Shh! Dont Mention SV40 Dr. Sam Bailey | Jim Fetzer

SV40, or Simeon Virus 40, is one of those things that excites both the establishment and the health freedom community. It tends to surface from time to time and has popped up once again in the COVID-19 era. Additionally, at least one prominent vaccine critic has claimed that it is some sort of fatal inconsistency for the no virus position. This prompted several of you to request that we address the issue, and although we have mentioned it in a previous Q&A session, this video explores the topic in more depth. The claim that the entity known as SV40 is a virus dates back to some key publications from the 1950s and 60s, and it is another example of so-called dissidents in the health freedom community simply espousing a variant of a mainstream theme.

Unfortunately, it serves to prop up the foundational frauds that benefit special interests and keep the public trapped within the Doom Theory paradigm. So let’s have a look at what the SV40 virus proponents are claiming, and crack this humbug wide open! Even if objective evidence in reaction, sickness and death were lacking, which it is not, that vaccines in sera can cause disease, no very profound depth of intelligence is needed to envisage the ingenuousness of injecting the filthy products of disease into a healthy person to keep him well. Dr. Ulrich Williams, Terrain Therapy.

In 2023, Canadian physician Dr. William Mackus, who has spoken out against the COVID-19 jabs, talked about the discovery of SV40 sequences in COVID-19 vaccine vials, repeating a long-standing claim that it is a virus that causes cancer. There is an additional sequence in these plasmids. Again, what they probably used to make the manufacturing process more efficient, at least that’s what they claim, and that’s this SV40, a simian virus 40 promoter, which is actually a virus found in monkeys and primates that is known to cause cancers in humans, known to cause brain cancers, leukemias, lymphomas, and there is a component of this virus, the promoter, the initial sequence is actually present in the plasmids during the manufacturing, mRNA manufacturing process.

While we certainly agree that injecting any of these products is dangerous and may cause numerous problems for the recipient, we will always call out the pseudoscience of virology. During the Dr. Mackus report, it appeared on the Defender, the website of the Children’s Health Defense. Here they are citing the work of Kevin McKernan of Medicinal Genomics. McKernan has made a few attempts over the years to attack the no virus position, seemingly having not studied any of our formal publications and continuing to run with the fallacious notion that sequencing proves the existence of viruses.

If you have not already seen it, Dr. Tom Cowan joined us in 2022 to provide refutations to McKernan’s claims he made in a presentation to the Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International Group. It is notable that all of the aforementioned virus proponents have an interest in maintaining the virus model. Dr. Mackus is part of the Wellness Company, an organization that pushes virus and contagion stories to sell toxic pharmaceuticals, including, quote, antiviral drugs to the public. CHD and Dr. McCullough have been driving the gain of function and lab leak narratives with streams of fear-based clickbait, as well as books promoting such themes.

Meanwhile, Kevin McKernan sells products purporting to detect viruses. So those of us pointing out the lack of evidence for virus existence may not be good for business for these groups and individuals. Things also took an interesting turn in November 2023 when CHD TV interviewed Dr. Suzanne Humphreys and the subject of no virus came up. For the record, Suzanne Humphreys has never talked with Mark or I, despite the fact we have directed thousands of people to dissolving illusions, the book she co-authored. As far as we know, she has not really interacted with any current and prominent critics of virology, and by all accounts appears to be ignorant of the refutations involving all aspects of the virus model.

Neither us nor any of our no virus allies have ever said that SV40 is a viral entity, so it is unclear to us why Dr. Humphreys would make such a claim. Hopefully this video will help her and any others appreciate where we stand on the matter. In order to understand what started the SV40 myth, we need to review the virology publications that invented the construct. We start the journey with a paper titled Simeon Virus 40 Infection of Humans, which appeared in the Journal of Virology in 2003. The author stated that in 1960, Sweet and Hilliman first described an agent, which they named SV40, that induced cytopathic effects and vacuole formation in monkey cells.

SV40 was isolated from normal monkey kidney cells, stocks of the Sabine Poliovirus vaccine, and an adenovirus vaccine. The last two reagents were prepared in primary kidney cell cultures, derived from monkey cells. Subsequent analyses found that the Salk Poliovirus vaccine, administered from 1955 to 1963 in the United States, was also contaminated with SV40, potentially exposing an estimated 100 million people. Before we get to the alleged contamination of the polio vaccines, we will need to examine what our 2003 virus proponents are referring to, so we’ll take a look at what the proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine was titled The Vacuolating Virus SV40.

