➡ On March 25, 2026, a new community platform was announced to be launched in early May by the new biology Clinic and Dr. Tom Cowan’s website. This platform aims to foster connections and exchange of ideas among like-minded individuals. In addition, a new biology experience will be held in June at Polyface as part of this initiative. Lastly, a new molecule found in python blood could potentially lead to the development of new obesity drugs, as it suppresses appetite without the side effects of current medications.
➡ The text discusses a claim that a certain bacteria, Neisseria meningitides, is responsible for two major diseases: meningitis and septicemia. The author questions this claim, suggesting that the presence of the bacteria may not necessarily mean it’s the cause of these diseases. The author also criticizes a person named Christopher Peacock for claiming to have isolated a virus from a sample before cell culture, a process the author insists is impossible and has never been done before. The author invites Peacock to prove his claim, suggesting that he either doesn’t understand the science, or is lying.
➡ The text discusses the complexity of understanding how certain bacteria cause diseases. It uses the example of Neisseria Meningitides, a bacteria found in most people’s noses, but only causes illness in a tiny fraction of those people. The text questions why this happens, suggesting it could be due to genetic differences, but admits that the exact reason remains unclear. It also criticizes the tendency to focus on smaller and smaller details, like subtypes of bacteria, instead of looking at the bigger picture.
➡ This text discusses the theory that a bacteria called Neisseria meningitides causes meningitis, a serious brain infection. However, the author argues that this theory is unproven and based on speculation, as the bacteria is commonly found in healthy people and there’s no animal model to test the theory. The author suggests that other factors, like vaping and its harmful chemicals, could be the real cause of the disease. They criticize the medical system for promoting meningitis vaccines without solid scientific evidence and ignoring potential environmental causes.
➡ This text talks about an upcoming biology event and a community for open, logical discussions. It also mentions a challenge to Chris Peacock to prove his unique virus isolation method, which others believe can’t be done. The author questions if Chris is unaware of this disbelief or if he’s trying to mislead us.

Okay, welcome everybody. Hope everybody is doing well. There’s getting a little spring weather at least around here, so that’s good and I hope everybody is doing well. So today is March 25, 2026 and just a few announcements. First, so the new biology Clinic and the Dr. Tom Cowan website business we’re going to start, we’re going to inaugurate a community platform and this will start sometime early May, we hope. The purpose of course is to foster community, to help people connect, to be able to, you know, share first and exchange ideas and exchange information first online. And we hope that this leads to actual bonafide in person, friendships and experiences and you can find people in your area.

And towards that end we’re also as I think you know, we’re going to do this new biology experience in June at Polyface. So that’s part of this whole initiative to bring people together to form some sort of community of like minded people, people who don’t have to start from square one and explaining, no, it’s, you’re not going to get, I’m not going to give you a virus and all that stuff. So to keep abreast of this, just keep track, you know, join the email and follow us on social media. Of course we’ll be giving more and more information as we get closer to the time.

The people who are new biology clinic members at any level, so the enrichment or just the sort of normal level, they will be automatically included with no charge. And all the people who have graduated from the new biology curriculum, they will have a trial membership and there will be more details coming about what we can offer to these people as far as help setting up their businesses and help connecting with other like minded people and practitioners. So this is very exciting to just keep this momentum going. So keep track of what we’re doing at the by, you know, getting on the email list and the social media, that’s where all this information is put out.

And again we’re hoping that this comes together in early May. Okay, that’s the announcements for today. Let me just take a look. I think I got it. And thanks everybody for joining me. And we have a little bit of science news and then we’ll get into the topic which is probably why most people came to hear something about meningitis. So let me share my screen here. I don’t think I need sound. So the first thing is it turns out that a new molecule has been found. Let me just check this. Yeah. In python blood, which could pave the way for new obesity drugs.

Scientists say so researchers find snake metabolite that suppresses appetite of obese mice without some of the side effects of GLP1 drugs. So for those of you who don’t want to take GLP1 drugs because they’re pure metabolic poison, you could always get bit by pythons. So when you read this story you hear in true scientific fashion, the pythons follow the ultimate crash diet. Swallowing an antelope in a single sitting. They go for months without eating. Scientists have identified a molecule that appears to be crucial for this metabolic feat and which they say could pave the way for a new class of obesity drugs.

