WHAT “Measles Virus?”

For some years now there has been a reward of 100,000 Deutsche Marks (about $112,000) for hard proof that viruses exist…

From Germany By Karma Singh

One would think that there must be hundreds of people in the pharmaceutical industry, the CDC, the FDA etc., et.al. who could easily pocket this reward by laying the proof upon the table.

NOT SO!  Only one has even tried, he chose the measles virus as his proof and he failed!

He even went to Germany’s highest court in an attempt to get the prize.

The problem he had, as the judges rightly pointed out, was that his evidence was not continuous. He tried to claim the prize with a sheaf of different scientific papers none of which proved the existence of viruses.

His attempt, however, was based upon the concept of “inference,” i.e. he said that because report a) says this and report b) this and report c) this etc., we must infer that they, taken together, prove the existence of the measles virus.

Now “inference”, in scientific circles, is an “upper class” word for “guess” so he was saying that guesswork proves the existence of the measles virus. The judges, whose business it is to weigh evidence impartially, disagreed and told him, in December 2016, that guesswork is NOT proof!

The reward is still unclaimed today.

Oddly enough, although I had been aware of the work of Gaston Naessens for some years, it didn’t occur to me until I read the report mentioned above that Neassens’ discoveries showed that the existence of viruses is extremely unlikely.

So, what is this attenuated thing that our children are being injected with, ostensibly to prevent measles?

Even more germane; where does the concept of viruses itself originate?

After those two charlatans, Pasteur and Koch, foisted their now completely disproven dogma of infectious disease upon humanity, there began to appear a sheaf of diseases where no “causational” bacteria could be found.

In 1892 the Russian botanist Dmitri Iosifovich Ivanovsky postulated the existence of pathogenic agents too small to be seen with the microscopes of his day. He named these organisms viruses. Over the ensuing years, many others jumped onto the band wagon as the postulate appeared to justify the “infectious disease” dogma even though no pathological agents could be found.

There is an interesting side-note here, part of the continuing bias on Wikipedia towards pharmaceutical medicine and suppressing anything which may detract from pharma-profits (in which Wikipedia shares). In the article on Dmitri Iosifovich Ivanovsky it is stated that he and his fellow botanist Martinus Willem Beijerinck from the Netherlands “discovered” and not merely theorised about the existence of viruses.

Until 1932, when both of these scientists had already completed their incarnations, there was no microscope available which could “see” anything so small as the postulated virus. Even today, the very, very best optical microscope will only magnify up to 2500 times – much too little to see the theoretical viruses.

In 1932, the electron microscope was invented.

With magnification up to 7000 times, it is capable of showing things that small. There are, however, drawbacks. The electron microscope can only view dead, immobile objects and only in black and white, never in colour.

Any coloured picture you may have seen in a magazine or online purporting to be that of a virus is not a photograph of the putative virus at all but an artist’s impression of what it MIGHT look like, i.e. photoshopped!

When the electron microscope began to show previously unknown particles common to sufferers of the same malady, it was immediately inferred (i.e. guessed – see above) that these must be the postulated viruses.

However, as they could never been seen live, there was no way of knowing whether these dust like particles were causational viruses or an effect of the “illness” as Pierre Bechamp, Pasteur’s professor in the university of Paris, had postulated many decades earlier but could not prove without a much better microscope. So, the existence of viruses remains, to this day, a blind guess with no scientific basis as the panel of judges in Germany’s highest court has already ruled.

We now turn our attention to Gaston Naessens. Born and educated in France and who later emigrated to Canada where he completed his life’s work. Naessens invented a completely new principle in microscopy which made it possible to view living organisms at more than 20,000 times magnification. Whether this is similar to that invented by Royal Raymond Rife a few decades earlier is unknowable as that mass-murderer, Morris Fishbein, then director of the American Medical Association, had had all of his devices destroyed.

What Naessens discovered is that the human body will produce micro-proteins which he called “Somatids” as a reaction to sickness. These somatids have the task of breaking up damaged cells before they can transfer their sickness to other cells. When the sickness is over, the somatids return to their dormant state.

This is why almost all known “pathogens” are to being found in completely healthy individuals but in a dormant state. When needed, your own body will call them into action to prevent diseases spreading. In short, there are no randomly invading pathogens but natural healing systems built into your body from conception onwards.

Naessens’ work proved Bechamp’s 19th century hypothesis…

…and thus hammered the final nail into the coffin of Pasteur’s and Koch’s hypothesis of infectious disease.

So, now let us return our attention to the measles “vaccine”. What, exactly, is this “attenuated virus” which purports to prevent measles in our children?

We have, in previous articles as well as in the book www.tprip.com, seen that measles is not in any way a sickness but the process by which your body switches your liver into full function following the 4½ years necessary development.

