What this says is that no isolates were available at the time of the rRT-PCR assay study, which was almost certainly the very first thing tested. This report came out only a couple months after we cared about it at all.
The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA
That doesn't mean they didn't have it at a later time. It doesn't mean anything really, since while it would be nice for other tests, for the PCR test its completely irrelevant.
While this is a data point of consideration, by itself this is not good evidence of the virus not existing. There are numerous other pieces of evidence that support the conclusion that it does exist and does cause Covid-19.
Please note that me saying these things says nothing about how virulent SARS-cov-2 is. It says nothing about the efficacy of the PCR test. It says nothing about any other aspect of the Covid-19 fraud.
It is substantially easier to exaggerate the truth, than to fabricate the truth.
I've been thinking for awhile that the real pandemic was faulty tests (+ media/corrupt health bureaucrats).
Seems like given your premise, it's entirely possible that China gave the world initially incomplete (or just false) data that would assist in driving up the false-positive rate. I'm not familiar with assay studies, but given this assumption, could a PCR test be confirmed which just so happened to identify Influenza in addition to COVID (especially when run at higher cycles)? That is, they transcribed what China told them to look for, which just so happened to catch many things. Or is that not possible with how this stuff works?
What this says is that no isolates were available at the time of the rRT-PCR assay study, which was almost certainly the very first thing tested. This report came out only a couple months after we cared about it at all.
That doesn't mean they didn't have it at a later time. It doesn't mean anything really, since while it would be nice for other tests, for the PCR test its completely irrelevant.
While this is a data point of consideration, by itself this is not good evidence of the virus not existing. There are numerous other pieces of evidence that support the conclusion that it does exist and does cause Covid-19.
Please note that me saying these things says nothing about how virulent SARS-cov-2 is. It says nothing about the efficacy of the PCR test. It says nothing about any other aspect of the Covid-19 fraud.
It is substantially easier to exaggerate the truth, than to fabricate the truth.
I've been thinking for awhile that the real pandemic was faulty tests (+ media/corrupt health bureaucrats).
Seems like given your premise, it's entirely possible that China gave the world initially incomplete (or just false) data that would assist in driving up the false-positive rate. I'm not familiar with assay studies, but given this assumption, could a PCR test be confirmed which just so happened to identify Influenza in addition to COVID (especially when run at higher cycles)? That is, they transcribed what China told them to look for, which just so happened to catch many things. Or is that not possible with how this stuff works?