Controversial: There is NO “Virus”. There are NO “Viruses” - 5 Experts Weigh In
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
Just goes further to prove the OP has absolutely no credibility by posting and buying into the bullshit and nonsense.
The thumbnail implies this is an argument using Koch's postulates in their original form, which no one does because they were a great advance in 1880 but have been superseded over time.
No way I am watching 2 hours of nonsense.
No way I am watching 2 hours of nonsense.
Nothing controversial, simply some people trying to deny reality by using a 19th century definition. Might as well be arguing that the internet doesn't exist.
If the earth was flat, cats would have knocked everything off alreadyMaybe somebody will fall off the end of it.
Koch's postulates are as follows: The bacteria must be present in every case of the disease. The bacteria must be isolated from the host with the disease and grown in pure culture. The specific disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the bacteria is inoculated into a healthy susceptible host.
And were a reasonable idea back in the 1880's. Thankfully medicine has progressed a fair bit since then.
Yes. I know what they are.
I took basic biology.
They were a great advance in germ theory.
They have been replaced by more comprehensive approaches.
