Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Apr 1, 2023·edited Apr 1, 2023

Natural immunity to what? That would imply "viruses" are real and that there are "invading" germs from the outside. None of which has been proven to be the case.

Expand full comment

Perhaps the concept of immunity was invented to explain why not everyone exposed to the same "viruses" gets sick.

If viruses do not cause disease... where is the need to have that concept of immunity?

But, if a viral disease is really some form of intoxication, and the virus is only a misconception, as it "appears" after the damage is done, then we must ask: why not everyone exposed to the same toxin get sick at the same time?

That may be the wrong question, because there are scenarios where it is difficult to track who gets contaminated with what and how much, and who doesn't. But, the polio "epidemic" seems like a good candidate. Was it because of the contaminated sugar with lead arsenic? Was it because they were throwing DDT at everything everywhere? Is there a reason to explain why adults were more resistant to the intoxication than the children?

We have to ask questions and research.

Expand full comment

Yes. Some of the researchers back in the original nuclear reactor research days were very close to lots of radiation and airborne particles living long life with no “cancer “. Other researchers were diagnosed, and later died in middle age. Why? Unless the radiation is an input, with the output dependent on many factors.

Expand full comment

This immune system was invented to help explain an invented idea of infectious viruses.

Two levels of bullshit, both of which they cannot explain.

This immune system they admit they know very little about.

But hey let's ignore the normal garbage collection system of the body.

What's that?

If they only looked into that, but then it would show that toxicity is what affects some more than others. And then they would have to explain how to boost this detox system.

Oops, no more need for anti Virals and vaccines!

Expand full comment

But the body of any animal has self-repairing abilities. Today, this real phenomenon is somewhat intertwined with the idea of the immune system or "the system that kills pathogenic microbes of any kind." All militaristic images.

It is a very clever ruse: if you deny the immune system people will think you are ridiculous because you are denying the obviousness of the self-healing abilities of living beings.

You guys try to demote this militaristic "immune system" to what it really: is a garbage collection and disposal system or a detoxification subsystem; but you are doing that in a highly militaristic society. Rhetorically, it's not going to work.

In order to help people come out of the spell of germ theory, it's probably wise to tell them that the immune system is real and does not need any memory to any foreign entity, it just reacts, destroys and eliminates whatever toxin or poison we happen to come by, whatever its source is.

Once they understand microbes are not pathogenic, infectious or contagious, then you can start to denounce immunology's failures. Don't do it before they understand, or you will scare them away and they will go back to the rock-eh-felas poisons.

The only "vaccine" that helps the "immune system" is learning what is false.

Expand full comment
Apr 1, 2023·edited Apr 1, 2023

It is quite easily explained as to why some get sick and why others don't. It all depends on how much you been exposed to toxic materials whether environmental or whether self induced i.e. Poor diet or eating heavily sprayed and processed foods, chemicals put on the skin such as lotions, soaps, makeup, household chemicals, or pharmaceuticals. Your state of mental/psychological health is a huge factor as well.

Essentially, if you aren't full of toxicity, your body has the capacity to deal with being exposed (to a degree). If you are full of toxicity then your threshold for dealing with it is minute and likely to flare the instant you come into contact with more toxins.

This is an oversimplification but the gist is there.

Expand full comment

You are correct. And that is why Fauci’s office insists on specific testing that will never be able to evaluate all of those factors you mentioned. When I was a little kid there was a study that stated red food dye causes cancer. Really. Scared the heck out of me because I was like 10 years old and thinking I am going to die cause some of the m&m’s were red. So far so good on that front.

Expand full comment

I do like what you are doing. I don't go through everything you produce because I am awash in incoming information and I began learning about science and its problems and corruption long ago. I think I could say that science was my religion in one period of my life, but then we had a major breakup.

I don't remember everything, but the 2012 California Proposition 37 GMO labeling debate occurred near the end, and I clearly saw the vested interests at work. Having nowhere else left to turn, and hitting an extreme low in my life, I came full circle and reconciled with God in 2014, and began reestablishing _that_ relationship. Science remains a tremendous disappointment.

Expand full comment

Thank you. I appreciate it. Glad to hear that you realized the errors of science and reconciled with God.

