38 WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015

WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015 39

Dismantling the virus theory
The “measles virus” as an example
Why should we doubt the existence of viruses? What are viruses and what are they not?
How are viruses being scientifically demonstrated to exist?

Author: Dr. Stefan Lanka
Scientists must question everything and especiallywhat they love the most, i.e. their own discoveries
and ideas. This basic rule of scientific research helps
avoid erroneous developments and reveals the ones
that already exist. Also, we must all be allowed toquestion the status quo, otherwise we would live in a
dictatorship. Moreover, science cannot be limited to aselected number of institutions and experts. Sciencecan and must be conducted by anyone who has thenecessary knowledge and the appropriate methods.
Science can be considered science only if its claims
are verifiable, reproducible and if they allow predictions. Science also needs external control, because,
as we will see, a part of the medical sciences has lost
touch with reality for quite some time. Anyone who
has knowledge of biology and the genesis of life, of

The origins of the idea
The present notion of a virus is based on the ancient
ideas that all diseases were caused by poisons (“toxins”) and that people would regain their health byproducing “antitoxins” as an “antidote”. Indeed, afew diseases are caused by poisons. The subsequentidea, that the body can restore its health by producing or being given “antidotes”, was born when it
was observed that people survived bigger amountsof poison (such as alcohol) when their body wastrained by consuming slowly increasing amountsof that poison. However, in reality there are no an-

the development and functions of the tissue, of the
body and of the brain, will automatically question
the assumptions about viruses.
In the reality of the body and of its mechanisms,
there is no place for hypothetical malignant processes. All biological processes, including those thatcan end in suffering, pain and death, are originallymeant to be useful.
A different approach to the virus phenomenon ispossible and necessary: any layman with some background knowledge reading scientific papers about
pathogenic viruses can realize that such viruses do
not exist and what is being described are only typicalcomponents and characteristics of cells. This background knowledge will be provided in this article.

tidotes, instead the body produces enzymes, which
neutralize and eliminate the poisons (alcohol).
In 1858, Rudof Virchow, the founder of modern medicine, plagiarized the findings of other scientists, suppressed their essential discoveries and thus a false
view on the cause of diseases was born and imposed
as a dogma, which is in fact still in effect to date. According to this dogma, all diseases supposedly originate inside the cells.1 Virchow’s cellular pathology
re-introduced into medicine the ancient and refuted
the humoral doctrine and claimed that diseases develop from pathogenic poisons (in Latin: virus).

The search for these pathogenic poisons remains
to date fruitless, however, when bacteria were discovered, it was assumed that they were producing
the pathogenic poisons. This supposition, called“the germ theory”, was immediately accepted andremains very successful up to the present time.
This theory is so successful that the majority ofthe people are still not aware of the fact that theso-called bacterial toxins are actually normal enzymes, which either cannot appear in a humanbeing, or, if they do, they never appear in such an
amount as to make them dangerous.
Then it was discovered that, when they slowly begin to die, bacteria create tiny, apparently lifelessforms of survival, the so-called spores. It was thensuspected that these spores were toxic and thatthey were the so-called pathogenic poisons. This
was then refuted, since the spores are rapidly developing into bacteria when their vital resources
are being restored. When scientists in the laboratory observed that the weak, highly inbred bacteria perished very quickly while turning into muchsmaller structures than the spores, it was first believed that the bacteria were being killed by the alleged pathogenic poisons, called viruses, and thatthe viruses were thereby replicating.
Due to the belief that these -at the time of theirdiscovery still invisible- structures were killing thebacteria, they were called phages/bacteriophages,“eaters of bacteria”. Only later it was determinedthat merely highly inbred and therefore almost
non-viable bacteria can be made to turn into phages, or bacteria which are being destroyed so fastthat they do not have time to form spores.
The introduction of the electron microscopy led tothe discovery of the structures resulting from thetransformation of bacteria when these were suddenly dying or when the metabolism of the highly
inbred germs was overwhelmed by processes triggered by the adding of “phages”. It was also discovered that there are hundreds of types of different-looking “phages”. The discovery of phages, theso-called bacterial “viruses”, reinforced the wrong

