A hidden admission by the CDC that the China Virus was never isolated?
(media.greatawakening.win)
? B O O M ! ?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
It’s essentially the same thing. The “only’ way we ‘know’ this virus ‘exists’ is through these tests which were never calibrated to an actual virus sample.
It is not the same thing at all. The PCR test doesn't in any way care about isolating the virus. In fact, a viral isolate would be a hindrance to developing the PCR test, not a boon. The PCR test requires RNA (in the case of an RNA virus like SARS-cov-2). If it was a viral isolate you would have to then lyse the viral bodies, extract the RNA, then create the PCR test for it. Just starting with the RNA (artificially created or pre-extracted) is way easier.
There aren't any detection tests that need an isolate, though in truth there should be, and such a test would probably be pretty accurate. The details of such a test I will not elaborate here, but that would be a test we would have if we really wanted to be testing for the virus. The problems with such a test are that they take a bit of time, and require some infrastructure, though I'm sure it could be streamlined if the desire was there.
These PCR tests, or Ab tests are not the only way we know the virus exists. In truth, a properly done PCR test CAN tell if the virus exists to a reasonable degree, it would just have a lot of false positives/negative. By a lot, I don't mean by the current standards, I mean a few percent (5-10 ish). When you over cycle it though, like the current Covid PCR tests you are probably better off flipping a coin than taking the test, since it isn't a quantitative PRC, but just a test for a positive, and the more you cycle PCR, the more likely you will get a false positive.
Nevertheless, there have been countless labs that have published results of isolation of the virus, with good tests, and lots of electron microscopy pictures, and all the stuff people seem to want, but refuse to admit exists.
Every antibody (Ab) test that is also a positive and done for a non-vaccine recipient is also a fairly good case for proof of the virus. Are they 100%? No, but they are a very strong indication, and any denial of their indication would have to be backed by really good evidence to the contrary. Evidence which I have never seen, and I look daily.
They never calibrated the PCR test to the isolate though. That’s the whole problem. They went off a computer model of what the algorithm ’thinks’ the virus should be. In reality it could be anything
That's not a problem. If you assume the virus exists, there is nothing wrong with using the RNA to create the PCR test. These are completely separate issues. In the context of the CDC's statement, there is nothing really damning there.
Please note I am not suggesting the PCR test is good. It is literally the worst test (as it is set up by the protocol, dictated by the WHO) that they could possible do. It is designed to produce false positives.
The problem is one of conflating issues. In this statement by the CDC there is nothing wrong with not having the isolate to create a PCR test, viable or otherwise.
Is the PCR test looking for the data/dna that China published early on? If so, how do we know China provided the right data, and not just a mis-mash that would accidentally match quite a few things (especially when run at high cycles)?
Remember that the CCP had the most to gain from a pandemic, and has proven to lie at every step along the way.
Or did the International Community obtain the target data on their own? (Note that the W.H.O. should be considered an extension of the CCP). Or did they re-calibrate the test once the virus was isolated?
“... countless labs that have published results of isolation of the virus...”
Can you post those publications here for us to review?
Here is a google scholar search. You can do a similar search on any science publication website (pubmed, etc.).
Here are some specific examples of labs that have stated they have isolated it. This is a small sample of those available. Two are papers, two are statements. I only looked at one of the papers in detail. As a biologist, I am satisfied that it meets a standard of isolation of the virus within statistical significance. Is it the best possible proof ever? Nope, but it doesn't need to be. If it is to be disputed, it must be disputed in the minutia.
The scholar search above has numerous papers with similar stories. Some better, some worse. I haven't looked at them all because I have yet to see a single counter argument that is credible or seems to have sufficient understanding of experimental biology, or even the scientific process in general.
Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida
NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories
University of the Western Cape (UWC) and Stellenbosch University (SU) (South Africa)
McMaster’s Institute for Infectious Disease Research
Here are electron microscopy images of the virus.
India's first positive test
Cell culture viral isolate
Pictures at various stages of cell/viral body fusion
A close up
This again is a very small sampling of what's available.
There have been many tests on this virus and its effects. It is much more likely that it is real, than that thousands of scientists are all complicit in an elaborate scheme to make it all up.
I believe the scam was not in the existence of the virus, but in how virulent it was. That is a much easier scam to pull off. All you need to do is:
Six steps and I just created a pandemic.
OR
I convince every biology researcher in the world to make up a fake virus AND do those six steps.
Which one do you think is simpler?
Seems like you see the core of the issue. Also seems like there should a whole pile of loose ends for them to tie up :)
I appreciate that you took the time to write this. I learned.
Would love it if you would write your "OK, Here's the Deal" views in a post on here. I would read that with great interest. Assuming there is more than what you wrote here.
I salute you fren/pede/patriot/seeker.