It opens with the statement, viruses are commonly carried by monkeys and may appear as contaminants in cell cultures of their tissues, especially the kidney. Included among these are B-virus, foamy agent, measles-like virus, hemadsulption viruses, LCM virus, arboviruses, and a wide variety of miscellaneous viral agents. What a piece of luck for the virologists that they seem to be finding viruses everywhere, even as, quote, contaminants in the cell cultures they are using to find other alleged viruses. For this claim, they cite seven papers published between 1955 and 1960, and we’ll look at the first one, which is titled Infection of Monkey Kidney Tissue Cultures with Virus-like Agents to see how they find their alleged viruses.

If you are familiar with the history of virology, you may be getting a sense of deja vu, because we are now in the middle of John Ender’s territory. In fact, the introduction states, Ender’s and Peebles have recently reported recovery of an agent from an uninoculated monkey kidney culture, which appears to have the same cytopathogenic characteristics in monkey renal cultures as our agents have. This refers to the 1954 paper where Ender’s and Peebles claim to have found a measles virus on the basis of cytopathic effects or cell breakdown, being observed in their culture under the microscope.

We have been over this paper many times, such as in my video The Measlesmith, and Dr. Stefan Lanker’s 2015 essay, Dismantling the Virus Theory, explains the Ender’s experiment in the wider context. Back to the 1955 paper which states, In our attempts in 1953 to adapt mouse-adapted Hawaii dengue virus to roller-tube cultures of rhesus monkey kidney, an unidentified agent was encountered which induced cytopathogenic changes in cultures of monkey kidney and cancer HeLa epithelial cells. Subsequently, three additional agents with identical cytopathogenic characteristics were passed from uninoculated monkey kidney cultures, prepared for polymyelitis studies, to HeLa cell cultures.

While this may sound scientific to the uninitiated, it is in fact completely unfalsifiable pseudoscience. They are mixing together cell cultures with all kinds of material, and if some of the cells subsequently break down, it is declared that an agent, aka a virus has been discovered. If the cells were not breaking down prior to their mixing, they claimed this is because of, quote, the problem of the presence of viruses in tissue cultures as a result of unrecognized infection of cells and tissues employed as primary eggplants. In other words, if there are cytopathic appearances, then a virus has been discovered.

But no cytopathic appearances could also mean a virus is present and you may need to just keep mixing your samples with other cultures until you get some of these telltale appearances. This not only opens up an unfalsifiable paradigm, but continues the virological fraud where no independent variable has been identified. Virologists in the modern era continue to claim that viruses are at work, even with no cytopathic effects at all. For example, Mary Houser during this talk to Panda in 2022. Yeah, I just wanted to add real quickly that not all viruses cause cytopathic effect.

So I studied a virus in graduate school that left the cells very happy. You could infect the cells and retrieve very high titers of virus in the supernatant and the cells were very happy and no cytopathic effect was present. And in fact, there was no pro-inflammatory cytokine or interferon induction. And so that was an example of a virus that has reached its optimal steady state of virus replication in the host. In his treatise, A Farewell to Virology, my husband Mark also wrote about the virologist’s propensity to keep introducing various cell lines until they quote viral isolate is found.

Vero E6 monkey cells have long been favored by virologists, supposedly due to their suitability to host many viruses, but suspiciously also because the aneuploid kidney line is more susceptible to toxic insults from additional ingredients such as the ubiquitous nephrotoxic antibiotics and antifungals added to the culture mix. When one group attempted to culture SARS-CoV-2, they had no desired result with human adenocarcinoma cells, human liver cells, human embryonic kidney cells, and a big brown bat kidney cell line, but then declared they had a viral isolate following the observation of CPEs in Vero E6 cells.

As is typical, there seemed to be no sense of irony for them that the purported human respiratory virus cannot be shown to infect the relevant cell type, let alone the relevant species, and their experiments were once again invalidated by the absence of appropriate control cultures. The 1955 paper similarly had no control cultures, despite claiming that they did, as we shall soon see. In this section, Infectivity Tighter and Healer and Monkey Kidney Cultures, they added quote, two of the four agents to heal our cell in monkey kidney cultures. By agent, they mean virus, and again, where was it shown that they had such a thing in their mixed sample? It is simply assumed in advance, one must be present.