assumption and the belief that there were humanand animal viruses that looked the same and had
the same structure. This is not and cannot be thecase, for several different reasons.
After introducing chemical examination techniques in biology, it was discovered that there arethousands of types of phages and that phages of
one type always have the same structure. They consist of a particular molecule, made of nucleic acid,
which is covered in a shell of proteins of a given
number and composition. It was only later discovered that merely the bacteria which had been highly inbred in the test tube could turn into phages
themselves, by contact with phages, but this neverapplied to natural bacteria or bacteria which had
just been isolated from their natural environment.
In this process, it was discovered that these “bacterial viruses” actually serve to provide other bacteria with important molecules and proteins, andthat the bacteria themselves emerged from such
structures.
Before it could be established that the “bacterial viruses” cannot kill natural bacteria, but they
are instead helping them to live and that bacteria
themselves emerge from such structures, these“phages” were already used as models for the alleged human and animal viruses. It was assumed
that the human and animal viruses looked like the“phages”, were allegedly killing cells and thereby
causing diseases, while at the same time producing
new disease poisons and in this way transmitting
the diseases. To date, many new or apparently new
diseases have been attributed to viruses if their origin is unknown or not acknowledged. This reflex
found an apparent confirmation in the discovery of
the “bacterial viruses”.
It is important to note that the theories of fightand infection were accepted and highly praised bya majority of the specialists only if and when the
countries or regions where they lived were also
suffering from war and adversity. In times of peace,other concepts dominated the world of science.2
It is very important to note that the theory of40 WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015

infection – starting from Germany – has only been
globalized through the third Reich, when the Jewish researchers, most of which had opposed andrefuted the politically exploited theories of infection, were removed from their positions.3

On the detection of phages
The existence of phages can be proved rapidly.
First step: their presence is confirmed throughan effect, namely the transformation of bacteria
into phages, and also through an electron micrograph of those phages. The control experiments
show that phages do not appear if bacteria do notchange or if bacteria randomly start decomposing due to extrinsic sudden annihilation, without
forming phages.
Second step: the liquid containing the phages
is concentrated and applied on another liquid,
which has a high concentration at the bottom of
the test tube and a low concentration at the topof the test tube. The test tube with the phages is then powerfully spun (centrifuged) and all
the particles gather according to their mass andweight to the place of their own density. The density is the ratio of weight (mass) per unit of volume, expressed as Kg/l or g/mg, respectively. That
is why this concentration and purification step forparticles with the same density is called density
gradient centrifugation.
The layer where many particles of the same density gather becomes “cloudy”, which is called a“band”. This step is being documented, then theparticles concentrated, purified and sedimented
in a “band” are removed with a syringe needle.
The extracted concentrated amount of particles
is called an isolate. A fast and simple electron
micrograph will confirm the presence of phages
in the isolate, which at the same time is an indication for the purity of the isolate, if the micrograph shows no other particles but the phages.
The appearance and the diameter of the phages will also be established with the help of thisWISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015 41

micrograph. The control experiment performed
for this step consists in treating and centrifuging
the liquid from bacteria which did not form any
phages, where no phages appear at the end of theprocedure.
After the step of successfully isolating the phages,
the decisive biochemical characterization of thephages follows. The biochemical characterizationof their composition is essential for identifying
the specific type of phage, since different typesof phages often appear to be similar. The isolate
obtained through the density gradient centrifugation is now divided in two parts. One part isused to determine the size, type and compositionof the nucleic acid; in a separate procedure, theother part is used to determine the amount, size
and morphology of the proteins of the phages.
Since the 1970s, these tests have been simple
standard techniques that are learned by every biology student in his first semesters.
These tests represent the biochemical characterization of the phages. In almost every case, theseresults have been and are being published in only
one publication, since a phage has a very simple
structure which is very easy to analyse. The control experiments for these tests use liquid frombacteria which do not form phages and thus cannot present any biochemical proof. The existenceof approximately two thousand different types ofphages was scientifically demonstrated this way.