Obviously we’re not snakes, said this professor of pathology at Stanford and co author of the research. But we can find by studying these animals we can identify what we could do. So they examined the blood from young Burmese pythons. They had the snakes had fasted for 28 days and then continuing on they identified more than 200 molecules. They found one which they said must be the, the reason why they can do this amazing feat. They found one PTOs produced by the snake’s gut bacteria present in low levels in human urine. And we wondered whether this metabolite affected any of the post feeding physiological change.

And they found that it regulated appetite and was not linked to nausea, constipation, stomach pain and all the other things that happen with GLP1 medicines. And so we’re basically discovered an appetite suppressant that works without some of the same side effects. And that is an exciting discovery. Bottom line is if you want a different option than taking a GLP1 drug, you could always go and find a python and see if it’ll bite you and then you won’t want to eat for 28 days, you’ll probably lose weight and all will be well, at least according to the professors of pathology at Stanford University.

So certainly that’s an exciting development as we all rush out to get bitten by pythons. I thought pythons strangled their victims, not bit them. But anyways, what do I know? Okay, so the next thing is a short piece which I thought just about sort of describes how Americans see the world. It says doomsday believers are no longer fringe. Studies suggest that a third of America, so in other words the third of Americans believe that, that the apocalypse is coming and that we’re all doomed and this is going to happen soon, etc. Etc. Now I have no idea whether that’s true or not.

And that’s not the reason, the reason I wanted to show. This is the final line here, a puzzle that Researchers could not fully explain. People who believe the apocalypse will ultimately be a good thing still tended to support drastic measures to prevent existential threats, particularly like viruses and climate change and so on. So on the one hand, they apparently believe that the doomsday is coming and that it’s a good thing because that’s something good will happen as a result. But they also think the powers that be should do whatever they can to prevent this doomsday from happening.

And if you understand that, congratulations, because that pretty much tells you how confused Americans are about just about everything. Speaking of confused about just about everything, I happen to see this, this is the final thing I’m going to share in the news. And this was from a guy named Christopher Peacock, who is allegedly a microbiologist slash virologist somewhere in Australia. And I don’t know anything more about him and I don’t know if this is even true, but I did look him up and there is such a person in Australia who does some microbiology type of work.

And I wanted to show this, this was a comment that he made on my, one of our Facebook videos. If you haven’t seen them, they’re short clips of things that I say, usually in the webinars, etc. Some of them are about virology or other things. And so this was about the, the essentially the false falsifying virology. That was essentially the clip that was shown and why no virus has ever been isolated and all the things that everybody knows. And so apparently this sort of pissed this guy off or offended him in some ways and he wanted to show us that he knows what he’s talking about.

And it’s really interesting to read what he wrote and to parse out the wording and the details here. So let me read this. And this was just a clip, a part of what he said. So I demonstrate viral plaque assays to my students using SYNBIS virus. We use negative controls that show no cytopathic effect and then varying viral titers which show a direct dose dependent effect and then support that with quantitative pcr. The only difference in all of these is the presence or absence. Apparently he’s not a good speller the presence or absence of the virus.

So you have no expertise in immunology or infectious disease and you sell supplements that are not tested. So the most important line here is the only difference in all of these is the presence or absence of the virus. And this gives away the boat here. So what he’s saying is he does cytopathic effect analysis. So in other Words to be very clear, he has cell cultures and he inoculates the cell cultures. And in some there is the presence of the virus, and in others there is the absence of the virus. And he says that’s the only difference in all of these.

Now that sounds impressive until you actually think about this for a minute and realized that that that means he must take some material, say some mucus or some previous cell culture or something, and he must have directly isolated the virus from that material, say the mucus of the person or whatever sample he’s working with. He must have isolated, that is purified that, that virus out of that sample so that he could actually give the, inoculate the cell culture with the material, like the mucus, with the virus or without the virus. That’s the only way to understand what he’s saying.

In other words, he must have isolated, purified the virus before doing the cell culture. Otherwise how could you get rid of it? You must have it first, you must have identified it so that you could have in one inoculate the presence of the virus, and in the second inoculate, everything would be the same, except there was no virus. So therefore, you must have purified the virus out of that inoculant, that mucus or whatever sample it was, and then you must have proven that that thing that you removed from the sample is actually a virus. Now, let me go ahead and read the definition of a virus again so we’re all clear.

