The Covid-era is a lesson on why it matters to test what we think we know about viruses and germs, argues Andrew Kaufman. Germ Theory is like “climate science” in that it is established dogma that may not be questioned; it is unscientific and illogical; and it is heavily funded by big industries.
Challenging paradigms is what critical thinking is about.
Germ Theory is one such paradigm that must be critiqued and falsified because, well, that’s what science is about. If something can’t be falsified, then we’re off to a good start. But if something can be falsified, then we’re off to an even better start.
What is Germ Theory?
To understand Germ Theory, a good rule of thumb is to get a bit of historical context.
Whereas most Americans probably have heard of Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), it is doubtful that many are familiar with the name and work of Antoine Béchamp (1816–1908). The two nineteenth-century researchers were scientific contemporaries, compatriots and fellow members of the French Academy of Science, but key differences in their views on biology and disease pathology led to a prolonged rivalry both within and outside of the Academy.
Germ Theory Versus Terrain: The Wrong Side Won the Day
Béchamp was the more brilliant thinker, but Pasteur had political connections, including Emperor Napoleon III. Reportedly not above “plagiarising and distorting Béchamp’s research,” Pasteur achieved fame and fortune largely because his views “were in tune with the science and the politics of his day.” Meanwhile, mainstream medical historians relegated Béchamp’s ideas—not as attractive to conventional thinkers—to the intellectual dustbin.
Pasteur’s promotion of germ theory (a flawed notion that he did not so much “discover” as repackage) has remained “dear to pharmaceutical company executives’ hearts” up to the present day, having laid the groundwork for “synthetic drugs, chemotherapy, radiation, surgical removal of body parts and vaccines” to become the “medicine[s] of choice.” The unshakeable belief that there is one microbe for every illness is so ingrained as the “controlling medical idea for the Western world” that competing ideas about disease causation still have difficulty gaining traction.
Critical thinking
I recommend reading the book Bechamp or Pasteur?: A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology, which is a wonderful biographical account of the two aforementioned scientists.
A number of my guests – including Andy – have spoken about all of this. Mark Bailey’s insights are concise and easy to follow, as are those of Mike Stone. Denis Rancourt’s analyses are a bit more detailed and analytical. David Rasnick’s critiques are also a bit more detailed and analytical, such as his breakdown of the (lack of) existence of HIV.
Our conversation
Andy chatted to me about
- why it matters to know about the existence of viruses;
- the sloppy science surrounding viruses;
- the logic and myths around contagion;
- alternative causal explanations;
- germs, in general, not causing illness; and
- treating the cause and not the symptoms.
