Myth-Busting Modern Biology

🖨️ Print post

Question everything. This is the challenge of Dr. Tom Cowan, author, podcaster, and proponent of the “new biology.” Tom suggests that our current understanding of modern biology is based on a number of assumptions that we need to reexamine.

Today, Tom busts myths (and perceptions) related to the covid virus (and viruses, in general), spike proteins, and the idea that humans can be genetically modified. He calls into question the notion that cell membranes have receptors, the concept of the human “virome,” the idea of specific antibodies, and even our understanding of the body’s immune system! Tom points out fallacious thinking in scientific circles. And he makes a strong case for a need to re-think viruses, contagion, and many other aspects of modern biology.

Visit Tom’s website: drtomcowan.com

“Nourishing Traditions” by Sally Fallon Morell in Spanish

Check out our sponsors: Paleo Valley and Optimal Carnivore

—

Listen to the podcast here

 

Episode Transcript

Within the below transcript the bolded text is Hilda Labrada Gore and the regular text is Tom Cowan.

Our understanding of modern biology is based on a number of assumptions. It’s time to re-examine what’s been told and accepted. This episode bears you to question everything. This is Episode 429, and our guest is Dr. Tom Cowan. Tom is an author and is on the board of Weston A. Price Foundation. He is a pioneer of what he calls the New Biology. Tom bust myths and perceptions related to the COVID virus and viruses in general, spike proteins, and the idea that humans can be genetically modified. He calls into question the notion that cell membranes have receptors, the concept of the viral, the idea of specific antibodies, and even our understanding of the body’s immune system.

In the conversation, Tom points out fallacious thinking, however scientific it may sound. He defines terms and makes a strong case for a need to rethink viruses, contagion, and many other aspects of modern biology. Plus, he reminds us of the importance of asking the right questions. Before we dive into the conversation, did you know that Sally Fallon Morell’s seminal book, Nourishing Traditions, has been translated and published into Spanish? It’s available on Amazon now. Look for Tradiciones Culinarias wherever you get your favorite books. How wonderful that our friends who speak Spanish can now enjoy this book and benefit from its recipes and important information.

—

Visit Tom Cowan’s website

Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon Morell in Spanish

Check out our sponsors: Paleo Valley and Optimal Carnivore

—

Welcome, Tom.

Thank you. It’s good to be here again.

I interviewed you in the early days of the show. It was Episode 2. I remember you said, “I’ve always been called a doubting Tomas.” Now, I feel like you’re doubting all of the premises on which modern biology is based. Is that a fair statement?

I would put it that having looked into things I never looked into, I’ve discovered that the entire foundation of modern biology is incorrect.

This is huge. You’re going to have to elaborate on this.

I would imagine so.

Let’s start with this. You’ve said that medicine and biology took a dramatically wrong turn about so many years ago. What happened at that time?

That’s a complicated question. There are a couple of things I want to say here at the beginning. One is that some things that I say I would contend are based on fact and based on my reading of the medical literature and papers, and maybe observations. Some of the things are hypotheses, things that I think are correct. I’ll try to tell people when I think I’m doing one or the other, just to be clear. The other thing that I want to be absolutely clear on is, even though I didn’t really appreciate this one, more years ago, I realized that I was doing something that I’m not the first one to do, but in some ways, I’ve come to learn it’s a spiritual path almost.

That is to find out what’s not true and not worry so much about what is true. It turns out Sherlock Holmes did that, who I read voraciously when I decided to become a doctor. He said, “The process is eliminating everything that isn’t true, and then what you’re left with, no matter how implausible, is true.” This is part of the Hindu spiritual tradition. A lot of other people have talked about this. You hear this a lot with the whole virus thing. The example that I like to give is, if you look into why clouds form, and rain happens, it turns out it’s very complicated because water is heavier than air. Therefore, it should fall down, yet you have these floating water things up in the air. How does that happen?

