'Science has known for a long time that these mutations in flu viruses happen so fast that trying to make a shot containing something in it that would make an antibody that would block a mutation they cannot predict is almost impossible'

They of course knew this when they insisted that taking the Covid 'vaccine' would stop people from contracting the virus - and we'd have herd immunity if enough people bought in (I was taken to task over this by a number of CovIDIOTS when I told them I was not about to inject an experiment -- they were very upset because I was refusing to do my part)

If one searches 'using leaky vaccines during pandemics' filtering pre 2018 results we find numerous papers indicating this is a no-no... that is can enhance the lethality of virus... surely they knew this as well when they unleashed the covid 'vaccine'


Sinister music... https://youtu.be/JCOJS1wWmeo?t=366

Expand full comment

Thanks for the article Dr. Stillwagon.

I have a question. I’m a 69yo male that’s had asthma for my entire life. It’s been under control for the past 20+ years. I’ve had pneumonia twice. I’m on a steroid maintenance inhaler. I’ve taken an annual flu shot all my life. I haven’t had flu symptoms in decades. From your article it would appear that I should be fairly immune so I’m not planning on getting a flu shot this year. And I certainly am never getting another Covid-19 gene therapy injection. Do you see anything wrong with my logic?

Expand full comment

I see nothing wrong with your decision.

Expand full comment

Thanks Doctor.

Expand full comment

My spouse works as a RN and has been forced to vaccinate every year for flu. Since we share doctor appointments 4x/year for a chronic condition, as a show of support I've rolled up my sleeve and done the same. But "the rest of the story" validates the good doctor's writings completely.

1) A decade after marriage & sharing doctor appointments (and flu vaccinations), I got the nastiest flu of my adult life. Knocked me flat on my back for over a week. So much for vaxxes preventing or making the symptoms "milder."

2) After getting forced to vaxx against WuFlu, my spouse developed allergies to things she'd never been allergic to before--hives visible a across the room! Work was (finally) decent enough to grant an exemption from vaccination, including the flu.

3) Since discontinuing the flu jabs, we both have been far healthier all winter long, and the nasty summer cold/flu this year that devastated our co-workers barely affected either of us.

I hope your experience has been similar, Rick. And thank you, thank you, THANK YOU good doctor.

Expand full comment

Great article and analysis, as usual, Dr. Kevin! Thanks so much. I'm seriously considering sending this to my naive family. Maybe they'd think twice before getting another flu shot.

Expand full comment


If we are wrong on any of them -- that's ok because we've let the zombies take all of them so if any of them work they've provided us with herd immunity.

We want to keep this a very exclusive club... which is easily done because even if one tells the zombies what we are up to and why --- they'll call us crazy anti-vaxxers... and move their Booster Shot appointments ahead because they fear people like us and need more protection.

Expand full comment

“constantly transmitting”

That’s why I worry about being UN-exposed to viruses. If I quarantine myself or oversterilize, I worry I’ll miss a mutation and my immune system will have to work harder to catch up when exposed. Maybe it doesn’t work like that, but that’s my intuition/superstition.

Call me crazy, but I’d rather be out in the virus world than in hiding.

Expand full comment

It's not possible to hide from viruses. Exposure is inevitable. No environment can be completely sterile with life in that environment.

Expand full comment

I just forked over $300 for one of these helmets - are you 100% sure that this will not protect me??? https://youtu.be/kI0C22dj8Ik


Has anyone seen anyone wearing one of these? It is a symbol of Mental Illness.

Expand full comment

Severe mental illness.

Expand full comment

Holy shit that's absolutely crazy as bat shit. I would be seriously concerned about any one seen with this shit on out side of a fancy dress party. Even then!

Expand full comment


Expand full comment

An excellent and very insightful article, I really enjoyed reading this and it again proves very well that the flu shots everyone rushes to push in to their arms each year are useless and worse still they're dangerous. Great article !

