Dr. Tom Cowan Insists We Show Him Covid-19 |472|

Alex

Administrator
#1
Tom Cowan Insists We Show Him Covid-19 |472|
by Alex Tsakiris | Nov 17 | Skepticism
Share
Tweet
0SHARES

Tom Cowan’s has some wacky ideas, but in what world can Amazon ban a Simon & Schuster book?

Audio Clip: 0:02 ‘Hi, everybody, Hi Dr. Nic. Dr Nic this malpractice committee has received a few complaints against you.’
Alex Tsakiris: 0:12 – That’s of course the Simpsons and today’s show does dive into what some people see as medical quackery and what other people see as cutting edge conspiracy science. Here’s a clip:
Published in Nature three years ago, again in 2016. In 2016 he was on this. He can give you all the stats on the camels and how many of the camels had the virus and how many camels had the, the antibodies and then, you know, so he’s been doing that work for 10 years. So he just –
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:46 – Show you the picture. Here’s the-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Your name is Alex right? Alex, right now show me the picture of the isolated virus.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:55 – Show, (Laughs)-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:58 – Show it to me.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:59 – Flat earth-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 1:00 – You said you believe this guy? Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 1:02 – Flat earth science. That’s what the flat earth guys do. They say, Hey, I can’t see the rest. Show me, show me.
 
#2
I believe there's some nuance to what it means to "isolate"... i think he started getting into some nuance when talking about the surrogate markers; it's too bad he didn't have a chance to dig into that a bit.

According to David Crowe, the term gets debased and abused.

It seems like it's a similar question to "Does God exist or not?" You can't really have a sensible discussion until all parties come to some clarity on what the heck "God" even means to you, me, him, them...
 

Alex

Administrator
#3
I believe there's some nuance to what it means to "isolate"... i think he started getting into some nuance when talking about the surrogate markers; it's too bad he didn't have a chance to dig into that a bit.

According to David Crowe, the term gets debased and abused.

It seems like it's a similar question to "Does God exist or not?" You can't really have a sensible discussion until all parties come to some clarity on what the heck "God" even means to you, me, him, them...
thanks for jumping into this. I feel like you may be cutting dr.tom too much slack.

tom is saying this is completely fake... i.e. criminal medical fraud ( which I think it's highly unlikely):
Canadian scientists make COVID-19 research breakthrough ...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/coronavirus-research-lab-vido-intervac-1.5443244

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-covid-19-vido-intervac-saskatchewan-vaccine-1.5508114
 
#4
It’s fair to say it’s on him to explain why the consensus science is wrong, but he was trying to and you wouldn’t let him.
Also, I think your conspiracy theory that allowing ideas like Kaufman and Cowan’s into the discussion is a psyop is off base. Yes, those two came to the conversation because of Covid; but others, like David Crowe, have been arguing against prevailing virological theory since the 90s. Court cases have even been won around the fact that HIV has never been proven to be isolated. I understand why this kind of thinking is so off putting and at first might seem like flat earth nonsense... but if you’re not willing to ease up and actually let a person that thinks that way say what they have to say about it, why even bother? No one learned anything from this other than that you think Tom Cowan is practically a flat earther. What a waste of all of our time.
 
#6
It’s fair to say it’s on him to explain why the consensus science is wrong, but he was trying to and you wouldn’t let him.
Also, I think your conspiracy theory that allowing ideas like Kaufman and Cowan’s into the discussion is a psyop is off base. Yes, those two came to the conversation because of Covid; but others, like David Crowe, have been arguing against prevailing virological theory since the 90s. Court cases have even been won around the fact that HIV has never been proven to be isolated. I understand why this kind of thinking is so off putting and at first might seem like flat earth nonsense... but if you’re not willing to ease up and actually let a person that thinks that way say what they have to say about it, why even bother? No one learned anything from this other than that you think Tom Cowan is practically a flat earther. What a waste of all of our time.
I agree, there is a real issue here, and I don't think it is semantics.

Imagine you had a total mess of documents that you are not interested in, plus one sealed box of documents, and you want to make a careful list of the documents inside the box. The only way is to burst the box open by force. Doesn't it make sense that you absolutely have to clean away all the other debris away before you do that - otherwise you don't know which documents came out of the box, and which was surrounding debris!

OK, that somewhat contrived analogy is exactly what this issue is about. Viruses consist of a protein coat (the box) and contain DNA or RNA (RNA in the case of HIV and COVID). In a sample contaminated by human or animal tissues there will be many other pieces of RNA, including human, microbial and fungal RNA.