After having looked into it for years, my conclusion is I don’t really know. If somebody comes along and says, “I know why there’s rain, it’s because there are elephants flying around, pissing down, and that’s why there’s rain,” here’s the process that I want everybody to do. I don’t care if they learn anything else because I want everybody to know this backwards and forwards, including most especially people who do interviews and podcasts.

This is my message. If somebody says that, you ask them questions about the details of the elephants and not ask why. In other words, how high up are the elephants? 1 mile. What kind of elephants are they? They’re the usual. What color are the elephants? They’re pink. Are there lots of elephants or just 1 or 2? No, there are at least 100 on each cloud. You could go on. What you do is repeat what the person says back. You’re saying that the reason there’s rain is because there are many elephants floating around, and then you do an experiment like you get a helicopter.

He said they were a mile up, hundreds of elephants, they’re all pink floating around. You go up on a rainy day, you look, and you don’t see any elephants. I can guarantee you that at that point, the reason for the rain is not elephants. I still don’t know why there’s rain. If somebody says to you after you say, “I know there’s no such thing as a virus,” which is a fact, not a theory or a hypothesis. “I can prove how I came to that.” If they will say things like, “Why do people get sick?” in other words, “You don’t know why there’s rain. Therefore, that’s the proof there’s a virus. We don’t know why there’s rain so that proves there are elephants.”

The consensus, The World Health Organization, Steve Kirsch, and Del Bigtree believe there are lab-created viruses. It doesn’t mean anything. You have to show the evidence. You’re not talking about what else there is. You’re talking about proving a declarative statement. They will try to baffle you and buffalo you and confuse you, but that’s the process. You hear this a lot. People say things like, “There’s this viral. We’re made of hundreds of millions and billions of viruses.” The question to ask that person is, “How did you, they, or some virologist come up with that figure, number, and fact?”

Here’s the important point. 1 of 2 things will happen. A) They won’t know, in which case there’s nothing valid about what they’re saying, or they’ll say something like, “We found little pieces of RNA in a sample of sputum, and we concluded that every piece of RNA must represent a virus. Therefore, there are ten to the quadrillion pieces of RNA, and that means there are that many viruses,” despite the fact that none of those pieces has ever been correlated with an entity called a virus. It’s the elephant theory.

It’s the same with lab leaks. Show me the evidence of a virus that is circulating in the population. They can give you patents and all kinds of stories about elephants, but they can’t show you the virus. That’s because people don’t know this way of questioning. You’re making a declarative statement. We then get into new biology. They say DNA is the hereditary material, and DNA is stable. It’s the same your entire life.

DNA is the same in all the cells and tissues of your body. This is one of those things that came in the late 1800s. DNA and the mutations of the DNA are the organs or the driver of evolution and change of the species. The function of DNA, just to take one example of new biology, is to code for proteins. Those are the declarative statements that they make.

We’re not talking now about my theories or hypothesis about what heredity is. I would say, “You stay, but DNA codes for proteins.” How many proteins are there in a human being? It’s 200,000. How many genes, which are the sequences that code for proteins? Approximately 10,000 to 20,000. How is it that 10,000 to 20,000 codes code for 200,000 proteins? Where’s the other 90% come from? They get rearranged somehow, which is nonsense. This brings up another point I want people to hear about, which is called reification fallacies.

Before you get there, let me say this. I hear what you’re saying. You are trying to help people stop operating on assumptions and to have curiosity about the things that we just take for granted and think, “They’ve done the human genome project NIH. I must think that Francis Collins has some information that I don’t have,” and taking it at face value without taking a deeper dive. You’re suggesting that we need to go deeper and not just take things at the surface level because we’ve heard them enough, which I guess is where you’re headed now.

I’m suggesting that whoever talks to Francis Collins or anybody else, including me, if they say that the genes code for proteins, you ask them, “How does that work?” There are 200,000 proteins and 10,000 genes. Arithmetic doesn’t add up. You want to know the steps, the actual methodology of how they came up with, “There’s this viral. Viruses cause disease. mRNA is translated, meaning made into protein on the ribosomes.”