About the alleged proofof pathogenic viruses
The “bacteriophages”, correctly defined as incomplete mini spores and building blocks of thebacteria, have been scientifically isolated, while
the supposed pathogenic viruses have never been
observed in humans or animals or in their body
fluids and have never been isolated and subsequently biochemically analysed. To date, noneof the researchers involved in this kind of work
seems to have realised this.

The density gradientcentrifugation is thescientifically required
standard technique forthe demonstration of
the existence of a virus.

Centrifuge tube with silicone beads gradient layered
with a suspension of viruses and cellular particles

Centrifuge tube with“bands” of viruses andcellular particles after
centrifugation

By extracting the viralband with a pipette, thevirus is thus isolated
and purified.

Despite the fact that
this method is described in all microbiology
manuals as the “virus
isolation technique”, itis never applied in experiments meant to demonstrate the existenceof pathogenic viruses.

The use of the electron microscope and the biochemistry were very slowly returning to normal after 1945 and no one had realised that not one pathogenic virus had ever been isolated in humans
or animals; thus, as of 1949 researchers started
applying the same idea used for the (bacterio)
phages, in order to replicate the human and animal “viruses”. John Franklin Enders, born in 1897
in the family of a rich financier, was active in various fraternities after having finished his studies,then he worked as a real estate agent and studied
foreign languages for four years before turning tobacterial virology, which fascinated him.
He then simply transferred the ideas and concepts
that he learned in this area of research to the supposed pathogenic viruses in humans. With his unscientific experiments and interpretations that hehad never confirmed through negative controls,Enders brought the entire “viral” infectious medicine to a dead end. It is important to note at thispoint that Enders, like many infectious diseases
specialists, worked for the U.S. military, which had
always been and remains to date a huge victim of
the fear of contagion. It was mainly the U.S. military which spread its erroneous belief that besides

chemical weapons there were also biological weapons in the form of bacteria and viruses.
In 1949, Enders announced that he had managed
to cultivate and grow the alleged polio virus in
vitro on various tissues. The American expert
opinion believed everything immediately. What
Enders did was to add fluids from patients with
poliomyelitis to tissue cultures which he claimed
to have had sterilized, then he alleged that thecells were dying because of the virus, that the virus was replicating in this way and that a vaccine
could be harvested from the respective culture. At
that time, summer polio epidemics (polio = flaccid paralysis) were very frequent during summer
and they were believed to be caused by polio viruses. A vaccine was to help eradicate the allegedvirus. After the polio vaccine was introduced, thesymptoms were then re-diagnosed among otherthings as multiple sclerosis, flaccid acute paralysis, aseptic meningitis etc. and later polio wasclaimed to have been eradicated.
During his experiments, Enders et al. sterilised thetissue cultures in order to exclude the possibility ofbacteria killing the cells. What he didn’t take into
consideration was that the sterilisation and the42 WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015

treatment of the cell culture when preparing it for
the alleged infection was exactly what was killingthe cells. Instead, he interpreted the cytopathic
effects as the existence and the action of polio
viruses, without ever having isolated a single virus and described its biochemistry. The necessary
negative control experiments, which would haveshown that the sterilisation and the treatment of
the cells prior to the “infection” in the test tube
was killing the cells, have never been performed.
However, for this “performance” Enders received
the Nobel prize in 1954.
1954 is also the year in which Enders applied andintroduced the same technique in order to allegedly replicate the measles virus. As he had been
awarded the Nobel prize for the alleged polio
virus the same year, all researchers believed his
technique to be scientifically valid. Thus, to date,the entire concept of measles has been based
upon this technique. Thus, the measles vaccines
do not contain viruses, but particles of dead monkey kidney tissue or human cancer cells.
To date, no negative control experiments havebeen done with respect to the so-called measles
virus either, which would have shown that it is
the laboratory procedures that lead to the cytopathic effects on the cells. Additionally, all claims
and experiments made by Enders et al. and thesubsequent researchers lead to the only objective
conclusion that in fact they were observing andanalyzing dying cellular particles and the activity
thereof in the test tube, misinterpreting these as
particles and characteristics of the alleged measles virus.

WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015 43

tically ideal way the various steps of the chain of
misinterpretations up to the belief in the existence of a measles virus.
The first paper was published in 1954 by Enders etal.: “Propagation in tissue cultures of cytopathogenic agents from patients with measles” (Proc Soc
Exp Biol Med. 1954 Jun; 86 (2): 277–286). This publication can be found on the internet, like all theother publications presented at the measles trial.
In that experiment, Enders et al. cut down dramatically on the nutrient solution and addedcell-destroying antibiotics to the cell culture
before introducing the allegedly infected fluid.
The subsequent dying of the cells was then misinterpreted as presence and also isolation of themeasles virus. No control experiments were performed to exclude the possibility that it was thedeprivation of nutrients as well as the antibiotics
which led to the cytopathic effects. Enders’ andhis colleagues’ blindness can be explained by thefact that he truly wanted to help people, while thevirus hysteria was intensifying after the war andduring the cold war. It can also be explained by
the fact that Enders and many of his colleagues
had no idea about medicine and they were competing with the Soviet Union for the developmentof the first measles vaccine.
Such a pressure for success can also explain why
Enders and his colleagues ignored their own reservations and cautions expressed in 1954, when they
had observed and noted that many cells also diedafter being treated normally (i.e. without being “infected”), which they thought to have been caused
by unknown viruses and factors. All these facts andcautions were subsequently disregarded.

The measles virus as an example
The second paper presented by the claimant in
The following explanations apply to all the so- the measles trial was published in 19594 and, forcalled (human or animal) “pathogenic viruses”.
the reasons presented above, the authors concluded that the technique introduced by Enders
The six papers provided by Dr Bardens in the was not appropriate for the isolation of a virus.
course of the “measles trial” as proof for the ex- This rebuttal is not only NOT being discussed byistence of the measles virus describe in a didac- all the other researchers, but it is being ignored.

In the third paper5, the authors photographed typical cellular particles inside the cells and misinterpreted these as measles virus. They did not isolate
any virus. For unexplained reasons, they failed todetermine and describe the biochemical structureof what they were presenting as a virus in a separate experiment. In the short description of themethods used, one can read that the authors did
not apply the standard isolation technique for viruses, i.e. the density gradient centrifugation. They
simply centrifuged fragments of dead cells at thebottom of a test tube and then, without describing
their biochemical structure, they misinterpreted
the cellular debris as viruses. From the way the experiments were performed, one can only conclude
that cellular particles were misinterpreted as viruses. We find the same situation in the fourth6 andthe sixth7 publication put forward by the claimant
as proof of the existence of a measles virus.
The fifth publication8 is a review describing theconsensus process as to which nucleic acid molecules from the dead cells would represent the socalled genome of the measles virus. The result isthat dozens of researchers teams work with shortpieces of cell-specific molecules, after which -following a given model – they put all the pieces
together on paper. However, this jigsaw puzzle
made of so many pieces was never scientifically
proven to exist as a whole and was never isolated
from a virus, for a measles virus has never been
seen, neither in humans nor in a test tube.

publications on the “measles virus” and otherpathogenic viruses, no control experiments wereever performed. No researchers used the density
gradient centrifugation technique; instead, they
only centrifuged cellular debris at the bottom ofa test tube. This technique, used to collect all theparticles from a fluid, is called pelletising. Froma logical and scientific perspective, it can be said
that in all publications on so-called “pathogenic
viruses”, the researchers demonstrated in fact
only particles and characteristics of cells.
In our next issue of WissenschafftPlus, we will
publish the scientific rebuttal of the claim thatthe measles virus exists, which applies to all socalled pathogenic viruses.
We would also like to point out another article, inwhich we described the so-called giant viruses9,
i.e. an enwrapped nucleic acid that can be foundeverywhere in the sea and in basic organisms.
Like all bacterial phages, not only they are harmless, but they have beneficial functions. They canbe also isolated by using the density gradientcentrifugation, which proves their existence (seethe graphics above).
We also recommend Prof Lüdtke’s relevant review(1999).10 He noted that at the early beginnings of virology, the majority of virologists always concluded
that the structures they had mistaken for viruses
turned out to be components of the cells and thus,
they were only the result of the experiment andnot the cause of the changes observed. After the
discovery and characterization of the phages andafter introducing the dogma that the nucleic acidwas the genome of all cells and viruses, the consensus was born, according to which such viruses must
exist in humans and animals as well.

