I know it's a ton of work but it is extremely important for the public to understand this! If you could jam pack the information in under 10 minutes and include sources on isolating HIV (or Covid if that's a thing) in your video description that would be even better!
Give people the light of the logical pathway, this is of the highest importance! I'm really interested in what you have to say @ObjectiveReality
Covid I'm skeptical about. My lab requested inactivated covid for me to validate my assay on and we ate silence from them. We never had trouble getting innactivated Rabies particles from them for another thing we were working on.
Not saying it isn't real, but I can't back that claim the way I can with other viruses or viruses in general. It may just be they are complicit in not wanting a treatment (if they did, HCQ would have been front and center from the beginning).
I'll think about it. It really hurts to see mindless bias masquearding as critical thought here. People are supposed to be here because they are BETTER than the left, not just the same retards but with a different dogma they blindly follow.
Covid I'm skeptical about. My lab requested inactivated covid for me to validate my assay on and we ate silence from them. We never had trouble getting innactivated Rabies particles from them for another thing we were working on.
That's good to know. Might I ask if you know what machines do you use for validating the assay and what corporation are they from? I have a strong suspicion against Illumina though I don't have much to go off on.
I'll think about it. It really hurts to see mindless bias masquearding as critical thought here. People are supposed to be here because they are BETTER than the left, not just the same retards but with a different dogma they blindly follow.
I agree, I do not like the mystical conspiracies you'll sometimes see here either.
I may be wrong on some things and I want to know them so I can learn and progress towards truth.
I am hesitant to detail the assay I would be using the particles as validation for as it would likely be enough to out me and my lab and living where I live has instilled in me an odd mix of caution for precisely when and where and how I stick my neck out.
In general terms, drug discovery requires a degree of throughput that can't be accomplished by doing things the 'best' way. One can't for example, infect tens of thousands of monkeys with SIV to test individual drugs against - ethically you've gone from a grey area to something utterly reprehensible. Doing so would also take a gargantuan amount of time and cost astronomical amounts.
It's better to do things in cell culture. Better throughput, even though as a collection of cells rather than a living breathing immune system or integrated organs it might not be quite as representative. Do the results in cell culture transfer to animal? Often not.
But even cell culture is low throughput, so in reality the only way to have a shot is to design assays which approximate the functions of relevance in the cells that are representative of the larger organism to test agaisnt the mechanism of action you're trying to develop against - for example, merely replicating the receptor binding that is prelude to entry, or the binding regions of a capsif they rely on for assembly.
But how do you know your assay which so removed from the integrated whole is actually representative? Well, you validate it. And for many such examples, trialing against actual legitimate viral particles is enough. If the virion binds the same as your stand in, and shows similar reactivity to some of your early drug candidates, you can have enough confidence (never needs to be 100%) that's it's then worth the time to roll the dice running that assy hundreds of times on tens of thousands of unique compounds to find one or two worth doing more intensie looks on...
...In cell culture. And if that works, in Animal trials. So as you could imagine, I am happy to receive other irradiation particles from the CDC, and a little perterbed when I don't know if my generic SARS1 coronavirus assay is sufficiently representative to SARS2 to be worth the time.
Dude I'm totally good with it, I'm at a university and I have some (albeit very very small) experience with what you're doing.
I'm not as interested in the assay but the equipment (or really the manufacturer) that measures everything.
(Correct me if I'm wrong) an assay is a substance that you get that is analyzed for
having our Covid-19 virus.
Throughput is the rate of production or the rate at which something is processed, so a cell culture gives little data to process but if you design the cell culture (collection of cells) around the cells the Covid-19 virus is supposed to drastically infect and alter, and if the assay (which is supposed to have the virus) binds to the cells the same way Covid-19 virus does.
If the virus (idk difference between virus and viron) binds the same way, you revalidate it with other cells and once you've sufficiently done that, you have the confidence that this assay is worth the time to run hundreds of times on tens of thousands of samples/compounds to see maybe one or 2 compounds that react differently (maybe for vaccine or interesting study).
So as you could imagine, I am happy to receive other irradiation particles from the CDC
What are irradiation particles?