Let me go over that ribosome one for a minute because that’s really important. Everybody knows about mRNA. We got this DNA that’s supposedly made into mRNA in the nucleus, gets out of the nucleus, which is already bizarre because if you measure the pH of the nucleus and the cytoplasm, it’s different. Meaning there’s a barrier around the nucleus, which is actually real. You can see it on a light microscope.

The hydrogen ions can’t equilibrate from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, otherwise, they’d be the same pH. Now an mRNA is approximately a million times bigger than a hydrogen ion. How does the mRNA get out of the nucleus without letting the hydrogen ion in? In other words, how do you make a door that lets elephants in out but doesn’t let the mosquitoes in? Do you know what the answer is? You don’t, because that door doesn’t exist. That’s what I mean by a reification fallacy.

A reification fallacy means you make something up and then you ascribe its properties. When you talk about science, people don’t understand the absurdity of it. That’s why I talk other ways. Hilda, I find out why all the buildings in Ukraine are being demolished. It’s because there are invisible exploding unicorns that have explosives tied to them. They have wings, and they fly around and explode the buildings.

 

“Tom, how do you know that? Are you saying that the buildings aren’t blown up?” “No, I’m not saying that the buildings are blown up.” You say, “Have you seen these unicorns?” “No, because they’re invisible.” “How do you know they’re exploding things?” “The buildings are blown up.” Now I’ve ascribed, “How do they get from one building to the next?” “They have wings, you dummy. They fly from one place to another. Otherwise, they couldn’t get from one place to another.” “The viruses, why can’t you see them?” “They hide inside the cell and they have a genome.” “Why can’t you find them?” “They’re hiding, you dummy. If they weren’t hiding, you would be able to see them.” Same with the unicorns, they’re invisible. They’re hiding, so you can’t see them.

They make up a story. The story is DNA makes RNA. The RNA gets out of the nucleus through a door, but the door is too big. It needs a door that doesn’t let something a million times smaller. They make up a squiggly thing like an endoplasmic reticulum that has a secret door in it because the story has to keep going. It’s got a secret door, and it’s got a whirly gig in the door that goes round and round like a merry-go-round and deposits the mRNA on the outside. “Can you show me a picture of it?” “No, it’s invisible. You can’t see it.” “How do you know it’s there?” “How else did it get out?”

They just make up something and then they keep reiterating it. It keeps getting passed on to others.

They make more and more reification fallacies. That’s making up something and then ascribing its characteristics. The mRNA then goes to the ribosome, and the ribosome is a little factory. “Do you mean it’s got little men in it in gears and stuff?” No, it’s just a factory. It churns out the protein. “Can I see a picture of the ribosome?” Yes. Here’s an electron microscopy picture of the ribosome. There are hundreds of them. They’re all perfect circles. You can’t see them under a light microscope.

In order to see them, you had to take the tissue and grind it in a blender, freeze it to 120 degrees, dehydrate it into a powder, embedded on a resin, shoot an electron beam at it, and then it shows up as perfect circles. If it’s a perfect circle in a picture, it had to have been a sphere in real life. What are the chances if you took an orange that’s a sphere and put it in a blender, dehydrated it, powdered it and shot an electron beam at it that every picture of that orange would be a perfect circle?

No, zero. In other words, that picture doesn’t exist. It’s an artifact. A brilliant biologist named Harold Hillman said, “I’m going to prove it to you. There’s no such structure.” He took tissue that couldn’t possibly have a ribosome in it. He did it through the same procedure and got the perfect circles, showing that this is a gas bubble, and they all look like perfect circles. In this case, there is no place for a mRNA to be made into protein. In this case, given that there are too many proteins to be made from mRNA in the first place, that theory is nonsense.

