people's immune memory would start producing um antibodies that are specific to whatever, so you know, variant that they were infected with.
00:45:54
beyondterrain
Thank
00:45:58
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Let's say they were infected with the original Wuhan strain um and later they were infected with Omicron.
00:45:59
beyondterrain
you.
00:46:04
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So their body was able to rapidly produce antibodies um you know But they weren't they weren't as specific to the Omicron variant because they were developed in response to the original Wuhan variant. right um and so But here's another really important thing is that with with natural immunity, the body is able to update itself.
00:46:19
beyondterrain
You can.
00:46:27
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so people who are you know maybe had a reinfection with Omicron, um their immune systems were able to like rapidly update that antibody response to be specific, to have greater specificity for the spike protein of the Omicron variant. um And this is something that people who received the vaccine weren't able to do, because with the vaccine, there's a problem that's known as original antigenic sin, where the initial priming of the immune system can prejudice the immune response to any subsequent exposure to whatever pathogen.
00:47:04
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so peoples whose ah people whose immune system were primed by infection have a robust long-term adaptive immune response, whereas people whose immune systems were primed by vaccination um don't.
00:47:20
beyondterrain
Thank
00:47:21
Jeremy R_ Hammond
and We've seen, of course, there's the rapidly waning immunity with the with the COVID-19 vaccines. And then there's this problem of original antigenic sin where they noticed that, you know, um if they did experience an infection, you know, what they call a breakthrough infection with, say, the Omicron variant.
00:47:38
beyondterrain
you.
00:47:39
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um that the antibody is generated don't adapt. they just they They stay fixated on producing an immune response to the spike protein of the extinct Wuhan strain um you know at the opportunity cost of of not producing a more ah specific response to the newly infecting variant. And so that's known in the literature as is original antigenic sin, or ah sometimes it's called immune priming, which I think is a really stupid name for it because
00:48:02
beyondterrain
Any
00:48:10
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um every immune reaction to any any new pathogen is immune priming. So it matters like, what is the priming? what is you know is it is it ah Is it priming from infection, so with natural immunity?
00:48:22
beyondterrain
other questions?
00:48:22
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Or is it priming from vaccination, which is different? And so just immune priming is kind of a very nondescript label for this phenomenon. and um But it's also called original antigenic sin, which I think is more is more fitting and a better description for it.
00:48:37
beyondterrain
And.
00:48:39
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But anyhow, yeah, I think, you know, so the this kind of speaks to the the we were talking about variance earlier, so that kind of ties together in terms of like antibody responses.
00:48:49
beyondterrain
Sure.
00:48:50
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And, um you know, there there is a question of specificity of antibodies to a pathogen. But you know, the the whole aim in terms of the immune system's function is to produce antibodies that are specific. And of course they're not always, and this can be a problem. and it's it's why It's why people can get reinfected with variants, even though they've had ah you know ah an infection before. um but
00:49:14
beyondterrain
Non-specificity of, of antibodies doesn't necessarily contradict that either though, you know, because like, if we have the, like they talk about the big five, that's what we learned about in this, our mice introductory microbiology classes. Um, you know, it doesn't necessarily go against the theory at large of, you know, having some sort of immune response either, which I think is interesting, um, used as a tool. It is a source of irreproducibility in the literature, which I think is problematic. And there are a lot of, of companies out there that are trying to remediate that. Like it's a huge problem in science is this non specificity of, um, of antibodies because it's used
00:50:00
beyondterrain
across the board, you know, in, in science and scientific research. So um something to look into. ah You know, I'm really curious about
00:50:08
Jeremy R_ Hammond
ah you i don't know I don't know what you're thinking of, but I'm thinking of like, for example, um and maybe this is completely different from what you're what you're thinking. But like, for example, um you know, they're they're trying to develop vaccines for Lyme disease. And the FDA is using antibody tests to kind of determine, you know, whether those vaccines are effective. But the problem is that um you know, a lot of people who are infected with Lyme don't develop antibodies. And so if you're just looking for antibodies to Lyme, and it's negative, it doesn't mean you don't have Lyme disease, for example.
00:50:37
beyondterrain
Mm-hmm.
