German Supreme Court Rules Measles Does Not Exist

German supreme court rules that Measles does not exist

Judges at the German Federal Supreme Court have confirmed that the measles virus does not exist, vindicating conspiracy theorists who have said that no study has ever proven the existence of the virus.

According to the judgement by the Supreme Court, the measles vaccination may have been injected into millions of unsuspecting German citizens for sinister reasons.

Anonhq.com reports:

The First Civil Senate of the BGH has confirmed the judgment by the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart (OLG) of the 16 February 2016. The sum of €100,000 which I had offered as a reward for scientific proof of the existence of the alleged measles virus does not have to be paid to the plaintiff. The plaintiff also was ordered to bear all procedural costs.

Five experts have been involved in the case and presented the results of scientific studies. All five experts, including Prof. Dr. Dr. Andreas Podbielski who had been appointed by the OLG Stuttgart as the preceding court, have consistently found that none of the six publications which have been introduced to the trial, contains scientific proof of the existence of the alleged measles virus.

Genetics falsifies thesis of existence

In the trial, the results of research into so-called genetic fingerprints of alleged measles virus have been introduced. Two recognised laboratories, including the world’s largest and leading genetic Institute, arrived at exactly the same results independently.The results prove that the authors of the six publications in the measles virus case were wrong, and as a direct result all measles virologists are still wrong today: They have misinterpreted ordinary constituents of cells as part of the suspected measles virus.

Because of this error, during decades of consensus building process, normal cell constituents were mentally assembled into a model of a measles virus. To this day, an actual structure that corresponds to this model has been found neither in a human, nor in an animal. With the results of the genetic tests, all thesis of existence of measles virus has been scientifically disproved.

The authors of the six publications and all other persons involved, did not realise the error because they violated the fundamental scientific duty, which is the need to work “lege artis”, i.e. in accordance with internationally defined rules and best practice of science. They did not carry out any control experiments. Control experiments would have protected authors and mankind from this momentous error. This error became the basis of belief in the existence of any disease-causing viruses. The expert appointed by the court, Prof. Dr. Dr. Podbielski, answering to the relevant question by the court, as per page 7 of the protocol explicitly confirmed that the authors did not conduct any control experiments.

The OLG Stuttgart on 16 February 2016 overturned the judgment of the court of first instance, dismissed the action and referred, inter alia, to the central message of Prof. Podbielski with respect to the six publications. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the judgment of the OLG to the Supreme Court. As reason he stated his subjective, yet factually false perception of the trial sequence at the court in Stuttgart, and the assertion that our naming of facts about measles posed a threat to public health. The plaintiff’s position was rejected by the Supreme Court in plain words. Thus, the Supreme Court confirmed the judgment of the OLG Stuttgart from 16 February 2016.

Conclusions

The six publications submitted in the trial are the main relevant publications on the subject of “measles virus.” Since further to these six publications there not any other publications which would attempt by scientific methods to prove the existence of the measles virus, the Supreme Court judgment in the measles virus trial and the results of the genetic tests have consequences: Any national and international statements on the alleged measles virus, the infectivity of measles, and on the benefit and safety of vaccination against measles, are since then of no scientific character and have thus been deprived of their legal basis.

Upon enquiries which had been triggered by the measles virus contest, the head of the National Reference Institute for Measles at the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), Prof. Dr. Annette Mankertz, admitted an important fact. This admission may explain the increased rate of vaccination-induced disabilities, namely of vaccination against measles, and why and how specifically this kind of vaccination seems to increasingly trigger autism.

Prof. Mankertz has admitted that the “measles virus” contains typical cell’s natural components (ribosomes, the protein factories of the cell). Since the vaccination against measles contains whole “whole measles virus”, this vaccine contains cell’s own structures. This explains why vaccination against measles causes frequent and more severe allergies and autoimmune reactions than other types of vaccination. The court expert Prof. Podbielski stated on several occasions that by the assertion of the RKI with regard to ribosomes in the measles virus, the thesis of existence of measles virus has been falsified.