Expand full comment

Thank you for sharing this information, Dr. Stillwagon.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the great substack.

How do they keep getting away with using antibodies as a surrogate for immunity, when they do not indicate immunity?

Expand full comment

Because it's a very believable lie. People want to believe it. It's so easy to believe that injecting themselves or their children with something that makes antibodies will provide some level of protection. Then they manipulate public health data to make it look like it works. This perception based on appearances has been firmly implanted into the consciousness of society. It still appears that the sun revolves around the earth, so until society realizes where immunity resides and how it is created based on real science, the believable lie will continue.


Expand full comment

Thanks for the link, very interesting video.

Expand full comment

If doctors and health experts knew how mucosal immunity works, not one shot would have been given.


Expand full comment

Hi Kevin.. Steve Kirsch interviewed president of "Xlear" .. See what you think.. I think it has good merit..


Expand full comment

This would be better than nasal washes in my opinion. Sometimes people can overdo the nasal rinses and actually weaken the mucosal lining. This product would seem to keep the mucosa intact.

Expand full comment

Any thoughts on the rabies vaccine?

Expand full comment

Some people say the rabies shot is the only shot they would ever consider getting. I would not get the shot if bitten by a rabid animal. Here's why:

As with all viruses, the rabies virus has to get into your bloodstream to affect you. This can happen through bites or scratches if the animal is infected. Thorough cleansing of the bite or scratch area is paramount. If enough of the virus is allowed to circulate, it has spikes on it that can attach to cell receptors in the body, primarily in muscle cells. If the virus enters the cell, it can be copied to make more viruses. It takes the action of RdRp (RNA dependent RNA polymerase) to copy the virus IF the pH of the cell is acidic enough. The presence of zinc in the cell will inhibit the action of RdRp. Not everyone who is exposed to the rabies virus will copy and release the virus. If enough of it does get copied and released, it can spread to nerve cells through the neuromuscular junction. Once the central nervous system is copying and releasing viruses, the classic rabies symptoms will appear.

The rabies shot contains the whole rabies virus that is copied in the MRC-5 cell line and then supposedly deactivated by beta-propiolactone. This shot can produce rabies in the recipient. If it was safe, it would be recommended for everyone to get the shot, but it is not. The adverse reactions to it can be horrific.

If I thought I had been exposed to rabies through a bite or scratch, I would thoroughly cleanse the wound, take plenty of zinc with a zinc ionophore to make sure the zinc gets into cells, and use dietary measures to increase cellular pH. If symptoms of rabies appear, emergency introduction of rabies immunoglobulins (RIG) can be done.

Expand full comment

Thanks - are you able to point to any studies that indicate that the vaccine caused rabies to develop in the recipients. Also interested in reading about the adverse reactions.


Expand full comment

All I can say is the fact that the virus in the shot is supposed to be deactivated by beta-propiolactone. If deactivation does not occur, rabies can result. Adverse events listed in the package insert include rabies like symptoms: https://www.fda.gov/media/83874/download

A search in VAERS shows 6 rabies cases after inoculation.

Expand full comment


Copied and redacted from: https://pastebin.com/PsXCQmGZ

Unofficial English translation of ‘Frauds and falsehoods in the medical field’


You cannot have specific tests for a virus without knowing the components of the virus you are trying to detect. And the components cannot be known without having previously isolated/purified that virus.

None of the seven "human coronaviruses" have actually been isolated and all the sequences of the primers of their respective PCRs as well as those of a large number of fragments of their supposed genomes are found in different areas of the human genome and in genomes of bacteria and a long list of others.

Coronavirus 229E.

Reference article: Dorothy Hamre and John Procknow. A new virus isolated from the human

respiratory Tract. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, 121: 1:

190-193. January 1, 1966.