When this process is complete, your liver naturally produces a protein signifying its adult function. I.e., this protein is a natural effect of the additional liver functions which the measles has “switched on”. This protein bears, of course, the genetic “signature” of that particular human being. It is this protein which pharmaceutical medicine extracts and attenuates (makes half-dead) and then injects, together with huge quantities of neurotoxins etc., into our children.

This has one of two possible effects:-

1) In very young children, it can cause the liver to attempt to transform into the adult state long before the adult liver is present: The baby liver then goes into self-destruct mode resulting in the organ failure which kills many babies and toddlers each year.

2) In older children it can cause your body to “believe” that the awakening of the liver has already taken place. Because, however, the liver has not been awakened to the adult state, the injected protein is effective for a limited time-span only as the liver does not constantly produce it afresh.

Additionally, as it is genetically foreign matter, your own immune system will tend to destroy it. This is the well-known phenomenon of the “disappearance” of the immunity which the vaccine purports to give. The nett result of this is that the liver maturing process is pushed off to much later in life when it is out of phase with other maturing processes causing a great deal of chaos labelled “serious illness”.

It is, therefore, clear that the sole beneficiaries of the measles vaccine are the pharmaceutical companies.

Not only does no benefit accrue to the recipients of their vaccines but a very great deal of harm, both physical and mental, is caused instead.

Time for a change.

Blessed be

From Germany By Karma Singh

Published by

Karma Singh

Professional healer, teacher, and researcher since 1986. Author of ca. 40 books, Handbooks etc. in "alternative", i.e. true healing. In September 2014 taken up into the Ring of Merlins

27 thoughts on “WHAT “Measles Virus?””

  1. Years ago, I phoned labs around the world, in search of a supplier of dead aids viruses. No lab had one, let alone supplied them like a regular lab might do. Thank you Karma Singh for the only rational explanation I have seen to date.

  2. Tim,
    you changed Euros in the originial article into Deutsche Mark.
    The Deutsche Mark ceased to exist as a currency twelve years ago.
    The figure I have quoted above is one hundred thousand Euros!

    Blessed be


  3. That’s a neat case in point Leo,

    A few years ago, the daughter of a close friend was visiting her mother. She (the daughter) was then doing post-graduate work at the same university where she got her BSc in something to do with biology (I don’t know the exact title).

    Walking past her mother who was reading an issue of “Stern” – one of the two “quality” main Stream magazines in Germany – she noticed a photo and commented, “That’s a muscle cell from a cow.” “No”, responded her mother, “It says here that this is the AIDS virus.” “No it isn’t”, retorted her daughter, “We have been working in the laboratory on cow tissues for many weeks and that is definitely a cow’s muscle cell.”

    Later, I was shown the picture but all that I could say, having never dissected a cow, is that it definitely wasn’t a photo of a virus because it was in colour!

    For what it’s worth.

    Blessed be


  4. Leo- I think you will be much interested to watch the youtube videos of Dr. David Rasnick and Dr. Peter Duesberg- talking about why the story we have been told about the so called AIDS virus is almost entirely wrong. They do not say that retroviruses dont exist, but they say that it was known prior to Gallo’s so called discovery, that no retrovirus was known to have caused any disease in any mammal and no retrovirus was known to be sexually transmissible. I do believe their explanations, because they answer some of the questions I had about AIDS when it first popped up and the questions I had after that. Oops, I guess now Im a conspiracy theorist. Well, as they say, “YOu can call me a conspiracy theorist, if I can call you a coincidence theorist”

  5. Hi Cherry,
    “same here”, if I may say so.
    When AIDS first appeared on the scene way back when, a lot of things just didn’t add up. Prof. Duisberg answered most of the problems and then Dr. Bergold from Columbia State showed what AIDS actually is. He showed that all AIDS sufferers have an extremely high level of stress hormones which, as any competent healer and medical doctor knows, will produce exactly the symptoms ascribed to AIDS.
    Using his discoveries, I and many other healers treated AIDS as extrme stress (as did Dr. Bergold) and the illness disappears.

    What AIDS sufferers DON’T have in common is HIV.

    Blessed be


  6. Years ago I felt like something didn’t add up about viruses, so I decided to investigate. I found a book about viruses at the public library and a series of university lectures on YouTube. It took me just a few hours to realise that virology was a big hoax, entirely based on assumptions. I have learned a lot more about the topic since and I’m always trying to convince people that viruses don’t exist. But it has appeared to be extremely difficult to convince people of that.

    “Man-made viruses” and “shedding” are obviously much nicer concepts to believe in. I tell people on Facebook all the time “once you learn and accept that germs don’t cause disease (but disease causes germs) you lose all your fear for germs and that’s incredibly peaceful”. The odd person wants to know more. Most people don’t want to hear about it. They are too attached to their germ fear.