An infectious obligate intracellular parasite comprising genetic material, either DNA or rna, surrounded by a protein coat and sometimes an additional lipid envelope. This particle relies on the host cell machinery for replication. So in other words, he’s saying that he purified this particle, which meets the definition of a virus, directly out of the sample so that he could inoculate the cell culture with the sample with the presence or the absence of the virus and only the virus. If that’s true. So let me just say now there’s three possibilities for what he says. One is it’s true that that’s what he did.

He took some material, mucus or whatever, he removed the virus, showed us a purified particle that, that meets the definition of a virus. Inoculated the, the cell culture with the sample, with the virus, and then the only difference is in the second sample, he removed all of the viruses and inoculated it with that. Now, we have approximately 230 different institutions who say that purification, isolation of the virus directly from a sample before a cell culture has never been done. There is no published paper that anybody can present or point to that says that exactly what he’s saying he does has actually never been done.

And in fact, if you ask a virologist how do you isolate a virus, that is to say, separate the virus from the sample, they say you do it with a cell culture. He’s saying, we did it before the cell culture, which contradicts everything the virologists claim as isolation. So in order to prove that this is true, he will have to send us a paper or demonstrate in some way that he removed all of the virus from the original sample and then was able to inoculate the cell culture with everything identical except the presence or absence of the virus.

Now, I can 100% guarantee you that he will not be able to produce the paper. He will not be able to produce any evidence that he did such a thing. Now, here is my prediction about what he will say. Well, you moron, that’s ridiculous. Of course you can’t separate the virus from the sample because viruses need the cells in order to replicate. So if you took them out, they would die or something like that. Or he might say, well, I mean, at that point, I don’t even know what you could say. My point is there is no possible way.

The only difference in all these is the presence or absence of the virus is true. So what does that mean? Either this person, Christopher Peacock. Chris is unable to understand simple basic logic in science. He’s not able to understand, no matter what excuse he gives for the fact that one simply cannot do what he just said he did. He said he took out the virus. One sample was exactly the same, but it didn’t have a virus. One was exactly the same as the other, but it did have the virus that everybody, every virologist says that is not possible.

That is not how they isolate viruses. Nobody has ever done that. There’s no paper. So either he doesn’t understand that what he just said is completely bonkers, or the third option is he’s lying, which means that he’s writing this in the hopes that nobody actually understands what he’s talking about. And he. They believe this viral plaque assay with the Symbis virus and we use negative controls. And he’s right. It would have to be that the sample is with the presence or absence of the virus. You have to then have isolated the virus before doing a cell culture, which everybody says is not possible.

Nobody has ever done that. There’s not a single paper that does it. And Chris, I’d be happy to have interview you and talk about this, and you can show me exactly the paper where you did exactly what you say, or you can say, ah, Tom, you’re right, I don’t understand anything about logic or science. Or you could say, yeah, I was lying in the hopes that you wouldn’t catch it. So those are the three options and I’d be happy to talk further about this. But just so everybody knows, when people say this, this, this is obviously nonsense.

All right, moving on to more nonsense, because that’s pretty much all there is. We get to this topic of today, which is what is meningitis? Now, a lot of people have asked me about this because apparently there was an outbreak of meningitis in. They usually said to be in young people, particularly at boarding schools and colleges, and this time it was in England, I believe, Sussex, England. And by the way, my good friend Don Lester did some papers on this where. So you can read more about it and hopefully somebody will put the link to her substack or website or whatever that is in the chat or somewhere so everybody can follow up with this.

And so we hear about this every once in a while. So this was another episode of the meningitis scare. Now, meningitis is definitely a significant illness. I actually don’t think I’ve ever seen maybe one or two cases in my entire career, including in the er. And I do remember as a resident and medical student, we did spinal taps on pretty much any child who came into the hospital with a fever, which is basically a form of torturing young children. So any child under, say, two months at that time, we did a spinal tap, which is you hold the child in a very uncomfortable position and you stick a needle into their back and you have to know how to stick the needles.

That’s why they did it so often, to teach the medical students how to do this. And then you see what you get and you send that off for analysis and culture. And then you say it’s either a bacterial infection if you see pus, or it’s a viral infection if the fluid that came back was clear. And most of them, in fact, all of them that we did, none of them had meningitis. And I kept doing that as an ER doctor for a while, and as far as I remember, nobody had meningitis. But it does occur as far as I’ve heard.