The next step is to burst open the viral particles and analyse the RNA within,

However, you really, really need to get those viral particles clean before you perform this step, because there is no way of determining the origin of the fragments of RNA after bursting the viruses open.

If you build a test out of a fragment of RNA which is not from the virus - well you can guess what happens! Remember those PCR tests only search for sequences of about 20 bases - nothing like a whole gene in length.

The other thing to remember, is that particular RNA strands from other sources may not be present in every sample that is tested - because that will only happen if the relevant gene is being expressed at the time. This means you might end up with something that looks like a functioning test - something that would only record positive in a small number of cases, and yet it could be bogus.

David
 
Last edited:
#7
i watched the Snyder parapolitical interview AFTER I watched this, and, after what was said there about all manner of high level deception and whatnot, how can you dismiss the possibility of a “criminal medical fraud” so easily? What’s going on now can be understood as the culmination of years of mk ultra like mass mind manipulation by tptb, whoever that is.
 
#9
i watched the Snyder parapolitical interview AFTER I watched this, and, after what was said there about all manner of high level deception and whatnot, how can you dismiss the possibility of a “criminal medical fraud” so easily? What’s going on now can be understood as the culmination of years of mk ultra like mass mind manipulation by tptb, whoever that is.
I suppose this didn't start out as deliberate fraud - more like sloppiness.

I am sure the scientists studying AIDS were dead serious about finding a solution to that deadly plague. However, getting a pure sample of a virus is hard work I think - so finding a shortcut seemed temporarily useful. However, consider Koch's postulates:

Koch's postulates for accepting a claim that a given organism causes a given disease are as follows:
  • The organism must be present in every case of the disease.
  • The organism 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 organism is inoculated into a healthy susceptible host.
  • The organism must be recoverable from the experimentally infected host.
These are all violated in the case of AIDS.

The same may be true for COVID, as it would seem they are still trying to infect animals reliably with COVID

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2787-6

The problem is, that Koch assembled those four postulates for a reason - because without them it is frighteningly easy to make a mistake - such as making a PCR out of non-viral RNA!

Note that this is just what I have picked up off the internet - I am not a microbiologist!

David
 
#10
I have read The Contagion Myth and have watched may of the Kaufman interviews. In the book they describe the process of isolation not being a true isolation since other debris tends to be present, which I assume is his main argument on that. But virologists are clearly isolating something even though it may or may not be what we call a virus. The hypothesis of viruses being exosomes comes up, leading to the idea that what we call a virus is actually a detoxification process of the cells. If true it does call into question the notion that a virus (or exosome) is the cause of the illness vs the result of an illness. And then terrain theory and blah blah blah, if you have read it you understand.

This reminds me of the ongoing debate of whether dietary cholesterol contributes to heart disease by increasing LDL levels. The most recent research shows that increased LDL is not the actually cause of plaque build-up, but is the result of systemic inflammation cause calcification of the arteries. The increased LDL is the body trying to heal the "cracks" caused by the inflammation. So inflammation in this case turns out to be the cause and not he increased LDL, even though that is what we see in those with heart disease. This is the main reason why limits to Cholesterol intake was removed from the US dietary guidelines in 2015. This has good references contained within: https://chriskresser.com/heart-disease/

There are pharmaceuticals, well meaning cardiologists, books, and medical textbooks still working under this assumption about cholesterol being bad for health and the cause of disease. They are not committing fraud, they are just operating under an old paradigm. And because of that there are still papers that get published (usually with questionable methods) supporting this paradigm.

So although I cannot prove David's claim, if he is in fact correct, I suspect that something similar could be happening within the field of virology. Everyone could be collectively misinterpreting the information without intentionally committing any sort of fraud or trying to deceive anyone.
 
#11
Koch’s postulate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch's_postulates

I have listened to several interviews with Dr. Cowan and I have recently ordered his book.

If I remember correctly he states that the rigor of Koch’s Postulate has not been met - he started to get into how he thinks others have apparently done a “work around” but was cut off by someone not interested in hearing why he believes what he believes. What a shame.

Conspiracies abound - and Big Pharma is not immune.

And it’s just as easy to bribe a scientist as it is a politician - humans are human.
 
#15
Tom Cowan Insists We Show Him Covid-19 |472|
by Alex Tsakiris | Nov 17 | Skepticism
Share
Tweet
0SHARES

Tom Cowan’s has some wacky ideas, but in what world can Amazon ban a Simon & Schuster book?