00:50:43
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um you If you look at vaccine licensure, there's a problem with, with, um you know, looking with the use of antibodies. um because, you know, the that the fact the whole purpose of the vaccine is to is basically to to cause the body to to generate antibodies. um But, you know, of course, antibodies are not the immune system's only response to to pathogens. There's also cellular immune responses and T cells. And, you know, SARS-CoV-2 is actually a very good example of how um the cellular immune response is actually more important than the antibody response. And this is something that
00:51:19
Jeremy R_ Hammond
you know, the the public health establishment only seemed to discover after they after they had to finally admit, after it was just absolutely clear in the data that the vaccine effectiveness against infection waned rapidly. And suddenly they discovered cellular immunity. They were like, oh, but don't worry, you might get an infection, but you still have protection against the disease and your sos symptoms won't be as bad because of you have T cells.
00:51:41
beyondterrain
Hmm.
00:51:42
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And suddenly they discovered T cells, right?
00:51:44
beyondterrain
Hmm.
00:51:45
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But, of course, you know, this is something that they had always known about and and they just never educated the public that it's not about antibodies. It's not all about it. Antibodies are important, um you know, in terms of preventing a circulating virus from being able to bind with the cell receptors and enter and penetrate the cell membrane to gain access into the cell and then use using the cell's mechanisms to replicate itself.
00:52:15
beyondterrain
Mm-hmm.
00:52:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
because is you know the virus is an intracellular parasite. It requires host cells to replicate. And again, that's why scientists use cell cultures to isolate viruses. um but you know but But antibodies are just one um factor in in in you know a broad range of immune responses that are important. so um So I'm not sure if that's along the lines of what you were thinking, but ah we might have some agreement in terms of, You know, if you're just looking at antibodies, it it can be very deceptive, you know, or when they when they say that, well, if you if you have ah if you have a certain level of antibodies, that means you're protected.
00:52:50
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Well, it's not necessarily true. um you could in fact In fact, with SARS-CoV-2, study after study was showing that, you know, that patients who had severe disease was was correlated with a high level of antibodies.
00:52:53
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:53:05
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Whereas patients who had very mild um symptoms or no symptoms at all, they had an infection, but no disease. And that's another important distinction. You can have an infection without disease. And so they were finding that patients who had, you know, the who who their immune systems just absolutely handled the virus without hardly any problems whatsoever at very low levels of antibodies. And this is explained by the importance of the cellular immune responses. And so there was actually the contrary correlation. They want us to think of you, oh, you need a high level of antibodies to be protected against this disease. In fact, um in terms of natural infection, um the the opposite was actually the the correlation observed were that people who had high levels of antibodies were deficient in cellular immunity. and And so they developed more and more antibodies, but those were also the patients that had the most severe disease. And so absolutely, if you're just looking at antibodies in this context, um yeah there's a lot of, um
00:54:03
Jeremy R_ Hammond
misunderstanding and misconceptions about that. um But I don't know if that has anything to do with the you know the line of thought you you were on.
00:54:09
beyondterrain
Well, that's an interesting observation at the very least. I think that's something that that merits a little more digging into for sure. That's because that's a really interesting observation to say the least for sure. um You know, and it sort of circles into one of the last things I want to ask you about. I
PCR Tests and Misinterpretations
00:54:24
beyondterrain
got two more things that we got time, but um the The one thing I want to ask you about is the um PCR test.
00:54:34
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, glad you brought it up.
00:54:36
beyondterrain
Yeah, I think that's an important part of our discussion for sure. So maybe I'll let you have the floor and then I can chime in.
00:54:40
Jeremy R_ Hammond
yeah
00:54:43
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Well, sure. I mean, as soon as you mentioned that, my again, my thought is there's a lot of confusion out there. I've had so many of my own readers. um It's not so much anymore. But, you know, in 2020 and 2021, throughout that that period of time, um just so many of my readers were so confused about kind of the distinction, um because they were seeing how ah the PCR tests, you know, the, the p you know, they the, the the tests that were being used to diagnose COVID-19, there was systematic fraud in the way they were utilized to diagnose COVID-19.
