"Measles is surging because of unvaccinated people."

Let's analyze all aspects of this claim.

To those (experts and laymen alike) saying things like, “the reason measles is resurging is because of unvaccinated people”—I want you to walk me through how each of the following points were established.

See if you can provide the direct evidence without appealing to authority, attacking me, strawmanning my position, or using any other logical fallacies. If you can’t, just be honest and say: “I trust what I’m told by someone else and I’m just regurgitating what I’ve been told, and I have no way to validate my claims.”

Each of these claims is quite literally required in order for the statement “measles is resurging because of unvaccinated people” to be real and true. If any one of them falls apart—or was never properly established in the first place—then so does your claim.

If you’re going to assert this claim as true, then show me step by step that the foundation it’s built on actually exists.

1. “The measles virus exists as a real, physical entity.”
   

   What is a virus, and how is it defined? Is it a distinct, physical, observable entity—or a conceptual model built from indirect observations? Where was the measles virus demonstrated to exist directly within the fluids or tissues of a person who is said to be sick with the symptoms known as measles? Was a purified and isolated viral particle shown to be present in the bodily fluids or cells of a sick human being—using direct physical observation, not inference from cytopathic effects or genetic material? Was the virus demonstrated in vivo, in the living human body where it is claimed to operate? Or was its existence inferred from cultured cells under artificial lab conditions?
   

   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 2—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

2. “The virus causes the illness known as measles.”
   

   Assuming its existence has been established (which is required FIRST), what direct evidence shows that this virus causes the symptoms commonly referred to as measles? What natural phenomenon was observed? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship established while adhering to the scientific method: with clearly defined variables, an isolated independent variable, control groups, replication, and transparency of raw data? Was the entire chain of evidence conducted transparently, with open access to raw data, proper blinding, and elimination of observer bias?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 3—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.
   

3. “The virus spreads from person to person.”
   
   Assuming the first two claims were established, if the virus exists and causes illness, where is the direct, controlled evidence that this specific virus spreads from one person to another, as is widely claimed? What mechanism of transmission has been empirically demonstrated? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship established while adhering to the scientific method—using clearly defined variables, an isolated independent variable (in this case, exposure to the virus), proper controls to eliminate other possible causes (such as environmental exposure, false positives, or psychosomatic effects), matched comparison groups, replication across different studies and populations, and full transparency of raw data? Was the entire chain of evidence conducted with methodological integrity, including proper blinding and elimination of observer bias? Were contamination, laboratory error, and diagnostic artifact fully ruled out in these demonstrations? Has this transmission mechanism ever been observed directly in the human population—or only assumed based on clustering, modeling, or anecdotal reports? Have all other explanations for symptom spread—such as environmental triggers, seasonal factors, psychosocial contagion, etc.—been ruled out?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 4—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.
   

4. “The full genome has been sequenced directly from the measles virus.”
   
   What is a nucleic acid, and where was it demonstrated to exist as a real, physical entity within a living organism—not inferred from chemical reactions or computational reconstructions? What is a genome? Has the human genome—which is vastly better studied—been fully and conclusively established, or is it still being revised and reassembled? Was the genome sequencing process conducted with proper controls to rule out contamination, and was it independently verified and reproducible across different labs and methods? What is a viral genome, and how were viral genomes first established? Were they extracted and sequenced directly from purified viral particles found in the fluids of sick individuals? Or were they constructed using computer models and in-silico assumptions, assembled from fragments with no confirmed origin from a virus proven to exist? Specifically, how was the genome of the measles virus discovered? Was it sequenced directly from a purified, intact virus that had been isolated from the body of a person showing symptoms of measles? Or was it constructed from presumed genetic fragments and stitched together computationally?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 5—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.
   

5. “PCR tests accurately detect the measles virus.”
   
   Where did the primers come from, and how were they validated to match real measles viral material? Was specificity, accuracy, and reproducibility scientifically demonstrated? What lab-generated results—such as amplification of target genetic sequences—were used to validate the PCR test? And more importantly, how was it confirmed that these results correlate with the actual presence of a real virus in a living, sick human being?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 6—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.
   

6. “The measles virus is the cause for the current ‘outbreak’.”
   