And so the main pathogen, they say, is a bacteria you can see here called Neisseria meningitides or otherwise known. We used to call it Meningococcus, and that’s the predominant, not the exclusive, but it’s the predominant, they say, bacterial cause of an inflammation infection of the meninges, which are this, the covering of the brain. And that creates lots of problems. And then people, particularly children, often can die from having meningitis. And even if they’re treat, even if they have bacterial meningitis, even with antibiotics still sometimes it doesn’t work. And so it’s definitely a significant illness. But our quest today is to understand the actual pathogenesis of meningitis.

And is this article which you can see the reference here, and this was from 2013, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. And you can see the whole reference here. This was from University of Paris. Sorry. And so you can see everything here. So let’s first start with the claim. So Neisseria meningitides is responsible for two major diseases, cerebrospinal meningitis and or septicemia. So this means an inflammation infection in the covering of the brain, which is the meninges, or septicemia is defined as a infection in the blood. The latter can lead to purpura fulminans, an often fatal condition owing to the associated septic shock.

These two clinical aspects of meningococcal infection are consequences of a tight interaction of meningococci with host endothelial cells. The interaction mediated by the type 4 Pili is responsible for the formation of micro colonies on the apical surface of the cells. This interaction is followed by the activation of signaling pathways in the host cell leading to the formation of microbiological synapse. A low level of bacteremia is likely to favor the colonization of blood vessels leading to bacterial meningitis, whereas the colonization of a large number of vessels by a high number of bacteria is responsible for one of the most severe forms of septic shock observed.

That was a big mouthful. One of the things that I want to point out, and we get into this a lot, and this happens not just in medicine and biology, but pretty much all of science, physics and chemistry, is when there’s a claim, and here the initial claim is that there is this disease or two diseases, one, infection in the blood called sepsis, and two, a infection in the covering of the brain called meningitis, and that its causative agent is this bacteria, Neisseria meningitides. And as we’ll see, and this is what I want to point out, when there is doubt or that claim has been falsified, or at least doubt thrown on it, the scientists or medical establishment or doctors end up at a fork in the road and they could either say, yeah, the whole theory was wrong and so we didn’t find, we found bacteria and they weren’t the cause.

Or as pretty much always happens, they have to get smaller and smaller and smaller each time you make a new claim each time it takes years in order to investigate and then falsify that claim. Then you come to the next fork and you can throw out the whole theory or you can get smaller and smaller and smaller and you can run that out for a hundred or so years and everybody eventually forgets about the original claim. And they do this with physics. They say, well, it used to be the, the neutron that does this. And then it’s so falsified.

It’s not the neutron, it’s the muon which is the part of the neutron. And then it’s not the muon because we falsified that and it’s the sub muon. And then you keep going on and on and here in biology and medicine, so it’s first is the bacteria and then it’s the subtype of the bacteria and then it’s the genetics of the bacteria and then it’s the interaction of the signaling pathways in the host and the plaque formation of the bacteria and the colonization and smaller and smaller and smaller until you lose the thread. And we don’t want to lose the thread, we want to keep our focus on is this paper which is calling the pathogenesis of meningococcaemia.

They’re supposedly going to prove to us that meningococcus causes septic shock and septicemia. Do they actually do that? So just to read some more, this meningococcus is a gram negative that describing the bacteria. There are these bacteria. So it’s not like viruses where they can’t even find the entity. But they do have this, even though without even getting into pleomorphism, let’s just say they have this bacteria responsible for the meningitis and sepsis. We already went through that. Now here’s the important point and just remember, think back to so called Koch’s postulates, which is basically just a common sense, logical way of thinking.

In other words. And so one of the things he said is the bacteria or the causative agent should be present in all of the people you’re claiming have the disease and none of the people who you’re claiming don’t have the disease. Why is this logical and sensible? It’s the same as I keep saying, you go to your street and there’s 100 houses and five of them are blown up and you go there and you find skunks and all of them. And you conclude from that that the skunks blew up the five houses. That would be obviously nuts, because how come the skunks didn’t blow up the other 95 houses? And so then you get into getting smaller.