00:55:17
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:55:23
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Because the the pcr those types of PCR tests um just detect viral fragments. So they can detect ah RNA from the virus, um but they don't but they don't look at the whole genome sequence. So they can detect just fragments of viral RNA and you can have ah you know fragments of viral RNA in your body and it doesn't mean you have an infection. It could very well mean that you that maybe you were infected before and your immune system has already fought off the virus and you don't have an infection at all and you're completely symptomless, there's no infection, you're not contagious, you're not a threat to anyone and they were calling people who had just like fragments of RNA in their system
00:55:57
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:56:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
you know they were calling them COVID-19 patients. And well, that's false. you know And to to utilize these tests in that way um was really systematic scientific fraud in the way they... they the And the other thing is is you could have you could even have an infection, but that's not necessarily the cause of the disease, um which I'm sure
00:56:30
beyondterrain
sure
00:56:31
Jeremy R_ Hammond
you agree with, that you know somebody might have, you know the PCR test might be positive for you know viral RNA from SARS-CoV-2. It doesn't mean that that's the cause of the disease. Again, there might not even be ah an active infection in that case.
00:56:41
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:56:43
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And so to to describe anyone with a positive PCR test as a COVID-19 case so also overlooks the distinction between infection and and disease, because again, you can have an infection and not and not have not have the disease. The disease is the the the the the symptoms
00:56:58
beyondterrain
Okay.
00:57:01
Jeremy R_ Hammond
That's what a disease is. The clinical disease is the the syndrome, the the symptoms um that you that you get from having ah an infection. If you don't have any symptoms, you don't have the disease. um So the disease doesn't actually develop, and that's another important distinction.
00:57:12
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:57:15
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So the way that they were counting COVID-19 cases was really premised on this scientifically fraudulent use of these PCR tests. And so a lot of my readers and a lot of people that I saw, you know, it's on social media and whatever, engaged with were just like they couldn't, they were seeing that. And then they somehow like took that over to the use of um like um genetic sequencing, genome sequencing, which uses PCR technology. And so they were kind of saying, well, so the that the PCR tests are being used in a fraudulent manner and therefore, you know, well, the whole genome sequencing uses PCR technology that must be fraudulent too. And so people were kind of making this leap of logic in in because they were hearing that type of thing from
00:58:00
Jeremy R_ Hammond
others who were kind of propagating these types of claims. And so I kept finding myself having to kind of clarify it like, you know, like, Hey, look, ah yes, I'm saying that whole genome sequencing proves that these this virus exists. It doesn't mean I'm saying that these PCR tests are are being used in a legitimate fashion to diagnose COVID-19. It's like people would just as would like make that assumption and and like attribute that kind of argument to me.
00:58:21
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:58:24
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And I'm like, no, that's not what I'm saying at all. um So anyway, when you bring it up and I say, I'm glad you brought it up, that this is kind of what's going through my mind because of that experience of mine dealing with lots of people on social media or even my own readers emailing me and in in in kind of ah either just confused about it and asking me or like challenging me and confronting me um about that.
00:58:44
beyondterrain
Yeah.
00:58:47
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And so yeah it's really important to understand the difference between like those PCR assays that were used for for improperly for diagnosis and just the PCR technology itself, um which is a legitimate technology.
00:58:47
beyondterrain
My biggest, biggest.
00:58:52
beyondterrain
but like Certainly. Certainly.
00:58:58
beyondterrain
Great.
00:59:01
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um And so people need to understand that distinction.
00:59:04
beyondterrain
um And I'm glad we agree on that, you know, and I think I'm curious if you. looked into this at all, but you know they were running the tests at a much higher cycle threshold than is scientifically acceptable.
00:59:13
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yes. Well, that's that's that's the other factor in that is that they were they were running the PCR test at such a high cycle threshold. So for your viewers who aren't aware. So um the way the PCR tests work is actually, there you know so it's reverse transcription, polymerase chain reaction. So RTPCR. um And so they they because the virus is an RNA virus and so they have to reverse transcribe the RNA into DNA and then they use cyclical amplification of the DNA up to a you know what they would consider a threshold of positivity. um But they were they were running the test at such high ah cycle thresholds
00:59:59
Jeremy R_ Hammond
that they were turning up positive for just like just you know tiny fragments, like tiny amounts of viral RNA that did not represent um vi whole viable virus. And and and it's such site high cycle thresholds that it was known that that didn't represent that in all probability, they were running the test at such high cycle thresholds that they knew that they were that it probably did not represent somebody who had an infection and somebody who was contagious, and they knew it.
01:00:18
beyondterrain
Yeah Absolutely,
01:00:31
Jeremy R_ Hammond
so And this is this again, I'm glad you brought up the cycle thresholds, because again, it just speaks to how how widespread the scientific fraud was in terms of diagnosing what they called COVID-19 cases.