   What evidence shows that the symptoms in the current “outbreak” are due to this same virus? What evidence shows that the symptoms are caused by healthy people coming into contact with sick people or their bodily fluids? Has this been independently confirmed, and were all other possible causes ruled out?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 7—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

7. “Infection from the measles virus creates long-term immunity.”
   
   What are antibodies? Have they been established to exist inside a fully intact human being? Has their supposed function been established inside a fully intact human being? Where is the evidence that natural infection leads to specific, durable immune memory and a specific antibody response? How was it established that this is what actually occurs in a fully intact human body, in vivo—not just in isolated cell studies or assumptions drawn from serology? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship demonstrated by comparing supposed “immune” parameters pre- and post-"infection", with studies using clearly defined independent variables, proper controls, and replication across different cohorts?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 8—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

8. “Antibody tests accurately detect measles-specific immune responses.”
   
   What evidence shows that these antibody tests selectively detect antibodies unique to the measles virus? How was this lab-generated phenomenon—the detection of specific antibodies in vitro—validated to represent a real, specific immune response occurring in a fully intact human body? Were the tests rigorously validated with proper controls, known positive and negative samples, and replication across diverse populations to demonstrate both sensitivity and specificity? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship established by comparing antibody presence with clinically confirmed infection and immune status—using clearly defined independent variables and replicated experimental designs?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 9—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

9. “The MMR vaccine effectively mimics that natural immune response.”

   What evidence exists that the MMR vaccine produces an immune response equivalent in quality and duration to that produced by the supposed natural infection? What lab-constructed comparison—such as measured antibody levels or cellular markers in vitro—was used to support the claim that the MMR vaccine mimics natural immunity? And how was it validated that these markers actually represent real, functional immunity in a fully intact human body? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship demonstrated by controlled vaccine studies (with identified independent variables, proper controls, and replication of results) that verifies this mimicry?
   
   Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 10—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

10. “Unvaccinated individuals are responsible for measles outbreaks.”
    
    Where is the evidence that individuals labeled as "unvaccinated" are both the ones getting sick and the ones spreading illness? How were these individuals diagnosed—through what tests, using what standards, and with what validation? What methods were used to confirm vaccination status—self-report, medical records, or assumptions? Were proper methods used to demonstrate clear chains of transmission from unvaccinated individuals to others? What data shows that vaccinated individuals were not also present in those outbreaks—or possibly the ones experiencing “breakthrough” infections? Were confounding variables—such as vaccine failure, waning immunity, misdiagnosis, environmental exposure, or socioeconomic status—fully accounted for? What real-world, independently verified population-level data proves causation, not just correlation, between vaccination status and outbreak presence? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship established while adhering to the scientific method: with clearly defined variables, isolated independent variables, control groups, replication, and transparency of raw data?

    
    Until you can show how this point was established, you cannot possibly move on to claim 11—unless you agree that the next claim is built upon an unproven assumption.

11. “The vaccinated have better overall health outcomes than the unvaccinated.”

    Given that you’re likely implying that vaccinated people have better health outcomes than unvaccinated, where are the long-term, controlled studies that compare overall health outcomes (beyond just supposed measles protection) between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups? What real-world health outcomes—such as decreased morbidity, fewer chronic conditions, or improved long-term vitality—have been directly and consistently observed in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated ones? Was a clear cause-and-effect relationship demonstrated by these studies (with a clearly identified independent variable, proper controls, and replicated results) that confirms superior health outcomes?
    
    So either you—or an expert you're referencing—should be able to provide direct, empirical validation for each of these claims. If not, then you acknowledge that the claim “measles is resurging because of unvaccinated people” is built on belief (which is totally fine—we all have beliefs). But don't mistake belief for empirical evidence or proof, and don’t expect me or anyone else to buy into your unproven beliefs. Until these claims are individually demonstrated, what you’re left with is an unproven assumption layered upon another unproven assumption, layered upon another unproven assumption... and so on.
    
    - Alec
    
    
    Please don’t pay to subscribe to my Substack!
    

    If you’d like to support my work, the best way to do that is by joining our community platform at TheWayFwrd.com. Not only does it support me and the mission, but more importantly — it supports you.
    

    It gives you access to a growing network of like-minded individuals focused on truth, wellness, freedom, and building new systems from the ground up. You’ll find real community, valuable resources, and a space to connect with people near you who are walking the same path.
    

    Support yourself, connect with local community, and help us co-create the way forward — together.