Anybody who tells you they give you an mRNA shot and it makes you make spike protein, if you hear that, you should run the other way because they have no idea the biology of what they’re talking about. Besides that, they cannot show you one study, where they took a bunch of people, injected them with mRNA, and measured the spike protein that they made like, “At 2 milligrams, you get this much spike protein. At 10 milligrams, you get this much.” They’ve never done that study.

—

Tom’s not done yet. Coming up, he questions the existence of receptors on cell membranes. In the next part of our program.

Check out Paleo Valley’s turmeric complex at Paleo Valley to get 15% off your first order.

Go to Amazon Optimal Carnivore and use the code WESTON10 to receive 10% off all your products, including the new Brain Nourish.

—

They have no studies showing you can find the spike protein in any living being that’s been injected with mRNA, even though that’s what all the so-called freedom doctors will tell you. That’s how they’re killing people with the COVID shot. It’s nonsense based on a misunderstanding of biology.

If I’m hearing you correctly, not only is what you’re revealing and challenging is the virus theory, but it’s also the idea that these injections are also causing havoc with spike proteins. Are you saying all of that is a house of cards?

I didn’t say that these COVID injections are fun and games and safe and you should run out and get them. I didn’t say that. There are many mechanisms of getting you sick from injecting nano poisons into you and big poisons. The real reason this is so important is they have, and this “they” meaning conventional science, conventional medicine, and the so-called freedom community, have people bamboozled into thinking these guys can manipulate our genome and do us all kinds of harm through genetically modifying us. They’re really smart. We’re blowing the whistle on them, but what they’re doing is embedding in people the, “They’ve genetically modified us,” which is not possible.

Conventional science, conventional medicine, and the so-called freedom community have people bamboozled into thinking these guys can really manipulate our genome and do us all kinds of harm by genetically modifying us.

The reason why people persist in these is they don’t know the science and they never ask the question, “How do you know this?” which is why I’m trying to get everybody to ask people anytime you meet somebody including me, “How do you know this?” One of the most important things in biology and medicine is receptors on cell membranes. ACE and ACE2 receptors are the vagina that meets up with the spike protein so they use sexual imagery to sucker you into the game, or opiate receptors and serotonin receptors. The biggest one of all is the sodium-potassium pump because that’s how cells and tissue become charged.

By the way, there really are no cells, but that’s a little bit different conversation. That’s another myth that came about in the 1850s, but that’s a little bit different. They see that tissue has a charge and the charge is what makes beings alive. We are an electromagnetic feel. If you lose the charge, you’re dead. The fact that we are charged has to do with water and the distribution of ions like sodium and potassium. There are sodium concentrates on the outside of the tissue and potassium on the inside. Because of that, with the interaction with water, there’s a charge.

They said, “How does that happen?” There’s a receptor in the cell membrane and it’s got this whirly-gig thing because they love whirly gigs. It binds to the potassium on the outside and then whirly gigs around, picks up the sodium and whirly gigs, and puts the potassium inside in the sodium outside. That’s the sodium-potassium pump. 2 or 3 Nobel prizes were given for the elucidation of the chemistry and the function of the sodium-potassium pump, which is one of the greatest mysteries solved in modern biology. We have drugs that work on the sodium-potassium pump. Heart failure is considered a problem of the sodium-potassium pump, losing the charge and the energy of the heart. This is a cornerstone of modern biology.

Gilbert Ling comes along, does his PhD thesis, Chinese guy, and he does a few things, but the most important was he strips the membrane off, and it concentrates the sodium-potassium exactly the same, proving that this distribution of sodium-potassium has nothing to do with the membrane. Mind you, that pump has never been visualized. All they can say is it’s the unicorn story. “Tom, are you saying there’s no distribution of sodium potassium?” No. You can measure that. “There must be a pump.” Why? “The buildings are blown up.”

