Morrowindur and cOVID-19

low key, for none of the "virusses". Virology is dogma.

Can’t test it on human via injecting them as it’s unethical but can inject with with vaccines that contain the virus lol

@@be_rt This guy gets it. It's sad most don't realize this about germ and viral theory. All dogma, no science.

You didn't watch this video to the end did you? Try that next time.

Thank you so much!

Is this for bacteria only or virus’s and bacteria?

Any pathogen, though some (like viruses) can’t be grown in pure culture. Koch didn’t know about viruses when he developed his Postulates.

@@BiologyProfessor You can also use Rivers modifications from 1937, which has overlap with Koch's. There is no proof that any virus has been isolated--that has to be done, because a virus us still a pathogen if it exists at all--I see no proof that any virus exists--nor any proof of contagion--where's the studies? It appears that Pasteur's germ theory is incorrect, and terrain theory is correct.

I’m glad you found me then! ;)

It is kind of like a double check to make sure that the bacterium you injected into the host in step 3 really did infect the host and grow and replicate to cause disease.

Biology Professor ok... thanks I'm really enjoying your Channel. You have helped me understand microbiology quite a bit

Awesome! That's great to hear!

Thanks! I enjoy teaching this way.

Yes, thank you for pointing this out. The work of Rivers is mentioned here: www.nature.com/articles/423240a

You are welcome!

It’s intracellular (replication inside cells), not intercellular (between cells). And here, we are using the basic definition of a parasite: something that lives in or on its host and steals nutrients from that host, to the benefit of the parasite and the detriment of the host. Anti-parasitic medication‘s are typically not going to work against viruses, because anti-parasitic medications are designed to treat eukaryotic parasites, like protozoans or helminthic worms. Antiviral medications are developed to target viruses specifically.

@@BiologyProfessor Thank you!

Haha, you're welcome. :)

Great! :)

This does not apply to viruses. Koch developer these postulates before the discovery of viruses. Viruses cannot be grown in pure culture.

@@BiologyProfessor They put Vero cells and an antibiotic in the purification process and faked finding CV 19--viruses cannot grow in culture because none exist. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/f9WpqrGBvaeymWg.html Andrew Kaufman M.D. - The Rooster in the River of Rats - Koch's Postulates (35 min) He shows exactly how the pandemic got started and brings the details of the studies out to view and reveals the fraud.

This is an interesting question. For the purpose of Koch's Postulates, with the goal of proving conclusively that a certain microbe causes a certain disease, it is important to use a healthy animal subject. However, I could accept the argument that, for certain microbes only capable of establishing diseases in an already unhealthy host (one with a weakened immune system, for example), that a more susceptible host with a weaker immune system might be necessary for disease symptoms to appear. This will normally not be the case though. Thanks for asking!

I've updated my recording equipment since this video was made; my new videos are much better sound.

Jeannette S turn it up then

There are new kinds of evidence, like PCR tests. When thousands of people test positive for a specific sequence of viral DNA, and the transmission chain from person to person can be observed, and treatments for that virus that work in vitro also work in patients, it’s pretty clear what’s going on.

That is misinformation that has been spreading, unfortunately. www.google.com/amp/s/in.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN24420X

@@BiologyProfessor Not completely though, I found an interview of Kary Mullis in which he said that testing with PRC doesnt mean the thing you are testing for made you sick or will hurt you per definition. its just an amplification of molocules, and if you amplicate the right ones often enough you can find almost any common strain of bacteria or virus. Even when those virusses are already dead we still carry "prints" on our genomes and/or DNA. So basically high infection rates depend on how many cycles of amplification you use. So in his words, you cant mis use PCR, you can only interpet it wrong.

It’s true that it could be interpreted incorrectly. That’s why it is only one type of evidence to be used. Using epidemiology to track transmission structure, using animal models to do infection studies, using PCR on people with and without symptoms, etc. all give a fuller picture of Disease.

Thanks :)

You are welcome

Glad it was helpful!

You are welcome! I try to keep it short and sweet. ✅

I've updated my recording equipment since this video was made; my new videos are much better sound.

No problem :)

Bordetella pertussis is an example of a bacterium that only affects humans not animals. HIV is an example of a virus that only affects humans.

@@BiologyProfessor So How can we prove HIV causes AIDS? Is there any postulate better than Koch's?

She answers this near the end of the video...and the answer is no.

Most welcome 😊

I go over some of the problems and caveats, starting at 4:04

Well yeah it’s a virus not a bacteria

It's a pathogen so this would still apply

Well, covid 19 is a disease, and the virus that causes covid 19 is called SARS-CoV-2. @@jeneway1 Viruses won't replicate in pure culture so this particular process wouldn't apply.

Thanks :)

@@BiologyProfessor always welcome 🥰keep uploading such kind of vedios

* What's your favorite color ? *

Hope it went well!

I suppose it would depend on whom you ask.

Not in every situation this can be done! It was considered before, but not now. For ex they don't experiment with syphilis

Some people would agree with you, others would not. It is kind of a gray area, I suppose. Thanks for commenting!

It is not Really.... it is unethical to inject a patient something without taking consent or giving them enough info about the injection. it is unethical to talk about patients privacy outside the working premise. but it is not unethical to inject an animal with pathogens in my eyes, because first of all, it does not the brain capacity or self consciousnesses to be aware of what is actually happening. You might argue, "But what if there is a human in a coma, they dont have the brain Capacity or self Consciousness". And to that is say, but that is not the default state of a normal human beings. Humans are classified as Animals but we are the superior to other Animals due to our Brain, and we cannot treat both the same. Therefore, we do have to respect a human's decision and privacy, and we should not treat animals in the same way. I do agree that animal testing is bad, but that is "Empathy" and not "Ethics". Ethics is simply a set of rules that separates the right from the wrong. And animal testing according to Ethics is not wrong if you really thing about it.

Very sorry, but I do not speak Turkish.

Fair enough. I did my best. :)

@@BiologyProfessor Exactly, and that's what counts!

Yes :)

auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2020/11/16/kochs-postulates-covid-and-misinformation-rabbit-holes.html

You flunk a lot, huh?

@@231mac with a comment such as that I would suggest you probably are the one who flunks, as you put it. I never have 🤣🤣

@@chickstar69duplicity35 That _really_ doesn't make any sense. At all. Ever. Could you please elaborate on how you came to hypothesis that bit of learned wisdom? Oh, and use more emojis next time! They really accentuate the height of your intellect! Wow oh wow, we're dealing with a Grand Master over here!!!

@@231mac hypothesis is a noun btw

@@chickstar69duplicity35 You're completely right, I meant to write 'hypothesize'. Now, with your inability to capitalize, or to even utilize basic punctuation skills, we'll call it even. 😉

How so? Literally explains what Koch’s postulates is and how to apply it. Maybe rewatch?

I discuss the limitations in this video you commented on, starting about 4:05.