Audio Clip: 0:02 ‘Hi, everybody, Hi Dr. Nic. Dr Nic this malpractice committee has received a few complaints against you.’
Alex Tsakiris: 0:12 – That’s of course the Simpsons and today’s show does dive into what some people see as medical quackery and what other people see as cutting edge conspiracy science. Here’s a clip:
Published in Nature three years ago, again in 2016. In 2016 he was on this. He can give you all the stats on the camels and how many of the camels had the virus and how many camels had the, the antibodies and then, you know, so he’s been doing that work for 10 years. So he just –
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:46 – Show you the picture. Here’s the-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Your name is Alex right? Alex, right now show me the picture of the isolated virus.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:55 – Show, (Laughs)-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:58 – Show it to me.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:59 – Flat earth-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 1:00 – You said you believe this guy? Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 1:02 – Flat earth science. That’s what the flat earth guys do. They say, Hey, I can’t see the rest. Show me, show me.
What the heck was this?

I feel like you’re complaining that he needs to prove his point without giving him an opportunity to do that. Felt like you were taking the role of professional skeptic here.

I mean maybe what he’s espousing is equivalent to flat earth science but there’s no way I could know that from this most unproductive interview.

I’m not a virologist so I have no idea. I’m an engineer so melted steel at 9/11 is obvious to me. I’m a fan of science in general so round earth is obvious. Viruses... I could learn a few things and perhaps if you debated the science I would have learned something.
 
#16
thanks for jumping into this. I feel like you may be cutting dr.tom too much slack.

tom is saying this is completely fake... i.e. criminal medical fraud ( which I think it's highly unlikely):
Canadian scientists make COVID-19 research breakthrough ...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/coronavirus-research-lab-vido-intervac-1.5443244

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-covid-19-vido-intervac-saskatchewan-vaccine-1.5508114
thanks for jumping into this. I feel like you may be cutting dr.tom too much slack.

tom is saying this is completely fake... i.e. criminal medical fraud ( which I think it's highly unlikely):
Canadian scientists make COVID-19 research breakthrough ...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/coronavirus-research-lab-vido-intervac-1.5443244

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-covid-19-vido-intervac-saskatchewan-vaccine-1.5508114
Tom Cowan Insists We Show Him Covid-19 |472|
by Alex Tsakiris | Nov 17 | Skepticism
Share
Tweet
0SHARES

Tom Cowan’s has some wacky ideas, but in what world can Amazon ban a Simon & Schuster book?

Audio Clip: 0:02 ‘Hi, everybody, Hi Dr. Nic. Dr Nic this malpractice committee has received a few complaints against you.’
Alex Tsakiris: 0:12 – That’s of course the Simpsons and today’s show does dive into what some people see as medical quackery and what other people see as cutting edge conspiracy science. Here’s a clip:
Published in Nature three years ago, again in 2016. In 2016 he was on this. He can give you all the stats on the camels and how many of the camels had the virus and how many camels had the, the antibodies and then, you know, so he’s been doing that work for 10 years. So he just –
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:46 – Show you the picture. Here’s the-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:49 – Your name is Alex right? Alex, right now show me the picture of the isolated virus.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:55 – Show, (Laughs)-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 0:58 – Show it to me.
Alex Tsakiris: 0:59 – Flat earth-
Dr. Tom Cowan: 1:00 – You said you believe this guy? Show me the picture.
Alex Tsakiris: 1:02 – Flat earth science. That’s what the flat earth guys do. They say, Hey, I can’t see the rest. Show me, show me.
I love your show, usually. However, I think it’s absolutely incorrect to equate questioning a highly profitable disease paradigm with “flat earth” science”. My mother was diagnosed HIV positive when I was 14. She died about 5 years later, from AZT, not “AIDS”. “Virology” is not what it’s advertised as. I wish you’d look deeper into the facts. David Crowe’s research would be a good starting place.
 
#17
It’s fair to say it’s on him to explain why the consensus science is wrong, but he was trying to and you wouldn’t let him.
Also, I think your conspiracy theory that allowing ideas like Kaufman and Cowan’s into the discussion is a psyop is off base. Yes, those two came to the conversation because of Covid; but others, like David Crowe, have been arguing against prevailing virological theory since the 90s. Court cases have even been won around the fact that HIV has never been proven to be isolated. I understand why this kind of thinking is so off putting and at first might seem like flat earth nonsense... but if you’re not willing to ease up and actually let a person that thinks that way say what they have to say about it, why even bother? No one learned anything from this other than that you think Tom Cowan is practically a flat earther. What a waste of all of our time.
You said it way better than I could. I lost my mother to “AIDS”. I get too mad when I try to discuss “The infectious myth” with people because it affected me quite viscerally.
 

