以下是我對亨利·尼曼和所謂的 H1N1 豬流感病毒的一些評論。大約一個月前，它們出現在病毒學部落格網站上。當我試圖發表有效的評論時，因為它們通常像神秘的病毒一樣被“劫持”，這種病毒應該“劫持”易感細胞並成為豬流感的唯一原因。
由於對「致病病毒」的信念已經在集體心理中根深蒂固，人們不妨與尼曼博士討論它們存在的實際科學證據！我希望接下來的內容能讓大家清楚了解這一點。
亨利·尼曼 1 個月前。
November J Virology, doi:10.1128/JVI.01136-10, shows D225G transmits via aerosol droplets in ferrets and guinea pigs and binds to alpha 2,3 AND alpha 2,6 as stated previously (and as is OBVIOUS from sequence analysis of pH1N1 fatal cases in Ukraine and Russia).
Discussion of paper at
http://fluboard.rhizalabs.com/…
Tony 1 month ago in reply to Henry Niman
Henry, you keep going on about gene sequences allegedly obtained from H1N1 isolates but you can’t grow isolates without first isolating H1N1. You merely postulate the existence of H1N1 like everyone else but you cant prove scientifically that it even exists can you other than a virtual reality on your computer.
Henry Niman 1 month ago in reply to Tony
No one questions the existance of H1N1 except internet nut cases, posting anonymously and frequently.
Tony 1 month ago in reply to Henry Niman
Henry, nobody questioned the existence of phlogiston and dephlogisticated air until Antoine Lavoisier came along and discovered Oxygen. He put chemistry which was standing on its head squarely on its feet and he wasn’t a nut case. He couldn’t post anonymously and frequently because the internet wasn’t invented in 1775! If people prefer not to question the existence of H1N1 then that’s their bad luck, but until you can prove otherwise, and so far you have not done so it will remain a virtual reality on your computer.
Henry Niman 1 month ago in reply to Tony
The are thousands of public H1N1 sequences, from isolates, no pictures required.
Tony 1 month ago in reply to Henry Niman
Henry, electron micrographs (pictures) of the isolated virus in question are always required. If there is no virus then there is no picture to be required!
Henry Niman 1 month ago in reply to Tony
You are posting utter nonsense. H1N1 is quite real as is D225G. Your posts are “internet babble”, at best (no picture required).
Tony 1 month ago in reply to Henry Niman
Henry the questions that are being put to you are simple valid scientifc questions so why don’t you answer them in full, so others can decide whether or not I am posting ‘utter nonsense’ and ‘internet babble’ as you put it. Its fine to refer to peer reviewed stuff in journals but D225G is not the real issue here is it? And I think that you know that too well (or at least I hope that you do by now). Rather its the question of the isolation of the complete virus that D225G is allegedly derived from – who first isolated it, where, when, and what methods were used?
The burden of scientific proof is on you my friend, not me, and so far you have delivered diddly squat – and all that you have delivered to date are a series of vague references to journals that can only speculate on the origins of D225G in the absence of an isolated virus.
You have also turned me into a parrot because I have to keep on repeating my questions over and over because you either cannot or will not answer them and trying to dismiss them on the ‘utter nonsense’ or ‘internet babble’ excuse. Shame on you Henry!
Regards to all,
托尼