What about this? I take the membranes off or I spray anti-unicorn repellent on all the cities in Russia so that’s going to stop the unicorns, because if it’s invisible unicorns, you need unicorn repellent. By the way, they’ll sell you unicorn repellent, which is made out of poison dust. You need something for this sodium-potassium pump. Otherwise, we don’t know why it happens. All you have to do is strip the membrane off and find out the exact same thing happens. He wrote a 200-page dossier explaining this in detail. How many doctors or scientists have read that? None. Some. My friends read this stuff.

It’s the podcasters’ and interviewers’ responsibility, I think. That’s why I talk to people. If somebody comes in with a serotonin receptor or the fentanyl works on your opiate receptors, demonstrate to me or show me the steps of how you know there’s an opiate receptor in the membrane because I can guarantee there isn’t. There’s no picture of it. There’s no proof. They’ll say, “Are you saying that opiates don’t have an effect?” No, I didn’t say that. I didn’t say there isn’t a charge differential. I’m saying that’s not the mechanism. As long as you keep thinking that is the mechanism, you are never going to know anything about living systems and how they actually function or heal anybody because you’re basically talking about a house of cards.

 

If you’re not a practitioner, that information has you enslaved by fear because you’re believing the stories you’re being told about the sickness that is fictitious, like the unicorns you’ve been talking about.

Yes. You spend all your time with a gun waiting for a unicorn to show up so they don’t blow your house up, getting unicorn repellent, putting anti-unicorn hazmat suits on, and funding $100 billion a year in the study of errant invisible unicorns. That’s called modern biology, The World Health Organization, the CDC, and alternative functional medicine. They’re studying invisible unicorns.

Some of us who are not interviewers are getting glimpses of this because it’s almost like in the past few years, they pushed this modern biology too far and people started realizing something’s wrong. Even if I don’t have these profound conversations with these supposed medical experts, something’s telling me I’m being sold a bill of goods. That’s kind of freeing, and that releases us to pursue what you’re describing as the new biology.

That’s the gift of COVID, which is why I absolutely bank on this. If you can’t understand, there’s no virus, lab-created virus, lab-engineered virus, infectious pathogen, infectious DNA clone, and no contagion, if you don’t understand that, which is what they chose to put this fraud based on, then you don’t have a clue as far as what happened in the last three years. You are buying a story that has no foundation at all.

It’s like a fairytale.

You’re right. They made a mistake in making this about a virus because it turns out it’s incredibly easy to prove. That’s why there is no excuse for any person who is so-called fighting for freedom to not know the answer to the question, “How do you prove there’s a virus and show it causes disease?” If you can’t answer that question, you’re not part of the recovery and the freedom process that has been unleashed because of COVID. It’s exactly what you said. They pushed this too far.

How do you prove there’s a virus and show it causes disease? If you can’t answer that question, you’re not part of the recovery and the freedom process that has been unleashed because of Covid.

There are so many beautiful resources that challenge the status quo. I’m thinking of virus mania and goodbye germ theory. There are a bunch of thinking people who’ve asked, “Where are those elephants, and unicorns?”

It is a viral delusion. All you have to do is read Mark Bailey’s A Farewell to Virology. He’s had that out for months. We’ve asked every virologist, every Peter McCullough, all those guys, “Name one thing that’s incorrect in there. Show us one contagion study that’s valid. Show us one study that shows that any fluid from a sick person makes another person or animal sick, the filtrate or the part that supposedly has a virus. Show us how you know that a viral culture proves there’s a virus. Show us one picture, an electron microscope photograph that proves that’s a virus and not cell debris.” They can’t do it.

They can’t or they won’t.

They can’t. They make up reasons like I’m disinformation, divisive, or I don’t have the right credentials. People can’t understand this. They can’t understand that if you can’t find this article, that means it’s not there.

The reason I was using the word won’t is because some people are intentionally on it. Either because they make their livelihood from it or they simply don’t want their paradigm of science or life to change. It’s like they purposely have blinders on. When I say they won’t, it’s not that they can disprove these things, but they choose not to look at all.