Alex

Administrator
#18
I have read The Contagion Myth and have watched may of the Kaufman interviews. In the book they describe the process of isolation not being a true isolation since other debris tends to be present, which I assume is his main argument on that. But virologists are clearly isolating something even though it may or may not be what we call a virus. The hypothesis of viruses being exosomes comes up, leading to the idea that what we call a virus is actually a detoxification process of the cells. If true it does call into question the notion that a virus (or exosome) is the cause of the illness vs the result of an illness. And then terrain theory and blah blah blah, if you have read it you understand.

This reminds me of the ongoing debate of whether dietary cholesterol contributes to heart disease by increasing LDL levels. The most recent research shows that increased LDL is not the actually cause of plaque build-up, but is the result of systemic inflammation cause calcification of the arteries. The increased LDL is the body trying to heal the "cracks" caused by the inflammation. So inflammation in this case turns out to be the cause and not he increased LDL, even though that is what we see in those with heart disease. This is the main reason why limits to Cholesterol intake was removed from the US dietary guidelines in 2015. This has good references contained within: https://chriskresser.com/heart-disease/

There are pharmaceuticals, well meaning cardiologists, books, and medical textbooks still working under this assumption about cholesterol being bad for health and the cause of disease. They are not committing fraud, they are just operating under an old paradigm. And because of that there are still papers that get published (usually with questionable methods) supporting this paradigm.

So although I cannot prove David's claim, if he is in fact correct, I suspect that something similar could be happening within the field of virology. Everyone could be collectively misinterpreting the information without intentionally committing any sort of fraud or trying to deceive anyone.
thanks. This is helpful. and I think it mirrors my take. since everything I know comes from skeptiko ( haha... Just kidding... not really) I point to my interviews with henry bauer
UN says African-American women 20 times more likely for HIV ...

it's another case where our incomplete understanding of viruses is evident

but then I'd include
Dr. Mary's Monkey: How the Unsolved Murder of a Doctor, a ...

and the horrible case of Alton Ochsner who injected his grandchildren with the polio vaccine to show how safe they were... one of the kids died the next day in the other developed severe complications from polio

that's relevant to our current conversation because it dramatically demonstrates that viruses really really dangerous... even for people with a normal terrain

it also has a bunch of other implications for vaccine safety that probably aren't relevant for this discussion right now but obviously soon will be :) or maybe :-(
 

Alex

Administrator
#19
Koch’s postulate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch's_postulates

I have listened to several interviews with Dr. Cowan and I have recently ordered his book.

If I remember correctly he states that the rigor of Koch’s Postulate has not been met - he started to get into how he thinks others have apparently done a “work around” but was cut off by someone not interested in hearing why he believes what he believes. What a shame.

Conspiracies abound - and Big Pharma is not immune.

And it’s just as easy to bribe a scientist as it is a politician - humans are human.
you've packed a lot into a short post... Let's deconstruct.

Several virologist have claimed to have not only isolated the virus but have tested it in animals. as I understand it, this essentially meets the koch postulate.

your second point is where all the action is. what cowan suggests in the interview is that virologist... like everyone in the saskatchewan lab... and all the other virologist around the world who are working on test, vaccines, treatments and a bunch of other realted stuff are all part of a coordinated and unimaginably synchronized conspiracy... which even includes countries that are essentially at war like the united states china and russia. I find this highly unlikely.
 

Alex

Administrator
#20
What the heck was this?

I feel like you’re complaining that he needs to prove his point without giving him an opportunity to do that. Felt like you were taking the role of professional skeptic here.

I mean maybe what he’s espousing is equivalent to flat earth science but there’s no way I could know that from this most unproductive interview.

I’m not a virologist so I have no idea. I’m an engineer so melted steel at 9/11 is obvious to me. I’m a fan of science in general so round earth is obvious. Viruses... I could learn a few things and perhaps if you debated the science I would have learned something.
point taken. I had spent about two weeks on this topic with matt belair... and I was getting pretty frustrated with his inability to see how paper thin and ridiculous this " there is no virus" claim is... so I wasn't in a very patient mood :)

do you think there is no covid19 virus? y/n/m

do you think the earth is flat? y/n/m
 
Top