01:00:31
beyondterrain
absolutely
01:00:42
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And then of course, anyone who was a COVID-19 case who died, they considered a COVID-19 death.
01:00:48
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:00:49
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So you know the amount of scientific fraud in that regard was you know absolute. But
Historical and Modern Contagion Studies
01:00:54
Jeremy R_ Hammond
again, ah you know a lot of people were confused about that when it came to like the PCR technology being used with home whole genome sequencing um and just kind of not understanding the difference.
01:01:02
beyondterrain
yeah It's a different discussion.
01:01:05
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um But yeah, i mean im I'm absolutely in agreement about the systematic fraud involved with PCR tests.
01:01:07
beyondterrain
Absolutely.
01:01:12
beyondterrain
Yeah. um Okay. That's great. The last, if I can ask you about one more thing.
01:01:17
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure.
01:01:19
beyondterrain
I'm curious about your thoughts on like real world contagion studies and the big one for me and the first one that I ever read that was the most convincing for me on sort of the terrain versus germ argument was the gallops Island study that was done back in, um, by Rosno back in 1919 for the Spanish flu. And, you know, he took a bunch of, I'm not sure if you're familiar with the, with the study, but
01:01:42
Jeremy R_ Hammond
ah My recollection was 1918, but I think pretty sure we're talking about the same study, yeah.
01:01:47
beyondterrain
I think we're talking about the same study. 1918 is correct. Yes, you're right. But yeah, I'm curious. So I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. You know, the listeners are are quite familiar. It's the controlled contagion studies, essentially, of trying to prove restored contagion.
01:01:58
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, that's the one I've most often seen cited. um But i don't I don't recall. It's been some time. I think I've looked at that whole study. Pretty sure I've ah managed to get ahold of it and and look at it. But I don't specifically recall. um Other than that, you know the the important point to make is that you know in 1918, they knew practically nothing about viruses. And they knew practically nothing ah about viral transmission and contagion.
01:02:29
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And um they they had some sense that there were these tiny particles that were you know transmissible and and um you know could infect people.
01:02:30
beyondterrain
Okay.
01:02:37
Jeremy R_ Hammond
But their their knowledge of virology and immunology was just primitive and basic. um And we've had you know over a century of scientific research since then um with many, many studies demonstrating transmissibility of and Well, demonstrating existence of as well as ah contagiousness of viruses, um including, as I mentioned earlier, you know with with SARS-CoV-2, again, there's that claim that that you know Cox postulates as understood today.
01:03:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Of course, Cox original postulates were just plain wrong. so you know And then you you taught you mentioned rivers, kind of you know modification of Cox postulates.
01:03:13
beyondterrain
you
01:03:18
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Cox postulates have been kind of modified over time. um to become you know more specific and more accurate and and more more valid in terms of how do you determine whether a particular agent causes a disease. um So when it's referred to cox postulates being fulfilled in terms of SARS-CoV-2, as scientists understand cox postulates today and in the modern research methods and modern understanding of of you know the steps involved to actually demonstrate ah causality.
01:03:50
beyondterrain
Thank you.
01:03:50
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um So, you know, they there again, there were, you know, animal challenge studies. um And even as I mentioned, there was actually one human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2 where they deliberately infected human subjects um and then observed the the pathogenesis of of disease and in those patients. um So, yeah, I mean, that this claim that, you know, there're you know people I see people citing that 1918 study as though that that study proves that there's no yeah that the flu wasn't contagious, but it it doesn't prove that.
01:04:22
Jeremy R_ Hammond
um i mean
01:04:24
beyondterrain
Gotcha.
01:04:24
Jeremy R_ Hammond
ah guess i guesss I guess that's my main point is that that study doesn't prove that.
01:04:25
beyondterrain
Can I tell you something about?
01:04:29
beyondterrain
Sure. Got it. And that's, that's good. You know, and I just, I want to tell you something about my experience in university, um, because I just graduated from my degree in 2022. So when I was in microbiology, when I took all my microbiology classes, they taught Koch's postulates and I could appreciate what you're saying. Like I can, you know, that's ah That's an area of distrust for me personally.
01:04:57
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Okay.