In the trial it was also put on record that the highest German scientific authority in the field of infectious diseases, the RKI, contrary to its legal remit as per § 4 Infection Protection Act (IfSG), has failed to create tests for alleged measles virus and to publish these. The RKI claims that it made internal studies on measles virus, however refuses to hand over or publish the results.

  • rcwarbirdbuilder

    Time to weed out all of the parasitic global criminals.

  • Dr John

    This is all very strange since I was sent home from the second grade in the 50s with Red spots all over my face and body. All of the indications were, I had the measles. i had the fever and no real discomfort as was indicative of the measles. So if it did not exist, I could not have had it. Or was it that I did not exist. Or do I exit and everything about me is the projection of my imagination. Then they would be correct there is no measles beyond my imagination. But wait if they are part of my imagination how can the contradict my imagination. After all it is my dream, my world, my disease to have and hold.

    To think the courts could take away, steal a part of my childhood. Mind you the virus was one of the easiest to endure and did not warrant vaccines that endanger future generations. I missed a couple of days from school (darn) and kept myself busy reading and playing quietly while being cared for by my grandmother. No headaches, no disgusting expulsions, no stomach problems, just spots and a very low grade temperature. Best couple of days of the week. The spots did not even itch. Once they disappeared I had to go back to school, bummer.

    By the way most most viruses are PH dependent. If your PH is higher than the virus can withstand and is still within the appropriate range for your body; it cannot survive in your body.

  • tim mitchell

    This is an interesting finding, but I think that we should clarify that they are not saying that a virus does not cause the symptoms which we call Measles, only that what is currently called the Measles virus, genetically and biologically is only a collection of cell DNA segments which have been confused with an entity called the Measles virus. Also that we currently have not proven and cannot say for sure what causes the illness which we call Measles. The explanation which is given concerning why measles vaccines are so damaging is very good and interesting.

    One last comment that I would like to make is that although what we call the Measles illness is very damaging in some cases, but if we treat it in the same way as the old time doctors treated small pox, we have great success in removing it from the body. Measles, Chicken Pox and Small Pox are treated effectively using Cream of Tartar, L-lysine, and Vitamin C. L-lysine stops replication of some viruses, vitamin C helps fight invaders and protects the body, and Cream of Tartar is a blood cleanser which flushes the toxins from the body which cause the rash and damage to organs in the body.

    The reason our bodies produce a rash is that the toxins are unable to be flushed through our normal elimination channels and the toxins are being forced out through the skin… hence the rash. Once the toxins are being flushed out, the rash disappears. Having a teaspoon of Cream of Tartar several times a day for an adult during the illness in our experience is sufficient to remove the toxins.

    • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ Derp Turtle

      Weird. Why don’t Diphtheria and Pertussis with their TOXINS produce rashes then?

  • k3nw74

    This is a very big deal…

  • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

    Anybody got the actual judgment?

    • Feli

      The Court ruled that Dr Bardens was unable to prove the existence of the virus.

      • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

        That’s a lie and you are a liar. I didn’t ask for lies, I asked for the actual court judgement so I could read it for myself instead of trusting dishonest conspiracy freaks.

        • Feli

          I was present at the trial and I have the audio recording of the announcement of the verdict.
          The judge said that they would have even accepted a review instead of a single publication, IF that review had stated “Here is the virus and here is the diameter”. But, quoting the judge, “WE DO NOT HAVE THIS HERE”.
          Here is the official verdict:
          http://lrbw.juris.de/cgi-bin/laender_rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bw&nr=20705

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Thanks for the link that shows that the court deliberated on the severely restrictive conditions of the supposed “challenge,” and not the existence of the measles virus. It’s nice having the original text where they state that the challenge asserts a refuted claim, i.e., the supposed nonexistence of the virus.

          • Feli

            They deliberated on whether or not the papers presented as “evidence” can be considered evidence for the existence of the measles virus. They concluded that none of the papers met the requirements.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            They deliberated on whether it qualified as evidence under the deliberately impractical requirements Lanka imposed. The court basically called Lanka a crackpot, but even crackpots get to make fake “challenges.”