I am not interested in their motives or their reasons, whether they’re just too stupid or they have psychological problems or financial whatever. I couldn’t care less. It’s not my problem. My issue is to show me the study and then I’ll say that I’m wrong because I’ve been wrong about a lot of things. Most of them because I believed what I “learned” without actually knowing how they came up with this. Everyone, every single mistake was because of that, and I’m tired of making that mistake.

This is why I guess you’re moving in this direction that is so freeing and that you are dubbing the new biology. I wanted to ask you about that because when I was doing some research on this, you said it’s very similar to ancient biology. I wonder why the term new biology at all.

Stefan Lanka talks about the new biology. In some ways, I got it from him and didn’t ask him so kind of I stole it, but we’re friends. He’s probably okay. This is how people used to think. They knew that we are electromagnetic fields and we are organized coherent water. They built healing devices based on sound, light, thinking, emotions, consciousness, and things that work to heal people because they harmonize the reality of who we are. You don’t need to torture animals to do this. You don’t need cell cultures to do this. None of that has any relevance anyways because you’re not studying life.

Another tragedy of modern biology is, with the bogus polio research, they tortured and slaughtered 15,000 monkeys to make a vaccine that A) Didn’t work and B) Poisoned to crap out of people. They do that with cats, dogs, ferrets, and mice. it’s completely psychopathic torturing of defenseless animals. You don’t need that because we are living systems and we interact with the energies and frequencies of the world. Every Chinese medicine knew it, Ayurvedic medicine, they all knew it. They all were about shamanic healing, which is all connecting with the energy flow of the world that we live in.

It is interacting with the sun, the moon, the earth, the animals, loved ones, and plants as guides and interacting with the magic of water in us. That’s all you can prove that exists in the first place. If you go down the list of things that are unprovable, the only things you have left were jello with a little bit of skin around it with some minerals dissolved in it, some fats, some nucleic acids, a nucleus, mitochondria, and that’s it. Everything else is a reification fallacy that has no basis in reality.

 

All the pathways, all the biochemistry, all the other structures, Golgi apparatus, endoplasmic reticulum, lysosome, receptors on cell membranes, nuclear pores, we don’t have an immune system that’s totally bogus. They made that up to make you think you have viruses. The way to prove that is you look at studies on antibodies, the cornerstone of our immune system. First of all, they’re entirely non-specific. There’s a whole medical journal now of neurology that won’t accept papers based on the specificity of antibodies.

That’s what our entire immunology is based on. You get a measles virus and then you make a specific antibody to fight you. If you do a study, it turns out that some of the people have this alleged disease called measles, which by the way, they can’t tell the difference between measles, chicken pox, and just a rash from arsenic poisoning in the wallpaper. Some people have Koplik spots, which is the pathognomonic sign. Turns out only 40% have Koplik spots, so then they call that atypical measles.

That’s the flying unicorn with one wing. That’s an atypical invisible unicorn. They make up categories within that. It’s just like you can diagnose rheumatoid arthritis or joint pains because you have antibodies. You had an autoimmune disease. You have 10 people with the same symptoms, 6 of them have antibodies, and 4 of them don’t. What do they have? They have atypical rheumatoid arthritis. They have antibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis. “Doc, what’s the hallmark of rheumatoid arthritis?” You have antibodies that are destroying your tissue. “I don’t have antibodies, so what’s destroying my tissues?” You have atypical rheumatoid arthritis or antibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis.

You have invisible unicorns that are hovering backward, that’s not the usual. You need a different unicorn repellent. Show me the study that has isolated the antibody and show that that causes joint deterioration. That’s the theory of autoimmune disease. We don’t have that study. “Why not? Are you saying you don’t have rheumatoid arthritis?” No, I’m saying you said that it’s because of the antibodies. I would like to see a study showing that you’ve isolated. In other words, show me the antibodies and the antibodies alone caused my joints to deteriorate.