01:04:57
beyondterrain
And I think that there's this, it's it's not right in my mind that university students are going in, they're learning about Koch's postulates as being the gold standard way that things are approached. When now inside of fields, something different is being done. I think that's a huge problem.
01:05:16
Jeremy R_ Hammond
you You mean they taught you like Cox original postulates as though that's still valid today.
01:05:20
beyondterrain
Original postulates, the four postulates is what we were taught in multiple classes, not just one micro and and high level up class 3,000, 4,000 level courses.
01:05:25
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Wow. Okay, okay, so Okay,
01:05:30
beyondterrain
They were teaching Cokes postulates and
01:05:33
Jeremy R_ Hammond
okay so just as an example of what I mean when I think that his original postulates are invalid and and now known to be incorrect is for example He had made an assumption that if there's an infection therefore there will be a you know with a with a pathogen therefore there will be a disease and so um you will you will not find In other words, you will not find that pathogen in anyone who doesn't present with the disease, which is completely false.
01:05:52
beyondterrain
We know that's not true.
01:05:59
beyondterrain
yeah
01:06:02
Jeremy R_ Hammond
and was subsequent subsequently disproven, which is why one of the reasons I think Rivers was was correcting the original Koch's postulates and updated them with you know the improved knowledge of scientific thinking.
01:06:10
beyondterrain
yeah Not a word of rivers.
01:06:13
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So i'm I'm really shocked to hear that they're actually teaching the original Koch's postulate as though they hadn't been like refined over the over over a century of of scientific thought and knowledge, that that that hadn't been refined. that um That would also, if I was you going through that experience, would also create distrust with me because that's crazy. Yeah, that's crazy.
01:06:31
beyondterrain
yeah
01:06:33
Jeremy R_ Hammond
But I guess i should it shouldn't surprise me that they would teach something like that and in in school.
01:06:33
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:06:39
beyondterrain
So the other amazing thing was like, I was taking genetics too. My, my degree was largely genetics. I took biochemistry and molecular biology. So it was mostly genetics.
01:06:45
Jeremy R_ Hammond
OK.
01:06:47
beyondterrain
Um, you know, I was in a genetics course during the real height of, of COVID and. we were learning about the intricacies of the polymerase chain reaction ah test. And my professor probably said 33 cycles a thousand times. We were tested on it. It was in our exams, midterms, everything. 33 cycles, 33 cycles. When I brought out the CDC document that said that labs should run at 40 cycles, she almost kicked me out of the class. You know, she licked me up in front of the whole class. And anyways, du
01:07:22
beyondterrain
My, my experiences, um, certainly, you know, influence my, my view in life a lot.
01:07:27
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Well, Fauci himself admitted that when you run even at 33, forget 40, even at 33 or 32, that's probably a non-viable fragment of RNA.
01:07:29
beyondterrain
or
01:07:39
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:07:40
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So.
01:07:40
beyondterrain
Yeah. You know, so I, I think, you know, and I really appreciate you for, for what you do because you know, you're going firsthand and you're learning about this. You're looking at this stuff. Um, I know we disagree on a few points, but I think generally we agree on quite a bit as well. You know, we agree.
01:07:54
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah, you know, I think it's important to focus on those, you know, the common ground in the areas of agreement and at least to establish a basis for
Respectful Discussion and Conclusion
01:08:01
Jeremy R_ Hammond
discussion, right?
01:08:01
beyondterrain
Absolutely.
01:08:01
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So I appreciate your approach and, and you know, inviting me on respectfully and ah with an open mind to have this discussion.
01:08:03
beyondterrain
absolutely
01:08:09
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:08:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
And, you know, I think this is actually a great example of the type of discussion that can be had on this contentious issue. I've had a lot of bad experiences, to be honest with you, um dealing with this issue with people. You know, just like I've never had I've had probably more hate mail about that about that issue than I have on, you know, because before I was doing um stuff on like health freedom, I was, you know, writing pretty much on entirely on like foreign policy matters. And I think I had more hate mail um for challenging you know these claims about the non-existence of viruses than I did for like writing about the Israel-Palestine conflict.
01:08:45
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:08:45
Jeremy R_ Hammond
So it was quite
01:08:46
beyondterrain
Imagine.
01:08:47
Jeremy R_ Hammond
It was quite disturbing to me, to be honest. um So I appreciate this conversation and the respectfulness of it. And um you know I'm glad that we're able to find so many points of agreement, yeah.