Well, it’s the skunks that have a red mark near their eyes. And so those are the ones that blow up the houses. And the other subtype of the skunks that have a black thing, they don’t. They don’t blow up houses. So then you go looking and it turns out that some of the skunks who were found in the place where the house were blown up have the red marks. Some of the red marks were found in the houses that weren’t blown up. So you have to say, well, it’s not just the red mark, it’s the subtype of the red mark.

It’s got to do with the genetics of the skunk. And then it’s not the genetics, it’s the epitope of the skunk’s genetics and smaller and smaller and smaller. So what do they say here? Paradoxically, this bacteria is a common inhabitant of human nasopharynx, the nose, and as such is a normal saprophytic organism that is transmitted from person to person by direct contact. Only in a small portion of colonized subjects does the bacteria invade the bloodstream where they are responsible for septicemia or meningitis after crossing the imaginary blood brain barrier. So this is the first problem here.

So in other words, and this gets into even the little that I investigated, which Don did much more thorough investigation, one of these unfortunate children, and I don’t mean to make light of any child or any person dying of anything, but when they say so, the child died. And the reason was because they were vaping. This 13 year old girl allegedly was doing a fair amount of vaping. And they say the reason that’s a problem because when you vape, you share the vaping thing. And I know very little about vaping, so I can’t say how people do it.

So you share the vaping thing with other people, therefore you get their saliva on the vaping thing. And so then you ingest other people’s saliva and the bacteria. And that’s why vaping is dangerous, because you end up getting infected by somebody else. But that’s obviously not the case because they just said, and in another study I read, they said, basically, if you look hard enough, everybody has this bacteria Neisseria Meningitides in their nasopharynx. It is a normal saprophytic, meaning it grows on the organism and so it’s transmitted from a person to person, but everybody has it, so it’s actually not transmitted.

And only a very small proportion of these people, all of whom have this bacteria, does it cause any problem at all. So we’re back to failing Koch’s postulates, because not only does it not cause disease in everybody, and not only is there a disease that you can see here which is potentially caused by many other different types of bacteria, so even the disease doesn’t tell you that. Well, that means we must have Neisseria. But in almost everybody who doesn’t have meningitis, then they also have this exact same bacteria. Then we’re back to the skunks. All of the houses blown up or not have the exact same skunks.

And so what person in their right mind would then conclude that it must be the skunks that did it? I mean, it’s actually kind of crazy. But so we go on and then they go on to describe what happens. So now we get to. And I’m going to go through this in some detail and read most of it because it really describes just how they have to use excuses to promote this agenda. As mentioned above, Neisseria meningitis is a frequent asymptomatic colonizer of the human nasopharynx. And only a very small proportion of infections, meaning they found it there, proceed to a sustained bacteremia.

So in other words, just about everybody’s got it and only a extremely small. I mean we’re talking Dr. 40 years er, never saw one case. The mechanism. Now here’s interesting. The mechanisms responsible for nasopharyngeal colonization and crossing of the nasopharyngeal mucosa remain mostly unexplained and will not be approached in this review. That is actually a fascinating comment. Now most people would say if you told them, okay, you got this bacteria, you find it in basically Everybody’s nose. In 99.9% of the people who you find it in the nose, nothing ever happens. They never get sick, they never know they have it in the nose, nothing.

And so the obvious question is, so how come in these 0.001% does it go from the nose and allegedly go into your blood and in your brain and basically kill you? And as they say here, the mechanisms of this remain mostly unexplained. We have no friggin idea. And we’re not going to talk about this in the review. This is a review of how this whole thing happens and they’re going to omit why some people get it and some people don’t. I mean not some people. Almost everybody has it, almost nobody gets it. That’s, that’s the question.

But we’re not going to approach this in this review. That’s not our concern. We don’t deal with that stuff now. It gets even crazier. The reason why disease occurs in some individuals and not others remain unclear. No kidding, Sherlock. But human genetic polymorphism is likely to be important in determining the outcome, particularly regarding the risk of developing purpurifulmanans. That’s bad sepsis. So here the normal Anything you do to look at the nose or ask the person like how’s your nose? Or even look at the bacteria, none of that sheds any light on it or they would have mentioned it.

