I’ve just found your Substack. I am grateful for this.

You’ve done an excellent job organizing and identifying older and more recent research.

God bless you.

Expand full comment

Just watched Amandha Vollmer Interviewed by Kate Sugak: Myth Of Contagion, What Makes People Sick, Antibiotics, And DMSO. Great interview, with explanations anyone can understand.

BTW, there is a master planner behind all this. If you haven't already, read The Great Controversy, by E.G White.

Expand full comment

Why not? We know germ theory has made a lot of people very rich.

Expand full comment
Dec 19, 2022·edited Dec 19, 2022

"Then they're sick afterward and decide they must have caught a virus, just like the kids. This does not always happen however, many times people will visit, and someone is sick or the grandchildren are sick, and no one else gets sick too."

The illusionist Derren Brown did a show where he flipped a coin with 10 heads in a row. Statistically this is rare but inevitable to happen if you flip the coin long enough. It is therefore not surprising that there are occasions where 2 or more people detox at the same time even without the factors increasing the odds that you mention. People remember the occassion where it happened and forget the many other occasions where it didn't. Ironically he refers to homeopathy in the video and fails to see how this could be applied to the belief in viruses. It is I suppose based on homeopathy. There is an invisible pathogen so dilluted it can not be isolated. Course with homeopathy there is something there to start with where as the virus is just imagined to be heavily dilluted. Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) lived at the same time as Edward Jenner (1749 - 1823) Hahnemann’s first comments about the general applicability of the law of similars were in 1789 and Jenner wrote his Inquiry into the Variolae vaccinae (horsegrease cowpox) in 1798. 'Vaccines' themselves were a opposition movement to variolation same like how sanitation was a opposition movement to vaccination and early treatment an opposition movement to sanitation. Even the smallest amount of virus in the ideology leading to trouble. The allopaths themselves providing comprehensive proof of the law of similars and the lower dose of virus ideology being even more dangerous. Take for example the 'alternative' practitioners (lower dose) being absorbed into allopathy and helping to magnify the 'covid' atrocity. Yoga teachers masking the children. If they had been out teaching breathing exercises and the importance of remaining calm the allopaths wouldn't have got away with it. That leaves the cure being a very low dose but all the more effective. Those few of us really did have a big impact.


Expand full comment

Thank you Amanda. I agree with you completely. Just yesterday I formulated this theory to my partner. I think that fear and the physical changes that come with it play a big part in the so-called contagion. Fear prevents healing and makes you sick. I realised a few days ago that this was a decisive factor in the so-called pandemic. If we had not known about it, nothing would have happened. I have been studying Prof. Dr. Enderlein and his healing methods for a long time and have always found them helpful, especially since I don't take antibiotics (I have Lyme disease and certainly won't throw my body out of balance by killing all life in it) and have found a perfect alternative with the Sanum Kehlbeck preparations. The only thing I had to rethink was the issue of infection, and your article has taken me a step further. We really have to realise that modern medicine doesn't heal us, but rather brings us on a cruel road toan ugly death.

Expand full comment

You are amazing, I'm learning so much from you. Forever grateful for your important work.

Expand full comment

This argument of the artifacts created by the handling of samples for the purpose of microscopy is compelling. The implicit leap of faith every biologist makes is astonishing.

"Those are not bubbles bro, it a lysosome" "That's not a weird metallic compound from the stain, that's an organelle." "Those are mitocondrial crestae, not shrinkage from dehydration." I'm sure all lab people must have a cool get away story for those questions.

Science is limited by the available technology. Perhaps someone could invent a "microscopic microscope" that can see living cells inside the body. The problem of this is that such a device would be destroyed by the "non-existent immune system," right? or is that just another excuse to not look what is really happening?

And it should be capable of being moved around the bloodstream to the organs from the outside, perhaps using radio waves, which would affect, in some way, the images taken by such a small device. It would be like sending a probe to Saturn. The probe is very small compared to the planet, but it can take pictures. When a Hepatitis virus reaches the liver, does it know the organ is huge compred to itself? could a hepatitis virus from Japan take some pictures of what happens inside an hepatocyte? Well, if a virus can enter a huge cell, why couldn't a man made device designed for the purpose of exploration, not as a pathogenic nano-machine?

Expand full comment

Thanks for a great article Amandha, the chickenpox section was interesting, my father has these reoccurring itchy skin eruptions, that I believe are related to blood pressure medication do you know of any instance or example of this?

Expand full comment

Good article. Paradigm shifting indeed, but let's take care those who will end up replacing the current status quo aren't just the status quo who've simply changed costumes.

One other thing to take into consideration is the rise of synbio, AI, genetic engineering. What are they now capable of doing? Craig Venter & his ilk have claimed the creation of synthetic molecules. Is this the weaponisation of life itself?

And one last thing, probably the most important. Your quote: " We have liquid crystals inside of us called EZ water that our mitochondria manufacture based on biophotonic (light) energy."

Please consider reading carefully & passing the links onto Cowan & maybe even Pollack himself:





From the xylem pdf:

"Since I am speaking now to biologists, I feel I must give a quick overview of my charge field. My regular readers may want to skip ahead. In short, I pulled apart Newton's old gravity equation, the one we all learned in high school, F=GMm/r2. The constant G there has never been assigned or explained, except as a hole filler. I discovered that it is hiding the charge field. The charge field is photons, particles of light. The charge field is already known. In macro-physics, the charge field is known as the electromagnetic spectrum, and it includes photons of all known sizes, including visible light. At the quantum level, the charge field is known as the pluses and minuses on the proton and electron (and a few other particles). Charge is the force that is thought to explain most of the quantum interactions. It is the main force at the quantum level. But up to now it hasn't been assigned to anything. There is no real field and no real field particle. It just is. When pressed, particle physicists will tell you that charge is mediated by a messenger photon. But this is a virtual photon. It has no mass and no radius and no real energy. It relates charge by simply “telling” the other particle plus or minus. Anyone can see that isn't satisfactory, so what I did is combine macro and quantum charge. That is, I proposed that quantum charge was mediated by a real photon of some size, a photon with real energy,real mass, and real radius. The field of these photons is then what we call charge. Since this is the same field we have at the macro-level, we must have charge here, too. We have been told that we don't, and that celestial mechanics is gravity only, but I found that the size of the macro charge field was precisely the size of the hole G was filling in the equation above. Yes, charge was hiding in G all along."

Mathis needs exposure, very few in the mainstream will touch him. I feel yourself & those with a similar worldview/alignment (Cowan, Kaufman etc) may be the ones to be able to bridge the gap, if the time is taken to seriously consider what he has written.

Expand full comment

"Here’s the rub, no one 'catches' anything."

I think we can actually "catch" stuff, just not in a biological sense the way the Germ Conspiracists want us to think. This is why biophobic germ fearers find it so hard to break out of the contagion spell, because there are many things in the world that are contagious (i.e. emotions, ideas, truth), and because Nature terrifies them they assume germs must be contagious as well.

Expand full comment

Ps great article, you explain this stuff better than anyone i've found.

Expand full comment

Thank you Amanda. Greetings from fellow Canadian. Your explanations for the reasons behind so-called 'contagion' are well detailed and clear. The brainwashed masses, however, insist on scientific proof. Is it possible to prove your explanations based on frequency and detox? Have they not been studied because money is always directed at more profitable 'scientimistic' knowledge? If you had unlimited funds to research these reasons, how would you begin?

Expand full comment