It gets more derailed when they report four additional titrations were made with the same and earlier passage fluids of the monkey kidney line in monkey kidney cultures. Without a hint of irony, it is then stated that, in three of these, no estimation of infectivity tighter was possible because of occurrence of characteristic degeneration in un-inoculated controls. Welcome to the world of virology, where cytopathic effects could mean A, a virus, or B, something else, and no cytopathic effects could mean A, no virus, or B, a hidden virus. In any case, the virologist cell culture methodology is fatally flawed, and by its very nature, cannot be scientifically controlled, as Mark outlined in Virology’s Emmet Horizon.

The virologists are trapped in a patetio-principae, or begging the question fallacy, where they are purporting to prove a proposition, while simultaneously taking the proposition for granted. In other words, there is no need to go any further, as no evidence for any virus has or could be presented through these publications. When we go back to the 1960 paper that started the whole SV40 mythology, the fairy tale is contained within the following paragraph. During the past two years, our virus research group has repeatedly encountered a new simian virus, a rhesus and cinnamogus monkey kidney origin.

This agent was unique among simian viruses, studied hitherto, since it grew, but did not cause a cytopathic effect in the rhesus or cinnamogus kidney cell cultures, from which it was derived. Instead, it grew and caused marked cytopathic changes in cell cultures of a heterologous species, i.e. the green monkey. Dr. Holz suggested that this agent be given the official designation of SV40. SV40 is not a virus, it is a component found in some monkey kidney cells and other primate tissues. When the alleged genome of SV40 was published in 1978, there was zero evidence that the sequences came from a viral particle, and the same applies to the corresponding proteins.

Once again, these papers simply assert in advance that there is a virus. So when someone claims they are finding evidence of simian virus 40 in the covid shots, it has nothing to do with a virus and merely the detection of sequences falsely attributed to a virus. These DNA sequences are found in some breaking down cell cultures and cancerous tissue, as well as in many monkeys and some humans. The sequences may well be associated with disease, but this by no means permits a declaration that they are the cause of the disease, let alone viral in nature.

As a side note on that issue, you can watch my video COVID-19 shots, cancer and HIV, which covers the discovery of HIV sequences and cancer tissue biopsies from patients said not to have HIV. An embarrassing problem for the HIV AIDS industry. Since the 1950s, monkey kidney tissue has been openly acknowledged to contaminate some polio vaccines. Establishment figures such as Paul Offit claimed in 2020 that SV40 has not been present in any vaccine since 1963, while independent researchers such as Kevin McKernan report that the current COVID-19 shots have an SV40 contamination problem.

Some of the health freedom community get up in arms because it is admitted that SV40 DNA sequences can be found in biopsy specimens obtained from patients with cancers such as mesothelioma, osteosarcoma and non-hodgkin’s lymphoma. The shocking but unwarranted conclusion is that an oncogenic virus has been slipped into vaccines, which is causing cancer. The so-called health freedom leaders pushing these narratives are doing the establishment all kinds of favors by upholding multiple aspects of virological and cancer fraud. It even makes it easy for them to have a chuckle with Wikipedia’s SV40 page stating that SV40 has become a totemic subject among anti-vaccination activists, where its presence in contaminated vaccines is accused of being a cause of a cancer epidemic and of being responsible for HIV AIDS.

There is no point arguing about matters that are downstream from the pivotal frauds. Such pastimes are a complete distraction and provide little or no direction about how best to help you and your family healthy. Vaccines are never indicated, as germ theory is a falsified hypothesis, full stop. Injecting biological material under the skies or otherwise is always erroneous, whether the material is derived from monkey-kitty tissue, any kind of bacterial culture or alleged viral cultures. The same goes for the new generation of semi-sympathetic mRNA products, the notion that a vaccine is quote contaminated may imply that some of the products are okay when in fact all vaccine constituents are bodily contaminants once they are introduced into a human or an animal.

As always, the road to health and prosperity should not be complicated. For the vast majority of us, there is no need to inject, inhale or swallow any of the products coming out of the pharmaceutical industry. Their quote solutions require the invention of fictional problems and misrepresentations of why people get sick. Just as important is the need to ignore fear-based narratives about germs, viruses and contagion, whether they are coming from the mainstream or so-called freedom leaders. As Dawn Lester recently wrote in her article, They’re trying to fool us again, let’s remain vigilant but not afraid.

Please check out all the free resources at DrSamBailey.com to learn more about all the ways to achieve your best health naturally. If you enjoyed this video, please visit support.drsam.com
[tr:trw].

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