            So, how many kids did you kill today?

          • Feli

            They deliberated on whether ONE of the six papers can be considered evidence for the existence of the measles virus. Taking into account that ONE of those six papers (Enders, 1954) is THE reference paper for the measles virus, it should have been easy to convince the judges that at least that one paper had demonstrated the existence of the measles virus. However, this was not the case and the judges ruled that NONE of the six papers demonstrated the existence of the measles virus.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Not to Lanka’s satisfaction, no. But he’ll never be satisfied—the”challenge” was designed to ensure that. 🙂

          • Feli

            The existence of a virus is strictly a scientific issue. It hasn’t been demonstrated. The judges ruled in favour of Dr Lanka.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Do you understand that the court wasn’t arguing about whether there’s a measles virus or not? Are you capable of comprehending that fact?

            This was not heard in a scientific court. This court does not rule on whether there is or is not a measles virus. This court rules on legal questions. The legal question before them was whether Lanka could refuse to accept evidence based on whatever rules he pleases, thus refusing to ever pay out or accept defeat. The court decided that he could.

            In other words, the court upheld Lanka’s right to issue a challenge with only one firm condition: nobody is allowed to win it.

            How many kids have you killed today, Feli?

          • Feli

            I am not sure that you understand German at all, it seems not.
            Dr Lanka required a scientific publication proving the existence and the diameter of the measles virus. Dr Bardens offered six (!) papers, but since in NONE of them there was a scientific demonstration of the measles virus and its diameter, Dr Lanka won. It’s actually very simple.
            The judge said that they would have even accepted a review, IF that review had stated “HERE is the virus and HERE is the diameter”. They would have ruled on that. But, quoting the judge, “WE DO NOT HAVE THIS
            HERE”.
            So clearly Dr Bardens was unable to present scientific proof of the existence of the measles virus.
            If you insist that this virus exists and has been demonstrated scientifically (by isolation and biochemical analysis), please do provide the scientific proof.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Interesting that you mention “biochemical analysis,” since that reminds me of a particular excerpt:

            Die von diesem geforderte eigene Indizienkette zum Nachweis, nach der das Masernvirus in einem Menschen oder seiner Körperflüssigkeit fotografiert, daraus isoliert, aufgereinigt, wieder fotografiert und anschließend dessen Zusammensetzung biochemisch charakterisiert werden müsse mit einem anschließenden Reinfektionsexperiment, stelle lediglich eine Hypothese dar, der wissenschaftliche Bedeutung nicht zukomme, da sie keinen wissenschaftlich etablierten Standard darstelle.

            I’ll admit that I am using machine translation and advice from Germanophone friends, but does that not indicate that Lanka demands that an experimenter deliberately infect a victim with measles?

            How many kids did you kill today, Feli?

          • Feli

            If you don’t understand German, you can only make false assumptions, I understand.
            The STANDARD method of isolation of a virus has ALWAYS been a part of ALL microbiology manuals and isolation protocols (described, for instance, in this manual of MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY: https://www.amazon.de/Medizinische-Mikrobiologie-Werner-K%C3%B6hler/dp/3437416405/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457539172&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=Medizinische+Mikrobiologie%2C+Urban%26Fischer%2C+8.+Auflage).
            I see that you do not understand German at all and that you also do NOT have a clue about lab protocols. A control experiment is performed IN THE LAB, so by “anschließenden Reinfektionsexperiment” it is scientifically meant that the CELL CULTURE should be reinfected AFTER isolation and purification of the virus, to be able to claim that they have indeed isolated a virus.
            Please can you stop wasting my time, since it is obvious that you have no clue? Thanks.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            How can you tell it’s measles if it just infects a cell culture? A cell culture won’t exhibit the classic symptoms, so what’s the point?

            How many kids have you killed today, Feli?