None of that matters. So they basically sort of falsified the whole claim that this is a infection. So in order to keep the story going you always have to basically say well it must be genetics, praise be. Because genetics is something that explains everything, praise be. And so it must be that the human genetic polymorphism is likely to determine it. We have no idea how that works of course, but it must be. And that’s how, that’s what we’re going to go with. In addition, all the meningococci do not have the same pathogenic potential. Indeed, analysis of results from the multi locus sequence typing have shown the existence of distinct phylogenetic clonal complexes, some of which are more likely to be isolated from patients with disease from then from asymptomatic carriers.

So now we’re back to the. So it must be the skunks with the red, red stuff near their eye, not the black stuff. So those are the different subtypes. And even though we can’t prove that only the subtype. So it’s a subtype that does it that it must be that because we can’t prove that it’s just the bacteria, so it must be that. And then when they even get into smaller these are the so called hypervigilant or hyperinvasive lineages. Recently the presence of a prophage, so now we get even smaller because nobody has been able to prove that it’s the subtypes that determine this has been able.

The prophage that’s like a virus has been responsible for a large proportion of invasiveness of strains belonging to the hyperinvasive lineage. This element inserts into the bacterial chromosome and can be induced to produce a filamentous phage. So we got even smaller. And so now the bacteria are infected with a virus like product which transforms it into a killer. And all of this is completely unproven, subjective theorizing to rescue the model. Here’s another thing that’s very interesting. Neisseria meningitides interacts only with human cells and there is no animal model of meningococcal sepsis. In some circumstances, mice and infant rats have been used to assess the ability of the bacteria to survive in extracellular fluids.

But these models are unable to assess the consequences of the interaction with the endothelial cells. So in other words, this bacteria that’s going to kill all the teenage humans has never been shown to do anything to any animal under any circumstance, except if they probably do very unusual things. And then they get certain models that show some bacteria in some fluids, but they don’t actually cause the disease. And so never mind. It must be that the bacteria by some kind of genetic manipulation, praise be, has, have managed to be very specific to humans. And how that came about we have no idea.

Consequently, most hypotheses regarding the pathogenesis of meningococcal infections are derived from postmortem studies of patients who died from meningitis or purpurifulmanans or from biopsies of skin purpur lesions. Skin lesions in the brain. Data obtained from patient who died of fulminant meningococcaemia at the time bacteria were evading revealed that the menin that the bacteria adheres onto endothelial cells. So basically, and here they’re talking about what they see under the microscope. Basically all they’re seeing is, is in the people who died of this meningitis. When you do an autopsy and look at their meninges, you in fact do see bacteria.

And they’ve disrupted the normal architecture of the brain and the tissues and the blood. And no surprise there, because something happened obviously to their brain and, and then the bacteria are growing there. And to say from that that these bacteria caused the death or caused the meningitis is again like saying the firemen, because they’re present at the fire, they therefore must have caused the fire. So, and you can essentially prove this because they say from these in vivo data, in other words, the microscopic analysis of the bacteria. So now we’ve gone from not looking at person with bacteria in their nose.

So how did it get into their brain? And were we ever able to inject people or expose people or yes, subject people to just the bacteria and show that it causes disease, the answer is no. So they have to look at basically microscopic analysis of the brain and they say from these in vivo data it can be speculated that the clinical forms of Meningococcus disease mostly reflect the level of bacteremia. So this is obviously pure speculation. In other words, when a low or moderate number of meningococcus circulate within the bloodstream, the bacteria interacting with peripheral capillaries cause only a few localized purpuric lesions, whereas the interaction with the brain endothelial cells is sufficient to lead to meningeal invasion.

This is pure speculation. They’ve never seen this and of course they have a cartoon to prove this. But they’re saying that if you got a few number of these bacteria that’s going to cause meningitis. In contrast, in the case of high bacteria in the blood, that the peripheral endothelial cells are massively colonized leading to a vascular permeability, thrombosis purpura, meaning purple rash. In this case, the bacteria also invade the meninges, but the clinical presentation is septic shock. This is all pure speculation. They have no idea whether this actually occurs. It certainly doesn’t occur in animals. They have found no animals that they can make this happen and they can’t understand, they have no explanation of actually how these bacteria that are always present in you, always the same type of bacteria, there’s no difference that they can actually find in the bacteria.