Here’s how we did it. We wanted to show you that hammers knock in nails. Some people think you should get a hammer from the toolbox and then, with the hammer alone, knock in the nail and see if it goes in, but we’re scientists. Here’s how we do it. We take the toolbox. We don’t look and see if there’s a hammer in there. We take the toolbox, bash the nail, and the nail goes in. That’s how we know it’s the hammer that knocked in the nail. “How do you know there’s a hammer in there? Are you saying you didn’t knock in the nail?” “No, I’m saying you don’t even look and see if there’s a hammer.” “How do you know there’s a hammer?” “Hammers knock in nails.”

If anybody comes at you with COVID autoimmune disease or the immunology of COVID, or you get the cytokine storm, what’s happening, is antibodies are simple chemicals. I’m not even 100% sure we make antibodies, but let’s just say we do. It’s not evidence that they’re there in a living system. Once you do certain chemical processes, you can find these proteins. What they are is repair proteins, non-specific. You poison somebody with some lipid nano gel injected in their body, and their tissue breaks down because that’s normal. You just poison them. You make antibodies to try to repair the tissue. That’s the spike protein antibodies.

“No, show me the spike protein.” “No, we can’t. We have to show you the antibodies.” “How do you know the antibodies are against the spike protein?” “What else are they against?” “You just poisoned the person and you make stuff to repair the tissue.” “Yes, but it says it’s making spike protein.” “Yes, but show me the spike protein. It’s an easy thing to measure. You can measure all kinds of proteins. Why don’t you measure that one?” “Are you saying there are no unicorns?”

It reminds me of our conversation, Tom, about Human Heart, Cosmic Heart where you were saying that when blockages are found, they would blame the cholesterol for the arterial plaque accumulation, when, in fact, people live long lives with many arteries blocked. There are other people that die young in a motorcycle accident and they would have arteries blocked. It’s not the cause of the blocked arteries. Cholesterol is not causing that heart disease.

No. It’s that blocked arteries don’t cause heart attacks. The cholesterol is only there because you have some process that’s poisoning the walls of your arteries in your heart and other places. You make a glue called cholesterol to seal the wound.

The cholesterol is helping but it gets blamed for causing it.

I know why fires are because it’s the firemen who make the fires. “How do you know?” “You’re saying you didn’t see firemen at the fires?” “I did, but I didn’t see them causing the fire.” “Yes, but there’s all these firemen at the fires.” “Not always. Sometimes they don’t show up.” Sometimes people with heart attacks have low cholesterol. Sometimes they have high. I know why you get a heart attack because you have a blockage, and then the blood doesn’t get through. “Do all the people who have heart attacks have a blockage?” “No.” “How do you know that?” “You do an autopsy, and it’s 20% or 40% have a blockage. It depends on when you do the study.” “That means that those are atypical heart attacks.”

That’s because they’re not the cause of the blockage, they’re atypical. Like the measles infection, it doesn’t have Koplik spots. 40% to 60% don’t have Koplik. That’s an atypical measles infection or atypical COVID. What’s COVID? I don’t know. If you get a different kind of COVID, that’s an atypical COVID caused by a smart virus that knows how to evade your immune system, unlike measles, which is a stupid virus that doesn’t know how to invade your immune system. AIDS and HIV are smart viruses. If you have antibodies, that means you’re sick. Whereas measles, if you have antibodies, that means you’re immune. Do you get it? Antibodies mean you’re immune except, for HIV, antibodies mean you’re sick. Now that makes perfect sense because HIV is much smarter than the measles virus.

COVID is really smart. It evolves all the time because of this genetic evolution, even though it’s proven that every tissue of your body has different DNA. If somebody says, “It’s your DNA that controls who you are,” ask them, “Which tissue are you talking about?” They say there are mutations in this, which just means that it changes all the time because it’s not a stable molecule. It has nothing to do with heredity. By the way, you can cut off a worm’s head, which I wouldn’t suggest because that’s torturing worms, and expose it to an electromagnetic field from a different worm, and it will grow the head of the new worm. It didn’t do anything to its genes because the genes don’t control anything. That whole evolutionary biology is a bunch of BS.