          • Feli

            NOW you asked a very pertinent question. Thank you.
            They claim that when their cell culture dies, it must have been the virus (!).
            This is a sheer supposition. They did not isolate any virus.
            Indeed, how can you tell it’s measles if it just infects a cell culture? 🙂
            Or how can you tell it’s measles if the same cell culture dies the same way without being “infected”? 😉
            Bear in mind that, before “infection”, they are putting antibiotics into the cell culture and these kill the cells by themselves.
            That is why they are not doing negative control experiments, because the error would be more visible then.
            I used to call it fraud, but Dr. Lanka says that for most scientists it is only an honest error.
            They simply assume that the original isolation has already been performed properly and they keep working with patented cell cultures and patented cell particles called “virus”, when in fact no virus has ever been scientifically isolated.
            Dr Lanka explains here.
            http://www.wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/Dismantling-the-Virus-Theory.pdf

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            So, wouldn’t you have to deliberately infect a victim with measles?

            How many kids did you kill today, Feli?

          • Feli

            No. Everything happens in the lab, with patented cell cultures and unstandardized tests.
            Meanwhile, there is still no proof of the virus.
            Makes you wonder what it is exactly that they inject babies with.
            Here some more information:
            https://www.arnica.org.uk/vaccine/how-vaccines-are-made

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Whatever it is, it sure works at protecting kids from measles!

            How many kids did you kill today, Feli?

          • Feli

            So we have established that we don’t have a measles virus.
            We have established that the vaccine is contaminated and toxic.
            I am sure everybody whose neurons still budge a little bit can see for themselves this “protection” 😉
            Thanks for this conversation.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            You haven’t established either of those things, though. The measles vaccine is very effective and has very, very few adverse reactions. It’s been shown to work in the United States, in Poland, in Mozambique, in Palau, and many other places. I’m sure you’ll write it all off as a shady conspiracy, but that just brings me back to my main question:

            How many kids have you killed today, Feli?

          • Feli

            Well then, you must have the scientific paper proving the existence of the measles virus?
            Please post a link. Thank you.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists
          • Feli

            So you still don’t have the scientific proof for the existence of the measles virus?
            They cannot manufacture a vaccine without the virus that they claim is contained in the vaccine.
            Checkmate.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            I guess you just checkmated yourself, then. They’re manufacturing an effective vaccine right now, so they must have the virus.

          • Feli

            Your wishful thinking is simply amazing.
            They do NOT have the virus.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            They are manufacturing an effectively measles vaccine, as I have demonstrated. Therefore, they have the virus. I win!

          • Feli

            I thought this wasn’t about your ego, but about babies and children.
            HOW can they manufacture a measles vaccine without the virus?
            Where is the proof for the existence of the virus?
            There is none.
            That is why Dr Lanka WON. You didn’t and you will never win anything. Dr Lanka WON the trial. There is no measles virus in the entire scientific literature.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            I dunno, you’ll have to ask the people making the effective vaccine. I’m not making it in my bathtub.

            How many kids have you killed today?

          • Feli

            You CANNOT manufacture a measles vaccine without a measles virus.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Therefore, measles vaccine manufacturers have a measles virus… What part of this are you getting lost on?

          • Feli

            The measles vaccine manufacturers have cell particles and cellular debris. No trace of a “virus”.
            If you want to know what is really being injected into babies, have a look here.
            It is very sad if you still refuse to understand 🙁
            https://www.cdc.gov/measles/lab-tools/vero-slam.html

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            So they don’t need the virus in order to make the current effective measles vaccine? Make up your mind!

          • Feli

            Ken, are you really that stupid or are you just pretending? They NEED a virus to make ANY vaccine which SUPPOSEDLY protects against that “virus”. Cellular debris, penicillin/streptomycin, Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium, Trypsin-EDTA, Fetal Bovine Serum, Dimethyl Sulfoxide ETC. are NOT A VIRUS and cannot offer any protection. Get it? 😉

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            So what is it that is currently providing effective protection against measles?

          • Feli
          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            So the measles vaccine is magic, or what? I’ve demonstrated the fact that it works, and you said that’s impossible unless they have a virus. According to your logic, they therefore must have a virus. I’m not trying to collect from the baby-killer Lanka, so I don’t care about finding a proof that would satisfy him. The vaccine works, and you’ve said they can’t do that without a virus.

