ethical objection vs correcting the science (virology and vaccines)
I apologize for writing something so long. At the very least I invite you to click on a few of the embedded links. They are very interesting and informative!

In discussions of vaccines, many Christians frame their analysis around the ethical problem, i.e. the argument that a vaccine can be refused on the ethical ground that fetal tissue contributed to its creation and testing. Fetal tissue utilization is actually a worse problem than I thought: look for the book by Pamela Acker, “Vaccination: A Catholic Perspective”, and her various interviews such as the one footnoted below (1) by Restoring the Faith.

To my thinking, the ethical objection seems limited, perhaps because it defines the problem narrowly and overlooks the needs of those who cannot perceive the ethical objection. An ethical argument is mostly a personal defense, limited to a specific objecting person and dependents. As virologists and researchers come up with more things to ‘vaccinate’ against, a critique of the science works as a hole-in-one option to throw off the entire industry, which is more efficient and beneficial than objecting individually, to individual injections.

I believe that a critique of virological science is far more promising. The basic problem of virology was known at least as far back as the 1980s, when some considered it doubtful that immunodeficiency was caused by a virus, a doubt that was well expressed by Peter Duesberg and that he became well known for. He believed that people’s immune systems were stressed by extreme behaviors and consequently became deficient. A great deal of bodily detoxification is ongoing in such a case, and the cellular fragments contain genetic material. Patterns among these are assumed to be “viruses” but it is by no means clear that there is even a pathogen. An excellent overview of problems associated with the AIDS debacle is to be found in the House of Numbers documentary material.

In 2007, Torsten Engelbrecht and Claus Kohnlein wrote a helpful book titled “Virus Mania: How the medical industry continually invents epidemics…”, and the great news is that a new edition is ready, featuring a chapter on the public health scam of 2020. Here is a blurb about the 2007 edition on Here is another very helpful look at the book on The latest edition can apparently be purchased at although I don’t immediately see how to start an account there from the USA. I have sent them an email.

An excellent source of insights about AIDS, SARS, and other illnesses thought to be caused by ‘viruses’ are those gathered by the recently deceased David Crowe whose papers and talks continue to be made available by his estate, for which we can be thankful. He was preparing a book about SARS, an episode in Asia which resembles this global mess we have now.

Another important researcher, this one a virologist, who has worked hard to explain the problems in the field of virology is Dr Stefan Lanka. He is currently organizing research to help show that there is no such thing as a virus responsible for the current phony pandemic.

In 2020 a number of people worked hard to help shine a healing light on the insanity and hysteria. Among these is Dr Cowan, who, together with Sally Morell (Weston A. Price Foundation), wrote an excellent book affordably available for your Nook device (or free app), titled “The Contagion Myth”. He gives semi-regular talks about the problem, which you can find on his bitchute channel -- on bitchute because the Guardians of Goodthink don’t want people finding it on YouTube or Facebook. The core idea that they summarize in their book is that what we are calling a “virus” is in fact cellular breakdown material having no pathogenic nature. Researchers pull material out of patients, and assume that a pattern they find is a “cause”. Indeed to suppress these bodily occurrences is harmful to health, because what is thwarted is a natural detoxification undertaken by the body. A “strain” is simply a different pattern detected among cellular detritus.

The short of it is that the science is deeply flawed. It is erroneous to suppose that there is a pathogen of which to be afraid. Can you imagine how many apple carts will be upset by this fact, when it is finally understood? How many profit opportunities will have to be set aside, on this, and future, magic illness scares?

The ethical objection allows the false science to persevere, and doesn’t help people who don’t perceive the ethics correctly. Even if a person sees the light and decides “Oh right, now that you mention it killing babies is morally evil,” only with difficulty can they suddenly ‘get religion’ and apply it. The ethical objection also doesn’t stop the test-demic, i.e. the phony PCR testing. See this discussion by Dr Sam Bailey about meaninglessness in PCR footnoted below as (2), and her discussion with Dr Engelbrecht about the fact that what we face is nothing more than a test-demic, footnoted below as (3). The ethical objection will therefore not stop the eventual travel passport which will become an internal travel permit in all likelihood, no doubt linked in time to a social credit score. The ethical argument is not absolute in any case. If the public hysteria is sufficient, there is no ethical objection that will be allowed to stand.

Perhaps arguing the ethics will excite Catholics to the point that enough people will resist the injection and even the testing. But I doubt it. The hierarchy is pushing vaccine belief. For example in one NO mass I attended, there was a bidding prayer that prayed for good distribution of the vaccine. So there you have a clear one-sided view of the matter, with no opposing view. That will influence a lot of them who might not otherwise investigate these subjects.

There are many scientists and doctors who oppose what is happening. America’s Frontline Doctors group, the Great Barrington Declaration, and a bunch of other efforts are underway. The problem as I see it is that there is tremendous funding inertia in the research pipeline and much political benefit being enjoyed. The scientific leadership needs to be replaced in the CDC and WHO. But just as food industry groups captured the FDA to create a bogus food chart that doesn’t tell the truth about food, so medical industry interests are gaining benefit from the current ideology of vaccinating against putative pathogens. We need to fight for good food, and we need to fight for good science. This is the best way forward. At any rate, even if the ethical objection is the highest absolute value and the highest in one’s own hierarchy of values, being aware of the flaws in virological science is a benefit.

Footnoted videos.



[-] The following 4 users Like TruthWhichIsChrist's post:
  • Basil3HCm, Fortunabeargirl, J Michael, Zedta

Messages In This Thread
ethical objection vs correcting the science (virology and vaccines) - by TruthWhichIsChrist - 02-14-2021, 10:49 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)