Since the authors refer to other articles to explain the method of isolation - which they call

Complement Fixation - we consulted a reference article for that method: that of Janet W. Hartley

et al. Complement Fixation and tissue culture assay for mouse leukaemia viruses PNAS, 53(5):

931-938, May 1965. This is a procedure already in disuse that uses the antigen-antibody reaction

to detect either one or the other. In the case we are dealing with, the aim was to detect the

antigens of the supposed new virus but, as we have already explained, specific antibodies are

needed which cannot be obtained the first time a virus is detected.

Coronavirus OC43.

Reference article: Paul Lee. Molecular epidemiology of human coronavirus OC43 in Hong Kong.

Thesis for the Department of Microbiology, University of Hong Kong, August 2007. The HKU

Scholars Hub.

What was considered to be viral RNA was extracted from cultures without any proof that the

RNA belongs to a virus. The tool used - a QIAamp kit - removes reagents, inhibitors and

contaminants but what it cannot do is determine where the extracted RNA comes from. And

there are no controls. It is then amplified by PCR and sequenced assuming (!) that it is genetic

information of a virus. Finally, the author speculates about mutations, recombinations, genotypes,

molecular evolution, strains and other jargon that conveys the idea -unproven- that a "virus" is

being worked with.

SARS-CoV Coronavirus.

Reference article: J. S. M. Peiris and others. Coronavirus as a possible cause of SARS. Lancet

361: 1319-25, April 2003.

There is no mention of purification in the article. There is not even any mention of filtration or

centrifugation. It is only stated that "the viruses were isolated in fetal monkey liver cells from

nasopharyngeal aspirates and lung biopsies of two patients". There are no controls. The only

mention is of a "cytopathic effect" that is attributed to a virus and that PCR was done for known

viruses and retroviruses without obtaining results. Finally, RT-PCR was done with "random

initiators" and a sequence "of unknown origin" is detected to which "a weak homology with the

coronaviridiae family" is found. Then they designed primers for that sequence and when testing 44

samples from SARS patients only 22 were positive.

Coronavirus NL63.

Reference article: Lia van der Hock and others. Identification of a new human coronavirus. Nature Medicine, 10, 4 April 2004.

The authors state that "the identification of unknown pathogens using molecular biology tools is

difficult because the target sequence is not known so that PCR-specific initiators cannot be


What they used is a tool they developed themselves called VIDISCA which, they claim, does not

require prior knowledge of the sequence! Is that possible? Let's see how it works: first the culture

is prepared and it is assumed that a virus is present due to the evidence of "cytopathic effect".

The novelty introduced by this method is that "restriction enzymes" are added, enzymes that cut

the nucleic acid molecules at certain locations and always by the same length. In this way, if after

the action of these enzymes they observe many fragments of DNA or RNA that are the same or

very similar, they deduce that it comes from a virus, since the host genome would present random

cuts, while the virus genome presents a large number of copies that are the same due to the replication of the virus. And is such a deduction correct? Of course not! This assumption (which

adds to the previous assumption that there is a virus) does not take into account that there are

"virus-like particles", "retrovirus-like particles", "endogenous retroviruses", "exosomes",

"extracellular" particles and even mitochondrial DNA. In denial, there are a multitude of particles

that possess the same reproductive characteristics in large quantities as "viruses" and therefore

can falsify results by producing large numbers of identical copies when cut by enzymes as

recognised in an article on the VIDISCA technique entitled Enhanced bioinformatic proSling of

VIDISCA libraries for virus detection and Discovery. It was published in volume 263 of Virus

Research on April 2, 2019, and its authors-Cormac M. Kinsella et al.-recognise that "no

redundancy is expected in the VIDISCA insert from the host background nucleic acid except in

the case of 'virus-like' characteristics, i.e., high copy numbers as in mitochondrial DNA.

Coronavirus HKU1.

Reference article: Patrick C. Y. Woo and others. Characterisation and Complete Genome

Sequence of a Novel Coronavirus, Coronavirus HKU1, from Patients with Pneumonia. Journal of

Virology, 79, 2, January 2005.