          • Feli

            You didn’t demonstrate that the vaccine works. You have to actually READ the papers, not only the titles, Ken!
            Those are only estimates and retrospective estimates, like in the one paper where they are talking ONLY about “estimate” figures (https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/131/2/349/138092). This is not science. This is statistics and statistics can be manipulated 🙂
            The science consists in having a virus and manufacturing a vaccine ON THE BASIS of that virus. No virus, no science.

          • Feli

            Besides, in the last link that you provided (http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/1766702), they say “The measles vaccine efficacy found in this study is similar to those
            obtained in previous years and indicates that the measles epidemic of
            1989 to 1990 occurred despite high vaccine effectiveness”.
            How can a vaccine be “effective” when there are epidemics that massively affect the vaccinated? 🙂

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            When the vaccinated are far, far more massively affected. Why is it that the vaccinated fared so much better? Was it magic, or did They just make up the numbers, or what?

          • Feli

            The vaccinated get ill just the same. There is no real protection.
            This was just off topic.
            I am still waiting for the proof of the existence of the measles virus.
            Remember how this conversation started 🙂

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            No, they don’t get ill just the same—they are far less likely to get ill, and the severity of their illness is reduced. Did you know that there are numbers between zero and one hundred?

          • Feli

            You can play with words as long as you wish.
            The fact is that the vaccines do not protect.
            And now back to the virus. Where is it? 😉

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            The vaccines do protect, your lies and dissimulations notwithstanding. Where’s the virus? In people with measles, presumably. I’m not trying to collect, and I have no expectation that you’re any more honest then the other baby-killer. There’s no point taking a bet whose only rule is that you have to win no matter what.

          • Feli

            Vaccines do NOT protect, since vaccinated people get the illness.
            Vaccines without the virus are a hoax.

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            By this logic, driving sober does nothing to prevent accidents.

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            So you don’t believe in numbers between 0 and 100?

            It’s kind of rare to meet people who think that protecting >90% of people is mathematically equal to protecting 0 of them.

          • Feli

            Ken, IF the vaccine offered protection, NOT ONE VACCINATED PERSON would be allowed to get ill. ZERO.
            Protection is protection, right? 😉
            Now look here at the 1997 epidemic in Romania.
            QUOTE: “Overall, 4019 (58%) persons with measles were reported to have
            received at least one dose of measles vaccine.”
            58% vaccinated and NOT protected, Ken! 🙂
            Vaccinated children with measles between 5-9 years –> 80% had been vaccinated and NOT protected, Ken! 🙂
            https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00050221.htm

            So back to square one and stop trying to change the topic: where has the virus been proven to exist?

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            It offers protection, not a magical cheat code. It’s ridiculous to argue that even a single case of a vaccine not working means that the vaccine never works.

            If one person is hurt in a car crash while wearing a seat belt, do you believe that means that seat belts have never helped a single person in any case?

          • Feli

            Ken, we are talking about science.
            Science is not “Well, it could offer between 11,5475% and 88,4857% protection”.
            This is not science.
            Science is for instance the Henle-Koch postulates and here you can see that vaccination is NOT science:
            1. The agent must be demonstrable in EVERY case of the disease – NOT FULFILLED by SCIENCE
            2. The agent is not present in other diseases – NOT FULFILLED by SCIENCE
            3. After isolation in culture, the agent must be able to produce the disease in experimental animals – NOT FULFILLED by SCIENCE
            4. The agent can be recovered from the experimental animal – NOT FULFILLED by SCIENCE
            So back to square one: WHERE and HOW has the measles “virus” been proven to exist?

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Dunno. The vaccine works, so I’m just going to take your word for it that the manufacturers have the virus or whatever it is. 🙂

          • Feli

            You are very welcome to do that, it is your decision and it only impacts your own life. Good luck with it! I wish you all the best!

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            It’s not just my life, either. It’s also helped me avoid carrying it to others! 🙂

          • Feli

            You are free to believe whatever makes you feel noble in your own eyes. You are a hero!

