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.
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.
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.