Also it looks like you cut off towards the end, please tell me more when you get the chance! So your generic SARS1 coronavirus didn't represent SARS2? That's really weird, they should be practically the same thing with a better binding mechanism for SARS2
Please do this!
I know it's a ton of work but it is extremely important for the public to understand this! If you could jam pack the information in under 10 minutes and include sources on isolating HIV (or Covid if that's a thing) in your video description that would be even better!
Give people the light of the logical pathway, this is of the highest importance! I'm really interested in what you have to say @ObjectiveReality
Covid I'm skeptical about. My lab requested inactivated covid for me to validate my assay on and we ate silence from them. We never had trouble getting innactivated Rabies particles from them for another thing we were working on.
Not saying it isn't real, but I can't back that claim the way I can with other viruses or viruses in general. It may just be they are complicit in not wanting a treatment (if they did, HCQ would have been front and center from the beginning).
I'll think about it. It really hurts to see mindless bias masquearding as critical thought here. People are supposed to be here because they are BETTER than the left, not just the same retards but with a different dogma they blindly follow.
That's good to know. Might I ask if you know what machines do you use for validating the assay and what corporation are they from? I have a strong suspicion against Illumina though I don't have much to go off on.
I agree, I do not like the mystical conspiracies you'll sometimes see here either.
I may be wrong on some things and I want to know them so I can learn and progress towards truth.
I am hesitant to detail the assay I would be using the particles as validation for as it would likely be enough to out me and my lab and living where I live has instilled in me an odd mix of caution for precisely when and where and how I stick my neck out.
In general terms, drug discovery requires a degree of throughput that can't be accomplished by doing things the 'best' way. One can't for example, infect tens of thousands of monkeys with SIV to test individual drugs against - ethically you've gone from a grey area to something utterly reprehensible. Doing so would also take a gargantuan amount of time and cost astronomical amounts.
It's better to do things in cell culture. Better throughput, even though as a collection of cells rather than a living breathing immune system or integrated organs it might not be quite as representative. Do the results in cell culture transfer to animal? Often not.
But even cell culture is low throughput, so in reality the only way to have a shot is to design assays which approximate the functions of relevance in the cells that are representative of the larger organism to test agaisnt the mechanism of action you're trying to develop against - for example, merely replicating the receptor binding that is prelude to entry, or the binding regions of a capsif they rely on for assembly.
But how do you know your assay which so removed from the integrated whole is actually representative? Well, you validate it. And for many such examples, trialing against actual legitimate viral particles is enough. If the virion binds the same as your stand in, and shows similar reactivity to some of your early drug candidates, you can have enough confidence (never needs to be 100%) that's it's then worth the time to roll the dice running that assy hundreds of times on tens of thousands of unique compounds to find one or two worth doing more intensie looks on...
...In cell culture. And if that works, in Animal trials. So as you could imagine, I am happy to receive other irradiation particles from the CDC, and a little perterbed when I don't know if my generic SARS1 coronavirus assay is sufficiently representative to SARS2 to be worth the time.
I swear that wasn't supposed to be that long.
Dude I'm totally good with it, I'm at a university and I have some (albeit very very small) experience with what you're doing.
I'm not as interested in the assay but the equipment (or really the manufacturer) that measures everything.
(Correct me if I'm wrong) an assay is a substance that you get that is analyzed for having our Covid-19 virus.
Throughput is the rate of production or the rate at which something is processed, so a cell culture gives little data to process but if you design the cell culture (collection of cells) around the cells the Covid-19 virus is supposed to drastically infect and alter, and if the assay (which is supposed to have the virus) binds to the cells the same way Covid-19 virus does.
If the virus (idk difference between virus and viron) binds the same way, you revalidate it with other cells and once you've sufficiently done that, you have the confidence that this assay is worth the time to run hundreds of times on tens of thousands of samples/compounds to see maybe one or 2 compounds that react differently (maybe for vaccine or interesting study).
What are irradiation particles?
Also it looks like you cut off towards the end, please tell me more when you get the chance! So your generic SARS1 coronavirus didn't represent SARS2? That's really weird, they should be practically the same thing with a better binding mechanism for SARS2