We’re going to have to wrap up soon. I wonder if I could just ask you two more questions. One is, if you had to summarize this new biology, this new way of looking at these bodies of water that we are, how would you do it? What do you consider the foundation of the new biology?

The foundation is taking a realistic look at what is there and what isn’t. There is a strategy for doing that, and it’s been known forever, but we’re bamboozled into thinking that we’re somehow biochemistry sets, which are therefore controllable and manipulatable, which they’re not. They’re poisonable, for sure. Once you see that, everything makes sense. There are sweat lodges, hypothermia, and taking herbs. Why do you do sweats? Get the poison out of your water.

 

Why do you do enemas and the Gerson diet to get the poison out of your water? Why do EMF fields and 5G hurt you? It is because you’re being exposed to toxic electromagnetic fields. This is not rocket science. These are principles that are easily understood by everybody. It should take doctors about two months to learn them, assuming they can forget that there’s the rain comes from the flying elephants. That’s the hard part.

I’m grateful for that summary. Even though some of the aspects of this conversation have been very profound, it’s good to simplify it in the way you did. I love picturing us as these amazing bodies of water that are resonating with each other, that are resonating with the earth, that can harmonize in a way that is beautiful and profound and, as you said at the top, really sacred. Tom, here’s the question I’d like to pose at the end. If the audience could do just one thing to improve their health, what would you recommend that they do?

Stop listening to so-called freedom activists and doctors. That will make a huge difference because that’s the people who are sheep-dogging people into still thinking there’s something to be gained by working with this system and this way of thinking. Everybody has to go through this. It’s almost like a terror of, “Now that you’ve torn everything down, who am I and what do I believe?” Don’t worry, it’s the Wizard of Oz. She has to go through that. Everything gets torn down. At the end of the rainbow, you click your heels and realize that you were home, you’ve always been home, and home is where you need to be.

I can guarantee everybody reading out there if they do that because like my friend Kelly Brogan has said, “Turns out the truth is never scary. You may go through some hard times and some difficult conversations and relationships, but you will eventually come home. Once enough people have come home, we’re good.”

The truth is never scary.

Those are beautiful words to end on. Thank you so much, Tom, for your time. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

—

Our guest was Dr. Tom Cowan. Visit his website, Dr. Tom Cowan, for more information. For a recent podcast review on Apple Podcast, Friendly Lizard has this to say, “This is my favorite podcast. I really appreciate the program. It has meant a lot to the health of my family and our 17-month-old through his life thus far. Friendly Lizard, this is a great review.” Thank you so much. You too can go to Apple Podcasts, click on ratings and reviews and let us and the world know what you think of the show. We might just give you a shout-out on a future episode. Thank you in advance, and thank you so much for reading. Stay well. Remember to keep your feet on the ground and your face to the sun. 

 

About Tom Cowan

Dr. Tom Cowan is the vice president on the board of the Weston A. Price Foundation. He has been one of the leading voices speaking out against the mainstream medical narrative and coordinated agenda of masking, social distancing and forced vaccinations. His messages of health freedom and personal autonomy have resonated with millions of people around the world. Dr. Cowan challenges conventional medicine to explore health and wellness in holistic terms, seeking to provide a collaborative forum for the exchange of knowledge, products and practices that enable us to forge a new world together, governed by truth. Explore this website for a wealth of free content (podcasts, blogs, videos, etc.), join Dr. Cowan’s subscriber community of like-minded individuals seeking to survive and thrive in our rapidly changing world, and check out his books and the products he has used personally and with his patients over 37 years of medical practice, including EMF mitigation products, water structuring, and supplements for detoxification, healing and support.

 

Important Links

• Dr. Tom Cowan
• Tradiciones Culinarias
• Episode 2 – Past Episode
• Paleo Valley
• Optimal Carnivore
• A Farewell to Virology – Article
• Human Heart, Cosmic Heart

🖨️ Print post