Positive Health Online

Republished from activehealthcare.co.uk

http://www.activehealthcare.co.uk/index.php/literature/science/217-a-virus-mutates  

Not only does the medical world struggle to keep their story on the existence of viruses and their impact on our health alive, but they also are constantly readjusting the narrative to “new mutations” of the viruses. A simple example is the influenza virus that is said to cause the flu. Not only does the flu as an illness reoccur on a yearly basis but it does so in spite of decades of yearly flu vaccinations to an increasingly more willing population. This means that the same virus is returning every year, like a migrating bird, to the same spot, causing the same effects, without taking any notice of the protection the vaccine is offering individuals. The reason for this, so the medical authority tells us, is the fact that the influenza virus “mutates” every year. It becomes a different virus, although it is still to be recognized as one from the influenza family. And since the vaccines must be prepared before the flu season starts, the medical profession, if they want to sell any flu vaccines at all, has to provide that kind of said protection without knowing in advance what the flu mutation next year will be. In other words, “protection” against the new coming flu cannot be included in the flu shot you receive during a current flu season. It contains information about past flu epidemics, not about the one that is coming next, and yet the medical profession keeps insisting it does protect you from becoming infected by the coming “unknown” virus. But isn’t it strange that a virus should mutate constantly? What, in fact, is a mutation?

Clockwise from Top Left: Cartoon representation of the entire bacteriophage MS2 protein capsid (pdb id 1AQ3) – Wikipedia; Diagram of the structure of tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) – Wikipedia; Electron micrograph of a Varicella (Chickenpox) Virus – Wikipedia; Two adenoviruses with a cartoon to show their icosahedral structure – Wikipedia

Mutations are Changes in the Genetic Sequence of Cells; they are a Main Cause of Diversity among Organisms

The word “mutation” refers specifically to changes in the nucleic acids, building blocks of the DNA. These changes are mostly noted in germline organisms, whereby hereditary traits are passed on to the next generation. During this process changes in the genetic makeup may occur, which will have, so it is said, “a permanent effect” on the offspring. However, we can ask the question how ‘permanent’ such changes are when they occur continuously, thereby continuously changing the permanent changes? It rather seems to be part of an ongoing process. In fact, mutations form the basis of evolution. Organisms change as a result of mutations in the way they function and in the way they appear. These changes appear random to us, in the sense that the predictability of what the next genetic modification is going to be is zero. Even so, evolution shows us a pattern formed by these changes that leads to the evolution and adaptation of organisms to their ever-changing environment. Even non-germline cells mutate, and here it does not involve passing on a specific trait to the next generation. These are called somatic mutations. These are mutations that occur in certain cells within an organism, as a result of outside influences. Hence, by the medical profession, these internal mutations are seen to be the cause of illnesses as these cells may have an altered physical expression due to the alteration in their genetic material. So they may look and function differently compared to the cells that surround them. However, it is worth noting that not all organisms of the same species exposed to the same outside influences will show the same somatic mutation or any mutation at all for that matter. Hence, the question remains why these cells and not others? Why these specimens and not others? This observation destroys the causal link the medical profession adheres to between the mutation and the disease, as it isn’t sufficient for certain outside circumstances to be present for these mutation to always take place. There must, therefore, be another factor present that determines the different reactions between cells exposed to the same circumstances. It is likely that it will be that, as yet unnamed, factor that provides us with the causal link to the specific illness, and not the mutation itself.

Mutations form an essential part of any living organism. Scientists have established that there is never a time or circumstance where no mutation ever takes place. In other words, mutations are essential to life itself, for all living cells as well as for all living organisms. Because we do not understand the reasons for naturally occurring mutations, we define them as random. This suggests that, once we do understand how life works, we will be able to see the trigger for a mutation to take place. Once you understand and comprehend, you can explain phenomena correctly and randomness turns into causality.