  7. A very bold report. Unfortunately, the masses can’t integrate such a shift in their concepts. Maybe if it was explained on Fox news for a couple weeks but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

  8. That’s the only way to do it Rixta; one at a time until critical mass is reached and “The Hundredth Monkey Effect” takes over.

    Been doing it for decades (not just me, of course) and slowly attitudes have changed.

    We’re working on getting enough money together to buy or build a Naessens viewer of our own. All help gratefully received.

    Blessed be


  9. Feli,
    thank you, thank you, thank you!
    That’s amazing work you’re doing there.
    Is it possible that you couls let us have that article in German – it blows a lot of BS from the vaccine pushers clean out of the water.

    Would you like a copy of my book – there may be something there that you’ve not come accross before. There are both English and German editions – whichever you prefer.

    Incidentally, the contact button in the navigation bar on your website doesn’t go anywhere!

    Let’s network.

    Blessed be


  10. Karma, thank you for your kind words!
    You can find me on Facebook as Feli Popescu (long blond hair and lots of antivaccine posts ;-))
    Here is Lanka’s article in German as well:

  11. Karma,

    Do you think that the improper progression of liver function from childhood to adult is at least part of the reason that 40% of Americans have “fatty liver” (or other liver problems)?

  12. This is one of the most interesting and thought-provoking discussions of the measles and “germ theory” I’ve ever read. Thank you!

  13. Brilliant article.

    Lanka, who won the measles court case, follows German New Medicine (GNM).

    And GNM stipulates that measles – along with all other diseases not caused by poisoning – is caused by emotional trauma.

    The theory is 100% causative. If you have the trauma you *will* get the disease and if you don’t have such a trauma you *will not* get it. Those affected by poisoning eg vaccines will often suffer worse but otherwise, the intensity/duration of the disease mirrors exactly the intensity/duration of the preceding trauma.

    Measles is caused by a touch trauma – separation from a loved one. The rash appears in the healing phase – after resolution of the trauma.

    If multiple people feel the same separation trauma then the disease affects multiple people.

    There is *no* contagion. Such an idea is mathematically impossible because the immune cell/pathogen model has no negative feedbacks (which would mean no organism could exist).

    In healing phases when the previous trauma phase involves increased cell activity the body uses bacteria to eliminate the no longer needed extra cells.

    Note that GNM applies to cancer, so-called infectious disease, musculoskeletal issues and anything else. It even explains so-called congenital defects.

    Nature/evolution/God/Intelligent Designer does *not* make mistakes.

  14. Alexis,
    firstly an appology to you and everyone else. There is some sort of glitch somewhere which sometimes for many hours prevents my seeing the comments on the Bolen Report and replying. This morning at 5 a.m. Berlin time, no comments were visible (although they were yesterday) and it has only just now cleared almost 11 hours later.

    It may possibly be of some significance but the extreme malnutrition is the main cause.

    Blessed be


  15. Hi Rtp,
    I am, of course, familiar with Dr. Harmers work and to some extent agree with him.
    He did not, however, attain the total knowledge to which he laid claim.
    Measles, for example, is definitely NOT an illness but a maturing process. The previously unprocessed traumas such a separation may well be processed at this point of maturing and may well be the emotional aspect of the detoxification process. This does not, however, make this accompanying symptom the cause!

    Dr. Harmers “discoveries” about cancer were already well documented but the traumas only determine WHERE a cancer will be grown and not WHETHER. Cancer is an emergency solution for chronic toxicity; the emotional traumas merely determine where you body can most easily built the processing plants which we call tumours.

    Dr. Harmers work is useful but it is far from the total be all and end all knowledge claimed.

    Blessed be


  16. Hi Augustin,
    the best available evidence indocates most strongly that polio was an effect of the widespread usage of DDT. Nowadays polio only occurs in the few countries which still allow DDT – everwhere else it has virtually disappeared since DDT was banned.

    One of the boffins who worked on the development of the polio vaccine stated before congress that, since 1964, almost all polio cases in the USA have been caused by the vaccine.

    Chemical poisoning and not a mythological virus was the cause.

    Blessed be


  17. @Agustin Gonzalez – it is the same scientific erroneous conclusion: just like for the measles “virus”, we have NO scientific literature on an isolation of a polio “virus”. The reference literature is even more ridiculous: Landsteiner and Popper are supposed to have isolated the polio “virus” in 1909 – can you imagine?
    When reading the original publication, however, one discovers that these guys just tortured monkeys and did not isolate any “virus”, they even speak of an “invisible” virus as a possible cause for the paralysis they called polio. Ridiculous.