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            Look up the Nirvana Fallacy.

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            You might want to read up on David Barden, Mr Lanka and Ravensburg.

          • Feli

            Ravensburg was the FIRST trial, in 2015. We are talking about the FINAL appeal of Stuttgart, in 2016, won by Dr Lanka. You must get yourself up to date before entering this conversation 🙂

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            I’ve read it. Whether or not he has to have a fair competition legally (hint: No) is irrelevant to whether or not it was proved (hint: yes)

          • Feli

            So you don’t have the scientific proof for the existence of the measles virus either?
            If you have it, please post the title of the scientific paper.
            Otherwise, send Ken back 🙂

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            I have no control over what Ken does.

            And all the evidence is right down there – all you need to do is look at the sources:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles#cite_note-MM2014-3

          • Feli

            What a surprise! That must have been why Dr Bardens LOST the trial, he should have given Dr Lanka the Wikipedia link as “evidence” of the existence of the measles virus – ROFL

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Oh, right, I forgot about the grand, all-encompassing conspiracy. Silly me, trusting scientists over cranks on YouTube!

          • shay simmons

            I wonder what Feli thinks caused the millions of cases of measles that were standard in western countries prior to 1963?

          • Ron Roy

            Who’s the killer here vaccine / poison pusher?

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            It’s you, Baby-Killer Ron.

          • shay simmons

            Who’s the killer here

            Look in the mirror, Ron.

          • Ron Roy

            I did. It was a two way mirror and you were on the other side supporting ( the killing and maiming of babies ) by supporting the use of vaccines.

          • shay simmons

            ( the killing and maiming of babies ) by supporting the use of vaccines.

            Evidence for that, Ron? Oh, right. You don’t have any. Where’s that database of vaccine injuries that the pro-disease faction has been working on?

          • Ron Roy

            e
            You mean the data base that the government won’t allow? Are Gulf War veterans all lying when they attribute their ill health to the Anthrax vaccine?

            Thirty percent of those vaccinated in the military confirmed vaccine
            damage, aka Gulf War Syndrome. Many military careers—especially
            pilots—ended due to Anthrax vaccine damage. It was common knowledge in
            the services that vaccinees were getting harmed and sick after taking
            the Anthrax vaccine.

            Frank Fischer, a Lt. Col. MD in the Air Force Reserve Medical Corps,
            is vaccine-damaged. You cannot believe how he was treated by the
            dispensing physician, who gave him the shot and who refused to answer
            his questions regarding what she had given him! It’s the same with all vaccines all the government agencies are collaborating with the pharmaceutical industry in the denial of vaccine injuries. You as a veteran should be ashamed in being part of a MEDICAL MAFIA that ignores the fact that the Anthrax vaccines has disabled thousand of veterans.

          • Acleron

            You have to admire how little Roy seamlessly progresses from a supposition to an unevidenced claim to a nonexistent fact. Must be sad to think with that very faulty brain of his.

          • JoeFarmer

            To use, “Ron Roy” and “think” in the same sentence requires creating a new definition of, “think”.

          • shay simmons

            You mean the data base that the government won’t allow?

            Wow – amazing that a government that won’t allow you to assemble a database, can’t stop YouTube videos or Facebook posts. How selectively powerful.

          • Mike Stevens

            There’s always Cia’s daughter….

          • shay simmons

            Please….that poor kid already has enough on her plate.

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            Does anything say the victim has to be a human?

          • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists

            Nothing else catches measles, so far as I’ve been able to find. Might as well try to infect Feli with Dutch Elm disease.

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            Darn.

          • Mike Stevens

            So, you claim the only proof Lanka required was a paper showing the virus particles and stating their diameter?
            Is that also your only requirement?

          • Feli

            A paper showing the ISOLATED virus and its diameter. No plural. Singular. THE virus.