So, mutation is as normal as life itself. Why, then, is medical science so overwhelmed by mutations? Have they ever told the public about mutations within bacteria, organisms they also consider to be responsible for certain diseases? Yet, it must happen there too because it is natural to all living cells. And yes, the public does know about “the hospital bacteria” which are bacteria that have mutated. They have adapted to the changing circumstances of their environment, which is the hospital and its effort to create a sterile environment. They used chemicals to kill bacteria (antibiotics and detergents), which these organisms have now adapted to and, indeed, their genetic structure has changed so they can survive their previously poisoned habitat. So, mutations in bacteria do cause health problems, even though this one (the major one, and virtually the only one the medical profession has alerted us to) has been induced by the direct actions of the medical profession itself.

What, then, is so strange about viral mutations? Well, we do know from observing evolution and many years of genetic research in nature that mutations in organisms occur at a very slow pace. It takes a while for a specimen population to truly establish a new trait, a new adaptation to the environment, a new requirement to survive more easily or survive in a different way. Medical scientists tell us that this is completely different in viruses. In fact, it is so bad they have called RNA viruses genetically unstable! And here is a weird thing: whenever a genetic code or sequence is unstable in nature it has the tendency to disappear and the line of development will be abandoned by that organism. Not so for RNA viruses, according to medical science! And once again, their words are contrary to scientific knowledge.

What’s the role of RNA within the cells? They are said to play an important role in the synthesis of proteins. Besides that, many RNA types carry out biochemical reactions, just like enzymes do, and many other types of RNA perform complex regulatory roles within the cells.

There are two immediate consequences following on from such scientific knowledge

1. RNA is abundantly present across the entire living cell;
2. RNA performs a variety of tasks, in much the same way as proteins and enzymes do, but there is no scientist who states that RNA has a life of its own. It is a thing, not an organism;
3. Scientific research over the past two centuries has shown that so called disease-making organisms are being generated from within the already existing diseased tissue and that the assumption they have moved inside the organism from their outer environment is false;
4. Quantum physics proved that all matter is formed by an energy field and that the physical manifestation of the matter at all times depends on the balance within that energy field;
5. All matter, including living organisms, are at the centre of their own energy field and manifests in the way it does as a result of the interaction of its own energy field and that of its environment. All interactions are energetic exchanges, not physical connections;
6. Viruses are not living entities. They are not ‘bugs’;
7. Viruses appear after cells have died and broken apart, not at the very beginning of a disease;
8. No virus has ever been isolated. All claims of virus isolation have been made on tests done on cellular debris, containing a variety of structures and part structures of the broken down cells.

Considering the wide variety of tasks the RNA is involved in in all parts of the cell it will be, in its various forms, found all over the cell. We can now imagine that when a cell dies its inner content will contain a large variety and a large quantity of RNA.

It is worth noting that viruses are identified in laboratory tests by recognizing a short specific genetic sequence (RNA or DNA) in material originating from cell destruction that can never be purified to such a degree that genetic material from different sources can be separated.

Here is a bit more scientific history for you. More than fifty years ago scientists discovered what soon became known as exosomes. These were vesicles found outside of the cells and they were considered to be waste material that the cells had expelled. It was demonstrated that exosomes were actually formed inside the cells (endosomes) before they were released through the membrane of the cell. So they are, in fact, tiny bubbles with a diameter of about 40-100 nm secreted by most cells. It has a lipid membrane structure and is internally coated with proteins, mRNAs, microRNA, and other substances. Very soon, however, interest in these vesicles disappeared, until recently. Now they are being studied intensely, also by the medical profession, because, so they say, these exosomes can cause and transfer diseases. Now, isn’t that a bit of good news? But they also reckon exosomes can be used to cure diseases, to facilitate treatments. Forgive me if I am cynical about this last statement as I have been spoon fed these lines all through my medical life and I have yet to see any improvement in any of their treatment results as a direct consequence of this kind of ‘innovation’.

