Five Simple Questions For Virologists

Five Simple Questions For Virologists

Hello, everyone. Almost three years into the "great virus debate," we're still awaiting answers to questions we have for virologists. I thought this would be a good time to put forward in one place the five most basic unanswered questions, with the hope that any virologist will reply with answers. I'm happy to share their answers with my audience.

Question One: When attempting to prove the existence of any "thing," we follow certain procedures. First, we define the thing we are looking for, then we go to the natural habitat of that thing and attempt to find it. If we find it and we isolate it (meaning, separate it from its environment so we have it in pure form), this step allows us to find out what the thing is composed of and what it does. It works very well with trees, frogs, bacteria and even nanoparticles. 

Can you give us a reference in which this step has been done for any pathogenic virus, and, if this reference doesn't exist, explain why not? 

Question Two: Virologists claim that the "viral culture" experiment proves the existence of the virus. In that experiment, an unpurified sample is taken from a sick person and mixed with fetal bovine serum, toxic antibiotics, and a starvation medium. It is then inoculated on a highly inbred cell culture, which results in the breakdown of the cells (called "cytopathic effect”). This process is called "isolation" of the virus.

Can you define what the term "isolation" means to you, and whether you agree that the above process is a scientifically based isolation procedure?

Question Three: The scientific method at its core means the choosing of an independent variable (that which you wish to study) and a dependent variable (the effect this independent variable causes). By this widely accepted definition of the scientific method, one would need to isolate and test the virus and only the virus as the independent variable. So, a proper experiment would be to isolate a pure virus from a sick person that you allege is made sick with this virus and inoculate this and only this virus onto the cell culture and see whether it causes the CPE. Then, of course, one would run a control experiment: The identical steps would be taken, except no virus would be added to the culture.

Can you point us to a study in which this clear experiment has been done? If it doesn't exist, please explain why. If the reason is that you can't find the purified virus in any fluid of any sick plant, animal, or human, then are you willing to acknowledge that the only experiment one could do to prove the existence of these viruses simply can't be done? If you agree that this experiment can't be done, could you please refer us to a paper that shows how a "viral culture" is experimentally validated with proper controls at every step of the experiment? 

Question Four: It is often claimed by doctors and scientists that every nook and cranny of our bodies is teeming with viruses. These viruses, it is claimed, make up what is called a "virome." Some claim there are 10 to the 48th number of viruses in our bodies. 

If this is true, when you inoculate unpurified lung samples onto cell cultures, presumably containing gazillions of these viruses, why is the only virus that "grows" the one you're looking for, i.e., SARS-CoV-2? Why aren't these other viruses seen, photographed, and found in the broken-down cell culture?

Question Five: Finally, can you offer other examples of "things" that are claimed to exist solely through the finding of pieces of that thing? To be clear, if no records of a purified virus such as SARS-CoV-2 exists, by what logic or scientific principles can one claim to prove that any piece, such as an antigen or genome, has come from that "thing?"

All the best,


Comments 24

Anonymous on

Hello Mai,

Who or what is tmv?

Customer Support

Anonymous on

Hello There,

For those of you that would like to view Stefan Lanka’s papers. Feel free to copy this link.

Customer Support

Dwayne Harris on

Can someone please show me all of Stefan Lanka’s control studies? I have been following Tom since the beginning and have probably watched every single video, but all I ever see is the same image of the cell cultures. Where is the full article please?

Mai on

Hello! Great questions.
Does anyone know if Dr. Cowan speaks about the “discovery of viruses” anywhere with tmv? I’d really like to listen to what he has to say about it.
Thank you

Craig on

Whoa! I’m rather “blown away” with the link to John Blaid’s convincing response to Jeremy Hammond’s earlier linked attempt to answer/refute Dr. Cowan’s 5 Simple Questions. I’m very, very pleased to have had this opportunity to read different sides on these questions. Thank you for your staff’s help in this. It has strengthened my faith in your work here.

Anonymous on

Hello All. Thank you for your comments and participation.

Tom is recommending everyone reads this response to Jerry R. Hammond’s answers.

Customer Support

Bjorno on

Watched your excellent discussion with Timpone on which you shared a graphic of all the things like DNA, viruses etc you suspect are mythical like Leprechauns, Unicorns and of course SARScov2.
Is that graphic posted on you website – can’t seem to find it.

