> What difference does it make on whether "virus" is real or not?

I'm bringing up the lack of existance of viruses even fewer times than the mainstream media and alternative media bring up the presense of it.
The only reason why I bring it up more than necessary is because I'm rather tired of it all, we (we as in the entire civilization of the earth) used to start and stop scamdemics, but for whatever reason now we seemingly only know how to start them and not stop them.

It's just that every time I say "the fake virus that doesn't exist", you come up with a counter agrument, which is fine, but every single time?
So please, don't tell me that I'm the one who starts this war!
I'd prefer to end that "war" (if you can even call it a war) if anything.
I don't mind if you believe it exists or not, worse is that there are people out there who are still outright afraid of it, which is what ultimately keeps this bullshit going.

> Semantics... The thing around LGBT is about calling "he/she/they" and the thing here is about naming "toxin/virus".

That's perhaps just some people, though I don't know of any of them.
I certainly know people in the flat earth vs round earth debate who get offended by words like "planet" or "globe", so I can see where you're coming from.
But in the yes-virus vs no-virus debate I've never seen any of that.
Or it's just me who missed it because I don't rely on 3rd party (mis)information from any side.
I used to, but I snapped out of it long ago.