I was just contemplating how ludicrously, criminally insane it is that the Government has people believing other human beings are potential weapons of mass destruction should they, you know, breathe (remember the old joke, "s/he's so sensitive, you can't even breathe near them..." - not so funny now, eh?), and the punchline to this crassest of bad jokes is that everybody actually knows, courtesy of the most rudimentary high school biology class, that it's not true.
What is the reason that no doctor ever gives antibiotics for a virus?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
It's because - again, as any 11-year-old with a C-grade average in science class knows - viruses are not alive. The word antibiotic comes from 'biota', which means, life. Antibiotic = anti-life = doesn't work on things that aren't living.
As such, viruses - non-living entities - cannot be passed from one person to another and cause illness.
Am I a "virus denier"? Of course not. Viruses definitely exist. But they are produced inside you, as a response to toxicity; a sort of internal soap. That's why unwell people test positive for certain viruses. These viruses are certainly present - but they didn't cause the illness, any more than calling the police a lot causes an increase in crime. In areas where there is high crime, there'll be a lot of calls to the police; that's not proof the latter causes the former.
Of course, whenever one posits that you can't catch a virus (because, pay attention there at the back, they're not alive), you inevitably get, "but what about chicken pox parties? What about when the 'flu goes round the whole office?"
Well, what about when women live together and their menstrual cycles synchronise? It's exactly the same principle. Women do not "catch" periods off each other; the menstrual cycle is not contagious. Nevertheless, women's bodies communicate with each other and synchronise their cycles, and it is the same with viral toxic cleanouts. When one body is having one, it can communicate to other nearby bodies that now is a good time for a detox - since that's what viruses are: detoxes.
High temperatures to kill off pathogens, coughing and runny noses to expel toxins. One reason why people in the same house, school, or office often get ill at the same time is because they are exposed to many of the same toxins, so tend to need cleanouts at around the same time.
So, to sum, because a virus is a toxic cleanout, you can't "catch" it from someone else, any more than you can catch acne from them. We all recognise that acne is an external manifestation of inner toxicity, usually related to bad diet and hormonal imbalances (hence why it is so common in teenagers) - meaning we never worried about "catching" it from sitting next to the spotty kid at school. We recognised that it came from inside them.
That's why it's so silly when plague enthusiasts smugly crow about sending "virus deniers" to Covid wards, and "see how you feel then, you evil, crazy, pestilence refusenik!". Well, I will feel exactly the same (e.g. extremely well), and will happily care for the patients, without PPE or Satanic distancing, and I would even give them a hug and share a finger-food buffet with them. No problem.
Because you cannot - I repeat, cannot - catch a virus from someone else. If your body needs a good toxic cleanout, it will have one, but that is nothing to do with the state of anyone else's health.
They've even done experiments whereby 100 volunteers with a cold have been put in a room with 100 healthy volunteers. The individuals with the cold had mucus and saliva extracted from them, and this was inserted straight into the mouths of the healthy people. Icky, yes, but end result? Not one of the healthy people caught a cold. Not. One. It's just the same as if (again, excuse the ick factor, but) someone squeezed their spots and transferred the result onto someone else's face. There is a zero percent chance this could give the recipient acne.
If you think the above is all crazy quackaloon conspiracy woo, I ask you again - why don't doctors give antibiotics for viruses?
The truth is, as ever, hidden in plain sight. Or, to put it another way: if germ theory were true, nobody would be alive to believe it.
Leading on from this, here's another question for the class...
Why do the overlords insist you still must take a vaccine, even if you've already had Covid and thus have antibodies against it?
It's because. as they have stated, a positive antibody test does not equate to immunity from disease.
And, for once, they're telling the truth.
But guess what the criteria for efficacy of EVERY other vaccine prior to Covid is?
That it provokes an antibody response. That's it. If a vaccine produces antibodies in the test subjects, it is branded "effective", even though - as the overlords now admit - producing antibodies does NOT equate to disease immunity.
The corollary of that is that you can either believe the Covid narrative, or you can believe the narrative justifying every other vaccine in history - but you cannot believe both.
If antibodies don't equate to disease immunity, then all other vaccines are useless.
If antibodies do equate to disease immunity, then the millions of people who have tested positive for Covid don't need the vaccine.
Vaccine devotees and plague groupies everywhere, please pick one or the other - because, quite clearly, you cannot have both.