How come in the extremely rare case, it goes through this speculatory process and causes you to die or get sick with meningitis, sepsis. And at the end of the day, this not only doesn’t fulfill Koch’s postulates, they’ve not, not all the people with meningitis have the same bacteria. A lot of the people, 99 plus percent who are perfectly well, have the bacteria. So Koch’s postulates, or how they claim they prove that a microorganism causes a disease is out the window. They have no animal model to demonstrate any of this at all. It’s basically just finding a bacteria at the site of an injury, claiming that somehow this must have caused it, even though it was always there.

And that’s all we’re going to say about it. So take this injection and, and somehow that will prevent the bacteria from doing God knows what. And as far as I can see, that’s basically the whole thing now. So I would say at this point, the idea that a meningitis is caused by Neisseria meningitides has been falsified and then we finish by doing a bit of speculation. So I don’t. Again, every situation, every illness is unique. And so I don’t claim to know what happened to this very unfortunate 13 year old girl. But one thing I can tell you from the little clue that I have is that if your 13 year old girl is vaping even once or on a regular basis, you have a problem.

And I mean specifically that young woman has a problem. So of course none of this gets looked into. How does it, how do we get this situation where the normal bacteria that are always found in your nose, somehow you go from that to a life threatening disease. Now obviously not all the people, children, teenagers who do vaping get meningitis, but if you go and look at what this is, the components are heated, they create an aerosol and many harmful chemicals can be produced during the heating process. This is not some alternative science, this is I think from Wikipedia.

So here’s the main ingredients in vaping devices. Nicotine, propylene glycol, a synthetic compound used as a base in e liquids. It’s the same poison they put in vaccines, vegetable, glycerin, flavorings, heavy metals, carcinogens. So this is a problem for a young person who’s doing this and somehow they don’t blame, they blame the bacteria which are always there in the person. So somehow you got the bacteria from sharing saliva with the person who gave you the vaping device. So that they claim is the problem, not the, the vaporizing. So it goes directly into your brain, through your nose of all that stuff, including heavy metals, carcinogen.

And while it’s so called a safer alternative to smoking, the e liquids and byproducts form during heating can pose significant health risks, particularly for young users. And I think this was on Wikipedia or maybe an AI thing. And what’s so amazing about our medical system is even though there is no way to, there’s no information, there’s no, they don’t know, they say they don’t know. How is it that this harmless bacteria somehow invades into your blood and brain and causes disease and not look at the obvious toxins, carcinogens, metals, propylene glycol, etc. That the person may even be vaporizing, volatilizing, therefore inhaling it right into their through their nose that goes directly up into their brain.

Nobody investigates that. Instead it’s just a big old scam to sell more and more meningitis vaccines which can’t possibly work because as far as I can See, there is no scientific evidence that this bacteria is actually the cause of this disease. More likely what’s happening is the person is being poisoned by these kind of things and maybe other things and maybe alcohol and maybe who knows what because I don’t know the particular story. There’s a deterioration of the substances in the brain. The bacteria are essentially combination of innocent bystanders and coming to actually help, you know, bio remediate the situation and they’re unfortunately blamed for the problem there.

Then the children are given more toxic drugs and then often they don’t survive that and then this is given as the reason for injecting all of the children in the population with more propylene glycol and all the other toxic stuff in a vaccine. And it’s all based on unbelievably flawed thinking and anti scientific jargon. Okay, I hope that’s clear enough for everybody and I’m going to stop this share and if anybody has any questions or comments, I will be looking forward to read it. And thanks everybody for joining me. Oh, I wanted to say I will not There will not be a webinar next Wednesday.

I have some other obligations to take care of. So I hope to join you in two weeks. So hopefully spring will arrive wherever you are and you can get outside in the sun and ground yourself to the earth. Don’t forget about our new biology experience and look forward to our coming community of people who can actually have honest, realistic, rational conversations. And finally, I anxiously await our good friend Chris Peacock sending us the proof that he isolated the virus before doing a cell culture which every other virologist has claimed is not possible and therefore inoculated the specimen with or without the virus, which I would claim is not is not at all possible.

And then maybe he can answer finally the question does he just unaware of this or is somehow he lying to try to convince us of something which is obviously not true? Okay, thanks everybody, see you in a few weeks.
[tr:tra].

See more of DrTomCowan on their Public Channel and the MPN DrTomCowan channel.