The article, incredibly, begins with these words: "Despite extensive research in patients with

respiratory tract infections, no microbiological cause has been identified in a significant

proportion of patients. RNA is extracted from non-purified cultures.” And a PCR with coronavirus

genes is used. For the sequencing they use two protein databases organised in families, domains

and functional sites -PFAM and INterProScan- combined with two computer programs that carry

out "predictions" on how nucleotides should be combined. The text adds: "The sequences were

manually assembled and edited to produce a final sequence of the viral genome". And once

again there are no controls.

MERS-CoV Coronavirus.

Reference article: Ali Moh Zaki and others. Isolation of a Novel Coronavirus from a Man with

Pneumonia in Saudi Arabia. The New England Journal of Medicine, 367:19, November 2012.

The genetic material is extracted directly from the culture supernatant and sputum sample with

a tool called High Puré Viral Nucleic Acid Kit and then tested with different PCRs for various

known microorganisms. There is no mention of purification and there are no controls.

The so-called "cytopathic effect" is actually an effect caused by the conditions of the culture itself. This is recognised for example in the article Antibiotic-induced release of small extracellular vesicles (exosomes) with surface-associated DNA.


explains that certain substances -such as antibiotics- added to in vitro experiments can stress

the cell cultures so that they generate new sequences that had not been previously detected. This

had already been noticed by none other than Dr. Barbara McClintock in 1983 during her Nobel

Prize lecture, as can be seen at https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/mcclintocklecture.

Expand full comment

Dr. S, you've mentioned many times on Jane Ruby "natural infection with Covid", can you give us a purified/isolated, pathogen proving paper with a control to show us that a sars-cov-2 virus particle has been found?

Expand full comment

Hello Dr. S.

1. Can you produce one paper showing that any flu virus has been purified/isolated from density gradient from a person's lungs or from lungs to cell culture then purified, proven to be purified by E-M, proven to be a pathogen by placing of purified virus into same animal/person thru respiratory inhalation, and with a control group of no human sample undergoing the same type of lab procedure?

Please exclude non-virus particle purified cell cultures because then we havn't identified a particle and we don't know what's causing what, and exclude metagenomic/next generation sequencing because those are not finding a particle either and can at best only give a taxonomy of pre-programmed gene sequences in a mix of many possible things, and exclude the finding of hemagglutinin or neuraminidase because those are not specific and themselves do not prove the existence of a full influenza virus particle.

2. On Jane Ruby, you said the spike proteins made from the shots (mRNA) were causing havoc. Do you have an article proving using chemical identification procedures that these substances are found in a Covid vax vial, and a relationship between mRNA dose and spike protein amount which would show that mRNA is indeed making a spike protein.

Thank you for your time.

Expand full comment

Good questions.

1. I cannot produce a document showing the isolation/purification of a virus particle. The only thing they end up with when they try to do that is RNA or DNA. Then they use an imperfect procedure called Sanger sequencing to identify the order of the nucleotides. Then scientists agree on the unique sequence and put it in a database and say that is the genome of that virus. We do have images of virus particles inside cells, outside cells and attached to cells. We do not have images of virus particles alone without cellular materials nearby. We have biological explanations of how the virus particles can be pulled into cells, copied, and released. We will probably never actually be able to see one do that due to the limitations of microscopy. Experiments have been done where they have taken the substance that contains the virus particles and allowed it to be inhaled by another animal. This did not result in disease. This shows that the genetic material can transfer from one being to another but not necessarily result in symptoms. Viruses can be associated with disease processes but are not the underlying cause. Here is a link to how the Sars-CoV-2 virus was “isolated” in Korea: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7036342/