Craig on

I found Jeremy R. Hammond’s responses at to be thorough and helpful. Further, as a wholly independent journalist, he appears to me to be exposing much of the government and science corruption in connection with COVID policies and more. I’ve never come across him before finding him through a couple of comments here preceding mine. I’m thankful and after reviewing his website have signed up for his newsletter.

poetinapaperbag on

In response to Alex Eulenbergs’ question 5 non sequitur on dinosaur remnants..
..The dinosaur remnants were actually extant when found ….they were not the result of aberrant processes of concoctions of non-dinosaur parts. HTH.

CHarlie B on

Hey All,
What if the virus construct is just that?
The perfect ghost. The perfect fear induced creation to poison people and create bebacks for another mild dose.
Could an institution do that?
Ah, why yes! Money driven psychopaths certainty would be the easy answer.
Next is the research of how every higher education institution has been hijacked by the same inversion of truths.
Welcome to the: planet of almost everything is a distortion with ill intent.

Cathy on

Hammond is an incorrigible, arrogant, and IGNORANT person. Talk about a dog with a bone. He is not a biologist, has never worked in a lab yet claims that he doesn’t need the education and background to understand the journal articles he reads. Oh yeah?

He says that the centrifugation done on the patient samples is by itself purification. It is not. He has been told that there are different types of centrifuges and protocols but he ignores this because he doesn’t understand it. Instead of asking to be educated on this topic, he continues to say that the first centrifugation is THE purification and anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Anyone who has worked in a biology lab knows that the type and state of the sample determines the purification process. It can take many steps and processes to purify a complex or crude sample. A sample from a patient’s lungs has a lot of debris that would be far larger than a alleged “virus.” That first centrifugation, likely done on a table top centrifuge at low rpms, merely pellets the large debris while the “virus” and many other biological components stay in the solution. There is no way any biologist would claim this is a purified sample.

Further, since Hammond has no background and experience, he has been duped by the “mock culture” fraud. Since being challenged on not using controls in their experiments, at least some dishonest researchers have started using the label “mock control” on a picture of a cell culture without giving any indication what these pictures are. An honest researcher would include all the parameters of this “mock culture” in the materials and methods section and call it what it should be called, a control. But then that would be the type of fraud that they could be held accountable for. So instead they hide the fact that there’s no control by showing an unidentified picture and giving it a new label so ignoramuses like Hammond will fall for their deception. Again, Hammond has been told this but dismisses the information.

Btw, Hammond ignores the effort expended by Andrew Kaufman and Christina Massey to document what these mock cultures are. We are told that when they ask the virologists, they’ve been stonewalled and have yet to receive answers. This is outrageous. That information, partly to blame for the tyrannical situation we’re in, needs to be made public.

Another indication that all these covid “virus” experiments are bogus, as if we need more, is the use of pcr. If there really were an infection such that the “virus” replicated itself in vast numbers causing disease, there would be no need to amplify the rna to “find” the “virus.” This is what’s called a clue. People like Hammond don’t understand that. They are duped by the high tech wizardry of it all. eye roll

And finally, there are no studies that show contagion. But that doesn’t bother virologists and their accolytes like Hammond. It never occurs to these dupes that by shifting the research to tissue culture, or worse computer models, fraud on a mass scale has been made cheap and easy, as we have witnessed over the past three years.

Hammond spends an inordinate amount of time fighting people who are on the same side. Either he is the most insecure, self-sabotaging jerk in history, or he’s controlled oposition. Quien sabe?

I could post this on his site, but he’ll spend 2 hours writing his nonsense that doesn’t address my points. He’s a total waste of time.

X Man on

What of the spike in numbers of HIV positive if no virus exist, do you mean the huge amount of dollars spent in research for cure of HIV is baseless over the last 38 years with 38 million people living with HIV according to WHO,
Further trials Mordena vacinne of long time injection to prevent HIV infections is just a joke

Steve Anderson on

This may be of interest to you.

Mike Marshall on

Hi Dr Cowan.

Jeremy. R. Hammond has attempted to answer your five questions here:

It’s nothing new, though. From what I can see, it’s just Jeremy. R. Hammond spouting his usual nonsense.

Jess on

No wonder I remain confused about viral testing as a non-scientist. It’s layers upon layers of nonsense.

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published