Why mention exosomes and their inside cell compatriots, the endosomes, at all? Scientists have made a significant observation. Researchers looking at pictures taken with the electron microscope have commented on how much these exosomes resemble the shape and structure of viruses. In fact, some have stated that viruses were indistinguishable from exosomes! Comparing what scientists consider the makeup of viruses with the known structure of exosomes they have found great similarity between the two. And of course, there are an enormous number of ‘different’ viruses but equally exosomes, although comparable in structure, can vary greatly in content and shape, as cellular waste comes in many forms too. This discovery should, at least in scientific terms, open the gates to a new theory. Instead the medical authority decides to ignore and ridicule any suggestion that exosomes could possibly be related to, maybe even be the same as, what previously they have called viruses. If that turns out to be the case then all the stories told about viruses and their involvement in illnesses will have to be reviewed in terms of the structures, referred to as viruses, becoming cellular waste bags.

And yet, I can point you to some other scientific knowledge which undermines the basic principles of our current story of infectious diseases.

Let’s put this into context

• All interactions are energetic, which means that a disease is the manifestation of an energetic interaction between the inner environment of the organism and its outer environment;
• Disease comes first, as an energetic imbalance. At some point during the disease process micro-organisms may be generated from the debris to help clean up the cellular devastation caused by the disease. The micro-organisms are specific for the kind of cellular breakdown that has taken place, specific for the kind of debris that is left;
• Cellular debris is the disintegration of the cellular structure, which happens during the disease process and finally at the cell death itself;
• What has been described as a virus has no living features and is basically just a small bag containing some genetic material (RNA or DNA) and little else. As no, falsely called, disease making organism attacks the cell from the outside, then certainly some non-living material, like a virus, is not capable of moving inside the cell, then inside the nucleus of the cell, and then destroying the cell either. It is far more likely, and now confirmed by electron microscopic picture analysis, that the small bag containing genetic material comes from the inside of a diseased cell;
• The breakdown of cells can happen in an almost endless variety of ways, so the small parts you can find amongst the debris will always be there if you care to look for it. All shapes and sizes can be found, and according to the way the cell structure collapsed you will find more of a certain type of broken pieces than another type.

If we now bear in mind that diseases are caused by energetic interactions between the living organism and its environment and not through direct physical contact, then it becomes crucial for us, wanting to understand the disease process, to survey the non-material part of the kind of world we live in. What kind of messages do we receive from our environment? How safe and nurtured do we feel within our environment? How much energy does it require for me to be allowed to be myself? How much conflict I am surrounded by in my life? We would do well no longer to focus on the physicality of life but to get to know the energy of life, because that is where the answers are to be found as to what makes us ill. Anything that we then find in the physical part of life is nothing more than an expression of the interaction between the inner and the outer energetic fields. It is an expression of something; it isn’t the real thing.

A virus does not mutate. It is a slightly different format of the same broken down piece of a sick and dying cell. It is released from the inside of the cell outwardly, in an effort to clear the rubbish and restore balance. When that fails the cell dies and breaks up completely. Viruses do not ‘adapt’ to a change in their environment. They change as the way the cells break down is changing. In other words, it depends on the kind of imbalance (disease) the cells are suffering from.

A virus does not mutate because for a mutation to take place you need to have a cell with a genetic code inside, in other words a living cell. A virus is not a living cell; it is not even a cell. And although it contains genetic material it has no living properties that are required for an internal mutation to take place.

• A virus does not mutate;
• A virus does not cause illnesses;
• A virus does not ‘live’ inside the organism.

A virus is, at best, a sign of an imbalance, of a disease, occurring within the system. But, as it is almost impossible to establish the presence of viruses in any tissue simply for you to know about an oncoming disease, there are far more simple, effective and inexpensive ways of finding out that you are out of balance, that you are harbouring an illness.

Let’s make life simple again!

Acknowledgement Citation

Republished from activehealthcare.co.uk

http://www.activehealthcare.co.uk/index.php/literature/science/217-a-virus-mutates