          • Mike Stevens

            OK, Mr Picky.
            So here is one such early paper showing THE isolated virus and its diameter. So measles virus exists. ..End of.
            …Glad to have been of help and to have put this to bed.
            http://jvi.asm.org/content/3/2/187.full.pdf

          • Feli

            1) How “perceptive” of you to assume Feli is a man’s name (!!) 🙂

            2) Since I wasn’t able to read the ENTIRE paper of the second link, we can only speculate about that. Please post a link to the entire paper, with the description of all the steps of the isolation, the purification and of the experiments, as well as the control experiments (negative control experiments are crucial), as well as the micrography and the exact diameter of the virus etc., THEN we can talk about it. Not particles, but the ENTIRE isolated virus. Also please note that, had the virus been isolated in THAT paper, Dr Bardens would have furnished exactly the same paper at the trial – but he didn’t.

            3) The first paper that you linked to is indeed one of the papers presented at the trial as “proof”.
            Had the virus been isolated and demonstrated in THAT paper, Dr Bardens would have won the trial. But he didn’t.

          • Mike Stevens

            Leave aside the “trial” for now – I am interested in following what is scientifically valid.
            You stated that all the proof necessary for measles virus to exist is for the virus to be isolated and to have a measurable diameter.
            Correct?
            Therefore the virus exists. It has been isolated, and its size measured.
            It’s not my fault if you can’t access the full text of scientific papers. I am not going to do your homework for you. If you are unable to have access to this paper, then it’s a slam dunk you won’t be able to understand the content.
            Suffice to say they used density gradient centrifugation.. that’s all you need to know.
            …Or do you wish to invalidate the results because the lab tech wore a blue T shirt rather than a white one, or because it was raining?
            We’ve been down the “I refuse to accept evidence until it conforms to my particular definition” before – with HIV and Kennedy’s mercury autism can for example.
            Your (Lanka’s) con is just another example of progressive goal post shifting.

          • Feli

            Mike, this topic is about the trial and in the trial Dr Bardens was unable to present proof for the existence of the measles virus. It’s that simple.
            With the abstract of an anonymous paper (which wasn’t even chosen by Dr Bardens as proof!!), you can’t demonstrate anything either. Where is the micrography? Where is the diameter, for instance? Nowhere 🙂 Sorry for you!

          • Mike Stevens

            How is an authored paper “anonymous”?
            I know you can’t read a science paper to save your life, but only an idiot would miss seeing the author’s name and affiliation under the title, surely?

            The paper wasn’t one used in the trial, of course not, no. I am happy to provide proof for the existence of the measles virus from other sources, which is quite appropriate, since we have moved away from the trial into the realm of reality (well maybe you haven’t).

            The paper has micrograph of the isolated pleomorphic viral particles. It gives their diameter as 120-250

          • Feli

            “Anonymous” also means unremarkable, having no outstanding features 🙂

            You cannot make a point with an 10 lines long abstract 😉
            Please post a link to the complete Udem paper, with the description of ALL the
            steps of the isolation, of the purification and of the experiments, as well
            as the control experiments (negative control experiments are crucial),
            as well as the micrography and the exact diameter of the virus etc. This information is NOT in the link that you posted, so it doesn’t demonstrate anything. You can insist as much as you want, the proof is not there 🙂

            By the way, just FYI – with all your comments you are doing a great job in promoting this article, so a huge thank you!!

          • Mike Stevens

            The article is available on my institutional log in. Copying it here in full will contravene copyright.

            Perhaps you could point to your recommended international standards/guidelines for viral isolation, as approved by virological experts.

            Then and only then we can see if this paper meets these criteria.
            Otherwise you will just keep goalpost shifting.

            Thanks for showing your lack of integrity to anyone viewing these comments. Keep it up.

          • Feli

            OK, someone was so kind and sent it to me. See, we have the problem right from the very beginning of this review.
            Quote: “The Edmonston strain of measles virus, originally obtained from Dr. B.N. Fields, Harvard Medical School, was subjected to two cycles of plaque purification, followed by a single blind passage in HeLa monolayer cells”.
            They did not isolate and demonstrate anything. They started working with something which was SUPPLIED to them as the “virus”, but the original proof of isolation is still missing.
            Please stop wasting my time.