  18. I think it was Ghandi, Hesu, who said

    First they ignore you
    Then they laugh at you
    Then they attack you
    Then you win

    All attacks have failed so far.
    Perhaps we’re entering phase four?

    Blessed be


  19. We haven’t won yet. We are in the last stages of the war, but the last battles will be nasty. Very nasty. But we will win. That’s inevitable.

  20. Rashes are typically focused. Some people even get rashes on corresponding parts of the body!

    Why might a toddler get a rash behind their knees and inside their elbows? Why might a baby get a rash on their hands and mouth?

    Well the toddler misses (or previously missed) embracing their father who just went away for 2 months to work. The baby misses suckling their mother who just started part time work.

    Focused rashes are a window to everything we need to know about disease. They can *only* be caused by the mind. If they were about detoxing or viruses then the rash would *always* be randomly (ie evenly) distributed around the body.

    And focusing on focused rashes is easily the best strategy to persuade people once you’ve gotten them to think about a non-germ cause of disease. The viral explanation of corresponding rashes is clearly absurd. Show people a photo of a child with a rash on both hands and get them to, with a straight face, explain how a virus could do such a thing and you’ll see a little glimmer of understanding on their faces.

    The three best arguments that every non-vaxer should be using are:

    1) doctor offices are filled with sick people germs.

    2) doctors differentially diagnose using vax status so none work and the diseases have been renamed not reduced.

    3) nobody has ever witnessed someone getting sick immediately following wild virus “infection” was observed in the patient. Conversely, observations of vaccines being followed by injury happen all the time so the evidence for vaccine injury >>>>> the evidence for virus injury.

    And then when you have people intrigued about a non-germ cause of disease you then start talking about focused rashes. You also point out the lack of negative feedbacks in the viral model rendering recovery impossible in such a theory.

    But no non-vaxer should *ever* leave a discussion on this issue without pointing out that doctor offices are filled with sick people germs. It boggles my mind that non-vaxers are petrified to bring this up. It’s our best argument by a long long way but I seem to be the only one willing to make it.

  21. Rtp,
    sorry for late reply but the comments keep disappearing. From 7.13 a.m. yesterday until about 10 minutes ago, I could not see any comments and so could not reply to you.

    There is, of course, truth in what you say but not the whole truth. A Bach Flower practitioner who works with the organ zones, for example, would deduce, from the positions, which organs were weakened and then take action to strengthen them.

    This is by no means a good way to convince people. Most understand, to all intents and purposes, absolutely nothing about pathology etc. and it is, therefore, of no surprise to them when the rashes are localised. They can’t conceptualise this because they don’t know enough to realise that it brings the whole of the virus story into question.
    Much more realistic is to show them the great discrepancy between infection theory and “infection” fact. I.e. why, in an epidemic, do at least 96% exposed to the “sickness bringing virus” remain unaffected and healthy? Leave them with the question – let them find the answer.

    Blessed be


  22. thanks for the response karma singh. My post was confusing. The three best ways arguments – by a long long way – to get people to question vaccination/germ theory I gave in my post:

    1) doctor offices being filled with sick people even though people (including the doctors) survive such encounters just fine;
    2) doctors using vaccine status to differentially diagnose (ie the so-called VPDs have just been renamed); and
    3) nobody ever observing a virus jump from one person to another and immediately cause disease.

    Those three arguments are irrefutable but more importantly they are foundational. Once you accept any (let alone all three) of them, you will never fall for any vaccine lie ever again. It doesn’t matter how many studies or statistics the pro-vax forces wheel out, they simply can’t refute any of the above three points.

    But if people then want to understand what actually does cause disease then giving them a picture of a child with a rash on both hands (and nowhere else) is an excellent way for them to get their head around the issue. Another one I use is to talk about “playing possum” – the opossum’s sub-conscious mind causes its body to go into paralysis. The opossum does this because its predators don’t typically like old meat so will ignore an animal that appears to have been dead for several days. Because this story is well accepted you have already gotten people to admit the general principle of German New Medicine is true. Add in the fact that rashes are focused and people can start to see that the mind is the most sensible explanation for most (if not all) disease.

  23. I agree with many of the comments above, AIDS and HIV are a hoax, contrived in the rush to win the accolades from identifying a new disease. Robert Gallo should be in prison for blighting millions of lives.

    Liam Scheff and Janine Roberts in their stunning books point out the fierce political battle between the toxicologists and the virologists, and describe their realisation that virology is little more than a bizarre pseudoscience with a serious lack of solid scientific underpinning.

    What many people do not realise is that AIDS is not a disease, and is not caused by a virus, but is a toxic problem of many causes and many manifestations.

    I also strongly recommend Brent Leung’s incredible documentary ‘House of Numbers’, which shows so clearly both the holes in the official theory of AIDS and the self-fulfilling nature of the medical ‘treatment’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.