01:08:58
beyondterrain
and And I do, I completely agree with that point too, um with what you're saying. there there is There is a level of hostility that i that I'm completely against. um And I think it's just a problem in the health freedom movement. you know like it It's hindering productic progress more so than anything. you know We talk about how the establishment suppresses us all, whatever. you know, not being able to converse with it within the sort of health freedom communities is a bigger problem, certainly indicative of a much larger issue at hand.
01:09:29
beyondterrain
So, um, I'd love to do this again sometime.
01:09:30
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Yeah.
01:09:33
beyondterrain
I'm sure, I'm sure we'll be able to, maybe we can, uh, next time we can delve into some studies together. I think that could be quite interesting, uh, to do as well. Like if we get into the more nitty gritty stuff, if if you're open to to another conversation in the future.
01:09:44
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. Well, with the understanding that you've got more educational background and in those areas than I do.
01:09:49
beyondterrain
ah ah thats
01:09:49
Jeremy R_ Hammond
yeah i have a I had a communications degree. and I went to school for film and video is what was my emphasis. um So you know i didn't I didn't have, you know I had some biology and I had some, um I don't think I had any, I had one class on, we discussed genetics in my anthropology class, as I recall, but you know, I never studied any of these fields.
01:10:00
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:10:09
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Again, I'm not a scientist, so I don't have that background, but you know, if you want to look at some studies that, you know, I'm happy to give my layman's perspective on them.
01:10:13
beyondterrain
Yeah.
01:10:16
beyondterrain
Well, I think it would give an interest interesting discussion nevertheless. And, you know, it ought to be quite honest, I think you're brilliant too, you know, you and you've, you've done a lot of work. So I really appreciate that honestly. And I appreciate you coming on. Thanks so much for your time today.
01:10:28
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. Appreciate you having me.
01:10:29
beyondterrain
Um, And I just want to hear maybe where the listener can learn more from you. Like I've read your your blog, um very informative, a lot of great information there. You can highlight that anywhere else that they can they can find you on the internet and how they can support your work too.
01:10:45
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Sure. JeremyRHammond.com is my website. It's where I publish almost all of my content. um And when you visit JeremyRHammond.com, just sign up for my email newsletters. And of course I'm on social media, um but you know you can get the links to... um my all my profiles and and from my newsletters. So yeah, just go to go to my website and sign up for my newsletters to stay updated with my work. you know I cover foreign policy issues, ah matters of health treatment, speaking out against public vaccine policy, and the systematic violation of the you know fundamental human right to informed consent.
01:11:19
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Of course, I was against the lockdowns from the beginning, speaking out and exposing the lies that were being told to manufacture consent for the lockdown madness and their coerced mass vaccination endgame. So I write about quite a wide variety of topics, also economic matters and economic freedom, with particular emphasis on the role of the Federal Reserve. So I've written on a wide variety of topics over the years. You can find all myself at JeremyOrHimmon.com.
01:11:46
beyondterrain
Awesome. Yeah, we'll put the all those links down below for for the listeners. Again, appreciate your time. Thanks so much.
01:11:52
Jeremy R_ Hammond
Thank you.
01:11:54
beyondterrain
You don't want to thank you all for listening. You should all know that this is not medical advice. This is for your informational purposes only. ah But also remember, we're all responsible sovereign beings capable of thinking, criticizing, understanding, absolutely anything. We, the people in the greater forces are together, self-healer self-governable self self-governable, self-teachers, so much more. Please reach out if you have any questions, criticism, comments, concerns. Can't wait to hear what you all have to say about this episode. I think we'll have some lively discussions and Instagram DMs after this one for sure. um And I know, um you know, ah Jeremy's open to conversing as well. I would certainly ask that everyone remains respectful. I hope that that's something I foster in my community. So, um you know, I know he's open to to chatting about this stuff. so
01:12:34
beyondterrain
You know where to find me on Instagram if you want to reach out. You know where to find him now. And listen, I really appreciate you all for listening. If you enjoyed, give us a like, share, comment, subscribe, review, whatever you are. Whatever your platform is, you know how to help support us. So that goes a long way. I really appreciate it. Sharing especially. And just remember, there's two types of people in the world. Those who believe they can, those believe they can't, and they are both correct. Remember that. Thanks guys. Take care.