          • Mike Stevens

            I like wasting your time.

            I’ll ask again, provide a source to the international standardised protocols for virus isolation.

            The are some, I trust, because if there aren’t you are just peeing into the wind.

            So show me the protocol, or stop wasting your own time.

          • Feli

            If you had bothered to read the comments, you would have found it, because Ken S. also asked for it 🙂
            The STANDARD method of isolation of a virus has always been a part of ALL microbiology manuals and isolation protocols (described, for instance, in this manual of MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY: https://www.amazon.de/Medizinische-Mikrobiologie-Werner-K%C3%B6hler/dp/3437416405/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457539172&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=Medizinische+Mikrobiologie%2C+Urban%26Fischer%2C+8.+Auflage)
            Now you. Where is the scientific proof for the scientific isolation of the measles virus? Because in the 6 papers presented by Dr Bardens there is NO proof. That is why Dr Lanka won the appeal.

          • Mike Stevens

            So, you confirm that according to standard reference virology isolation methodology, measles virus has been isolated.
            Thanks!

          • Feli

            Excuse me? Have I written something in Chinese in my comment above? 😉
            I was asking you where is the scientific proof for the scientific isolation of the measles virus. Because in the 6 papers presented by Dr Bardens there is NO proof. That is why Dr Lanka won the appeal.

          • Mike Stevens

            Laughing now….

            …Scientific facts are not determined by arbitration in a court of law.
            If that were the case, then pi would equal 3, and the sun would revolve round the earth.

            It’s been amusing biting a chew toy for a while, but I’ll get back to relevant discussions elsewhere, Feli. Thanks for wasting so much time on denying reality…

          • Feli

            They had a court expert. The court expert said at the first trial that “none of the 6 papers proves PER SE the existence of the virus, but somewhere within their total plus in some of other papers not presented at the trial there is proof” – ROFL
            The Superior Court in Stuttgart (I was at the trial and I have a recording of the announcement of the verdict) said: “We would have even accepted a review, IF that review had stated “HERE
            is the virus and HERE is the diameter”.
            They would have ruled on that.
            But, quoting the judge, “WE DO NOT HAVE THIS HERE”.
            So you see, Dr Bardens was unable to present scientific proof of the existence of the measles virus.
            Bye bye!

          • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

            If only there were some sort of institution that allowed people to access books and articles and to essentially rent them for free. Of course, it would have to sustain itself somehow so let’s say fees for going over the allotted time with some concessions to renewing your item.

            It’s a pity that nothing like that is a viable model, isn’t it, Mike?

  • Feli

    WHY in God’s name did you choose such a STUPID title for this article?
    MEASLES DOES EXIST. Measles is a conglomerate of symptoms.
    If you want to spread CORRECT information, don’t start with an idiotic title!
    Dr Lanka won the appeal because Dr Bardens was unable to prove the existence of the measles virus. Not with one and not with 6 papers. Because if it had been in those 6 papers, the judges would have accepted it. But it wasn’t.
    So the trial proved that the existence of the measles virus has never been scientifically demonstrated.

    • https://autisticagainstantivaxxers.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/submissions/ The Many-Named One.

      He didn’t win the trial.

      • Feli

        You are right, Bardens didn’t win the trial, he didn’t get the money and he had to pay the trial costs of about €30,000.

  • Feli

    Read this, then you will understand how we got into this cul-de-sac with science 🙁
    http://www.wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/Dismantling-the-Virus-Theory.pdf

  • Acleron

    This is hilarious. Lanka formulated his challenge in terms of of requirements being presented in a publication. The senior courts ruled that the stipulation meant that six papers did not comply, not because measles did not exist but because there were six papers instead of one.

    The desperation of antivaxxers is shown by their lie that Lanka issuing a fake challenge must mean that measles virus does not exist.

    Pure comedy.

  • Lara Pop

    Well, this is certainly a breakthrough decision. And, hopefully, more will come to dismantle this dogma of viruses and of the infection theory.