Partager à volonté 😉
👍44💯13❤9🤔1
Signed Riko

Channel
@LPV_Virus
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
7,156subscribers
-35 since we began measuring on 8 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001572713127 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @LPV_Virus |
| Created | Between 1 August 2021 and 28 February 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 11 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/LPV_Virus |
Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 51% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Sept 2026, 01:19 | 7,156 | -5 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 11:57 | 7,161 | -11 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 17:56 | 7,172 | -3 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 09:33 | 7,175 | -2 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 05:38 | 7,177 | -8 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 04:34 | 7,185 | +6 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 01:02 | 7,179 | +2 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 02:27 | 7,177 | -3 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 19:42 | 7,180 | -8 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 17:47 | 7,188 | -3 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 04:15 | 7,191 | first reading |
21 posts held, back to 18 August 2024 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 10 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 21 posts for this entry, the most recent from 17 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
1,379 reactions across 21 posts, in 16 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 55.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 762 | 55.3% | |
| ❤ | 315 | 22.8% | |
| 👏 | 155 | 11.2% | |
| 💯 | 61 | 4.42% | |
| 🙏 | 44 | 3.19% | |
| 😁 | 17 | 1.23% | |
| 🔥 | 12 | 0.87% | |
| 🤬 | 4 | 0.29% | |
| 🥰 | 2 | 0.145% | |
| 👌 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 👎 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 💩 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 😴 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 🤣 | 1 | 0.073% | |
| 🤷♂ | 1 | 0.073% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 21 of the 21 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 1,379 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 18 August 2024 to 17 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Partager à volonté 😉
👍44💯13❤9🤔1
Signed Riko
.../... 💰 2. Les recherches à “gain de fonction” Des financements publics américains ont bien été dirigés vers des recherches présentées comme portant sur des coronavirus et leurs prétendues fonctions. Mais le financement d’un programme ne démontre pas que les entités étudiées existent réellement telles qu’elles sont décrites, ni qu’un véritable « gain de fonction » viral a été obtenu. Tout le modèle repose sur l’aff…
👍39❤17💩1
Signed Riko
À la suite des questions soulevées sur le canal Telegram Le Facteur – Canal 🇨🇦 (*), probablement québécois, je tenais à apporter une réponse aussi franche et claire que possible(**). Mon objectif est d’aider le plus grand nombre à remettre en question les fondements de la virologie, le prétendu modèle de la contagion et l’imposture construite autour de Covid-19. N’hésitez pas à aller lire et commenter la publicatio…
👍31❤5👏1
Signed Riko
Le piège du “gain de fonction” Quand la critique des “pandémies” reste enfermée dans la virologie Examen critique du discours de Corinne Lalo (6 pages, A5)
👏16👍5❤2😴1🙏1
Signed Riko
🚨 Le piège du gain de fonction Réaction suite à l'intervention de Corinne Lalo ce matin même sur Tocsin (42 min avec la participation de Senta Depuydt) Corinne Lalo dénonce beaucoup de choses graves, mais elle s’arrête au mauvais étage. Elle attaque les responsables politiques, les agences sanitaires, les laboratoires et les réseaux d’influence, mais elle conserve l’idée centrale qui a rendu toute l’opération possi…
👍32👏7💯7❤3🤷♂1
Signed Riko
De la fiction virale à l'arnaque vaccinale : Interview de Jérémie Mercier Le Zapping au Scalpel & Jérémie Mercier (21 mai 2026, Français, 21 minutes, YouTube) Hantavirus, Ebola, Covid... Les virus, armes invisibles de Big Pharma 🚨👉🏼...et de ceux, en général, qui exploitent les populations👈🏼🚨 Dans cette entrevue-zapping sans concession, Jérémie Mercier révèle que la virologie n’est qu’une pseudoscience conçue pour t…
👍42🙏4❤2💯2👎1
Signed Riko
Hantavirus vs Covid-19 : Le protocole secret des crises sanitaires ? Pierre Chaillot (17 mai 2026, Français, 11 minutes, YouTube). COVID, HANTAVIRUS, le scénario était écrit ? 🚨🚨👉🏼OUI👈🏼🚨🚨 🔸Et si le scénario des crises sanitaires était écrit à l’avance ? En comparant l’épidémie d’Hantavirus en Argentine (2018) et le début du Covid-19 (2020), on découvre une répétition presque parfaite : mêmes mises en scène, mêmes o…
👏30👍14❤5
Signed Riko
DNC : L'enquête de Marguerite Ou comment une vache à nodules devient, un peu vite, une affaire de "virus" Si le PDF vous plait, n'hésitez pas à le partager aussi largement que possible 👍🏼 (surtout auprès des éleveurs et des acteurs du monde agricole) Si vous avez des remarques constructives, elles sont les bienvenues 😉
👍21❤11🙏9
Signed Riko
Coïncidence 😁 Je travaillais sur ce document lorsque Pierre Chaillot a programmé sa vidéo sur la DNC. 🔹Ce document s’adresse d’abord aux éleveurs et à tous ceux qui veulent comprendre ce qui se joue autour de la DNC. Au lieu d’accepter trop vite le récit officiel — pseudo virus, tests, restrictions, vaccination, abattages — il propose de reprendre l’enquête à la base : animaux, bâtiments, eau, fourrage, insectes, pr…
👏32❤5🙏1
Signed Riko
Dermatose Nodulaire Contagieuse : Pourquoi l'État abat-il des troupeaux sains ? Pierre Chaillot (9 mai 2026, Français, 16 minutes, YouTube). DNC, vraie épidémie ou 🚨🚨👉🏼 SCANDALE D'ETAT 👈🏼🚨🚨 ? 🔸Depuis l'été 2025, la France est en alerte face à la Dermatose Nodulaire Contagieuse (DNC). Mais et si la menace n'était pas celle que l'on nous présente ? Dans cette vidéo, Pierre Chaillot analyse les zones d'ombre de cette …
❤25👍22
Signed Riko
Virologie résumée en 5 secondes ! "What they have in reality in their test tubes, right, …They… er… They have nothing." "Ce qu'ils ont en réalité dans leurs éprouvettes, n'est-ce pas... ils.. euh... ils n'ont rien." 🔻
😁16❤6👏5💯1
Signed Riko
Photo, posted without a caption
👍29👏13❤4
Signed Riko
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @LPV_Virus. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
@LPV_Virus named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“La Perfection du Vivant - Virus 🙃” (@LPV_Virus), 7,156 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/LPV_Virus.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.