Referring to this publication, the court-appointed
expert stated that it described the gold standard,
i.e. the entire virus genome. It is obvious that theexpert did not read this paper, whose authors
stated that the exact molecular composition andfunctions of the measles virus genome will haveto be the object of further research, which is why
they had to rely on other virus models in order to In 1992, the dogma stating that the nucleic acidachieve a consensus on the structure and func- is the genotype of all cells was retracted in thetions of the measles virus genome.
scientific community. In 2008, it was also retracted for a part of the German public community..11
The easiest thing for anyone to notice is that The dogma of pathogenic viruses, however, is stillin all these publications, as well as in all other being promoted.

44 WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015

WISSENSCHAFFTPLUS – Das Magazin 6/2015 45

The Australian Perth Group (led by Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, Val Turner and John Papadimitriou)12
proved with scientific arguments that HIV has notbeen demonstrated to exist. It was Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos who as early as in 1992 encouraged
and offered me scientific support to accept thereality about HIV, to study the facts and share theknowledge that there are no pathogenic viruses.
I am very thankful to her and her team.

MAUNAWAI® PIPRIME®
Water filter system

Quellen:Siehe Ausführungen zu Virchows Leben und Wir- 8 Horikami SM, Moyer SA.
kung in WissenschafftPlus Nr. 5/2015 und Nr. 6/2015. Structure, Transcription, and Replication of Measles Virus. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 1995;
2
191: 35–50.
Anticontagionism between 1821 and 1867.
Aufsatz von Erwin H. Ackerknecht in der Zeitschrift
Bulletin of the History of Medicine, Volume XXII, 9 Siehe WissenschafftPlus Nr. 1/2014.
The Johns Hopkins Press, 1948.
10
Zur Geschichte der frühen Virusforschung.
3
Das Robert Koch-Insitut im Nationalsozialismus. Übersichtsarbeit von Prof. Karlheinz Lüdtke.
Buch von Annette Hinz-Wessels, 192 Seiten, 2008. Reprint 125 des MAX-PLANCK-INSTITUT FÜR WISSENSCHAFTSGESCHICHTE, 89 Seiten, 1999.
Kulturverlag Kadmos Berlin.
1

Bech V, Magnus Pv. Studies on measles virus
in monkey kidney tissue cultures.
Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand. 1959; 42 (1): 75–85.

Erbgut in Auflösung. Die ZEIT vom 16.6.2008.
Siehe zu diesem Thema die Beiträge in WissenschafftPlus seit 2003.

Nakai M, Imagawa DT. Electron microscopy ofmeasels virus replication. J. Virol. 1969 Feb; 3v (2):
187–97.

12

5

Lund GA, Tyrell, DL, Bradley RD, Scraba DG.
The molecular length of measles virus RNA and thestructural organization of measles nucleocapsids.
J. Gen. Virol. 1984 Sep;65 (Pt 9): 1535–42.

6

Daikoku E, Morita C, Kohno T, Sano K.
Analysis of Morphology and Infectivity of Measles
Virus Particles.
Bulletin of the Osaka Medical College. 2007;
53 (2): 107–14.

11

http://www.theperthgroup.com
Dimensions:
30 x55 cm (WxH)

beforeunfilteredtap water

Price:
from 399,- Euroafter
going througha MAUNAWAI®
filter7

teten ge

Wa s

i

tä

s

teme E

rks

eten

sys

st

er

ne

s de am sr

Information and Sale
Telephone: +49 3327 5708926
www.wissenschafftplus.maunawai.com

Fotos: © www.fotolia.com–pixelrobot/weseetheworld; Reinhold Kistenich

4Long term studies prove· Removes pollutants· Eliminates arrearsof drugs and hormones· Very good results also for
uranium, fluoride and chlorine· Tastes like spring water