Expand full comment
Apr 1, 2023Liked by Mike Donio

Thank you for the work you put into helping us understand just how devastating the state of science has become. It’s scientism more and more.

Expand full comment
Apr 1, 2023·edited Apr 1, 2023Liked by Mike Donio

It's a good thing the "science" is falling apart.

This is the time of questioning every pseudo-...

Pseudo science


Pseudo politics

What a great time to question systems. A few years ago it was called crazy to question any of those.

Make questioning cool again.

Btw, please try to lower the gain level or turn off auto gain, it'll sound clearer.

Expand full comment

I found Edward Calabrese's documentation of the usurping philanthropic leverage of genetics-with particular regard to the establishing of LNT risk modelling and its role in setting Media hype that enabled regulatory capture to be protected against all subsequent evidences, to be an excellent overview of the ways in which science can err, or fall prey to bias, become protected against correction by insider hierarchy or peer pressure, as well being funded and 'guided' by philanthopathy seeking better controls against its own evaluation of risk - not those pertaining to living human beings or environments. While at first the subject may seem obscure, I see a backstory for the regulatory capture of our institutions and minds in a bent science promoting bio-insecurity, susceptibility and inherent weakness or defencelessness in a hostile pathological world.

So while at first this may not seem so - recognise the patterns and bear in mind Calabrese is painstaking to the whole story that in terms of story becomes more 'juicy' or dramatic and challenging in its findings and implications in the latter few interview segments (that I note are not shown or mentioned on the youtube channel).

The link is


And unless you actually like to corporate into and outro - it can be easily skipped.

Part of my interest in pointing this out is to encourage and expand pattern recognition rather than identifying in opinions or beliefs - be they 'right or wrong'. So that knowledge is part of a re-integrative process of consciousness rather than a 'better model' for predictive control. For when we recognise truth or resonance we are part of that - as opposed to seeking boosters for a sense of self-specialness - however well masked.

Switching completely I also mention a broad and wide 'fringe' of emerging paradigm in 'Electric Universe' as a source of thought, science.

The role of ionised or plasma interactions at all scales and involving all mediums is a connected appreciation of a Universe in which the physics support the bio-field that includes our psychic or felt awareness - the still point.

A sense of lack driven adaptation has driven science as invested technologism for marketised and weaponised gains - framed in the struggle for power or dominance that consolidates to our current paralysis or death spiral. However the ascendant spiral is only waiting on our energy and attention to uncover an already moving process of re-evaluation, re-alignment and reintegration.

Uncovering a true foundation by living from, instead of All the king’s horses and all the king’s men seeking to attain or get to. the 'new wine' doesn't work in the old paradigm, we need abide in the qualities of life as they find expression rather than rushing out to sell what we haven't truly received. the mind is like that - very quick to interject as if speaking for the whole or the true of you.

Expand full comment

Sure The State of Science is Dire! What you are eloquently describing is a corrupt system, run by a corrupt Cabal. All systems have been corrupted today. You could easily replace the word 'Science' with the words 'American Corporate Christianity'. We also have a replication crisis in the so called Christian "church" - yet it in no way replicates the authority of God's Son, the Messiah Yeshua HaMashiach. Most claims of healing are false. A high % of what is claimed by Pastors/Priests is inaccurate. The church too is full of hypocrites who are biased towards their false, corrupt narrative. They say "Trust your Pastor!" Yeh, right! Corruption is in the hearts of the people. Why do you think that if we send your video to even a billion people, these facts about a corrupt system would change the heart of even one individual?

Expand full comment
Apr 9, 2023Liked by Mike Donio

Word! Thank you for this summary. In addition to this; "conclusions" in "scientific studies" are usually not cohesive with the findings of the actual study itself... :)

One can positively label current "science" as "assembly-line-science"...heh.

What I find particularly "interesting", in terms of general vaccines, is the blatant lack of interest for a live study-group of non-vaccinated people within a society; one would think, that in the name of "public health", this would be a necessary tool, in order to measure the "effects" of vaccines.

But of course, there is no real interest in "public health" (other than destroying it! Hahahhah), from the "governments".

CHEERs, and keep 'em coming; you're doing a great job. :)

Expand full comment