2. All we have to go on with mRNA is the dogma that mRNA is translated into proteins. We will probably never be able to actually witness that happen real time. The published genetic sequences for the mRNA that is supposedly in the Pfizer and Moderna shots do NOT match the published genetic sequence of the original Wuhan spike protein. Some independent investigators state there is no mRNA in the vials. Other investigators say mRNA is present. I will not be satisfied until monitored investigations using multiple reputable labs that can do sophisticated genetic sequencing can prove and agree to what is actually in those vials. Some researchers say the spike is released from the virus in a natural infection, others say this does not happen. This research on a jabbed person identified the spike protein alone without any other viral material in the areas of myocarditis. This would indicate the spike is from the shot, not a natural infection. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/10/10/1651

Expand full comment

Thank you Dr. S for your honesty that you can not produce a document of isolation/purification. Many persons now realize that no virus infecting humans has ever been found (www.theviraldelusion.com). The RNA/DNA that is found is of unknown provenance so it says nothing about a virus. In HIV hunting research for example they found reverse transcriptase but this enzyme is in all human tissues, so…that’s not a virus nor a signal of a virus.

It should be impossible to say, “We do have images of virus particles…” and, “Viruses can be associated with disease processes” when no virus has actually been found. An image of a particle whether from patient fluid or in cell culture says nothing about what it is, is it an exosome, cell fragment, going into, out of or just next to a cell- most likely because the object itself is a fragment of a cell, because the same things are seen when you treat a cell culture without patient fluids. EM photos are of something frozen in time, you can not characterize the particle’s make up, behavior, or provenance. A virus must have genetic material in it and be replication competent. You must first purify a sample with ultracentrifuge, confirm purification on EM, THEN characterize it. Virologists often say the particles are too small, but phages are half the size of supposed 50-100nm viruses and can be purified and characterized (they have the genetic material of bacteria in them but there has never been any proof that they infect or even go inside a bacterium).

The Korean link you sent did not purify or isolate a virus only put patient mix of millions of things into a monkey kidney cell culture (these cells have disordered aneuploid chromosomes), and while they did not directly mention in the study, cell cultures are starved, given cell toxic antibacterials and antifungals (here given CO2), and they did not confirm what was the pathogen nor have a control sample (that’s very serious), and corona shapes can be seen on any cell fragment especially those given trypsin.

Referenced from another study so one has to dig into what they did, they first “confirmed” the patient was PCR assay positive, the amplicon showing that sequence identical to 2019-nCoV from the Wuhan patient. But the first Wuhan patient’s sequence was a theoretical sequence fabricated from a computer. Dr. S, please look into what your references say because one fraud is built upon the prior one making it harder to find. In fact no Corona virus has ever been found, the proof of I will put on another comment to keep this one short. Viruses are in name only in research papers and text books, there is no object. They are made up to explain the cause of some illness that indeed does exist like insecticide poisoning (polio), lack of a vitamin, living in unsanitary toxic environments, etc.

Please see this reference on the first “discovery” of Sars-c-2 by Fan Wu in Nature 2.2020 (Chinese virology researchers we can assume are closely watched by the CCP):


They did not find a particle or pathogen, did no control with non patient fluid, only ASSEMBLED A GENOME FROM SOFTWARE. That my friend is not a virus. They studied ONE PATIENT, and then decided to make a vax for 8 bil people?!

Here are 2 other short vids that most any audience can understand. I hope you will have the guts to realize the enormity of fraud we are facing.



Expand full comment

Is it just me or does vaccination (for any illness) seem to be causing more of and spreading the illness it's supposed to be preventing? I know not all vaccines contain the live virus, so not sure why this seems to happen (exosomes?) We've obviously seen this in regards to Covid, with the cases tripling since the vaccines rolled out but also with the flu. I honestly wonder what would happen if we stopped all vaccines all together.....When man keeps messing with nature, they make everything worse...

Expand full comment

Part of the reason is because the injection of antigens inside of the body, complete virus or not, is coming at the immune system from the wrong direction; inside out vs outside in. This causes the immune system to focus on the injected thing, vs all things coming from the outside. Ultimately the protection of infection from all things is reduced, including the thing it's trying to prevent.

Expand full comment