I just did a ddg search for "furin cleavage site" and I got this as first result talking about the mechanics of the 'rona. It mentions sequencing. It's really just like so many other papers I have read on the 'rona
Just start reading research papers and then you will see how the 'rona works.
When you have a good idea how the spike protein works and how it interacts with ACE2 receptors to produce high blood pressure etc, then you can decide whether it exists or not.
In short, there's plenty of evidence if you look for it.
Start searching for technical details and you will find stuff.
The fact that you would cite a junk article like that, and not even understand WHY it is a junk article, says a lot.
we generated a SARS-CoV-2 mutant lacking the furin cleavage site
And you have NO IDEA how they did this. They did NOT start with the actual virus. How do I know this? Because ...
replicated with faster kinetics and improved fitness in Vero E6 cells
They did what they ALWAYS DO. They used MONKEY KIDNEY CELLS, and NOT a "virus" itself.
You don't know HOW these fake virologists do their fake "lab experiments," and so you are FOOLED by their fancy language.
They take monkey kidney cells that they CLAIM have the virus in it, then they POISON the monkey kidney cells, then they CLAIM it was the virus that killed the cells.
It is a SCAM. And you fall for it because you REFUSE to do the research necessary to understand what they are REALLY saying and doing.
Loss of the furin site also reduces susceptibility to neutralization in vitro .
That means in a test tube, not in a person or animal.
You also cited ONLY a portion of the actual paper. That means you did not READ the actual paper, which is where you will find HOW they claim they did what they claim they did.
You are very lazy. You not only do not understand what you are reading, but you refuse to learn how to read these papers so you can understand what you are reading.
Good luck to you, but I have no interest in discussing this any further because you are not being intellectually honest.
So ... you believe that my unicorn exists?
Interesting that you would believe something with NO evidence. It's quite a shame, too.
Someone says that to me, and I can point them to tons of evidence.
YOU, on the other hand, offer ZERO EVIDENCE to support your position.
Big difference.
AGAIN ... you are not understanding the difference between ISOLATE and SEQUENCE.
You need to educate yourself on this subject before you continue embarrassing yourself.
Look up Tom Cowan and Andrew Kaufman interviews and debates. They offer some of the easiest-to-digest explanations of this issue.
This is NOT merely my opinion.
This is PROVEN.
YOU are just unaware.
So ... wake up, dude.
Or continue to be bamboozled like the sheep.
I just did a ddg search for "furin cleavage site" and I got this as first result talking about the mechanics of the 'rona. It mentions sequencing. It's really just like so many other papers I have read on the 'rona
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32869021/
Just start reading research papers and then you will see how the 'rona works.
When you have a good idea how the spike protein works and how it interacts with ACE2 receptors to produce high blood pressure etc, then you can decide whether it exists or not.
In short, there's plenty of evidence if you look for it.
Start searching for technical details and you will find stuff.
The fact that you would cite a junk article like that, and not even understand WHY it is a junk article, says a lot.
And you have NO IDEA how they did this. They did NOT start with the actual virus. How do I know this? Because ...
They did what they ALWAYS DO. They used MONKEY KIDNEY CELLS, and NOT a "virus" itself.
You don't know HOW these fake virologists do their fake "lab experiments," and so you are FOOLED by their fancy language.
They take monkey kidney cells that they CLAIM have the virus in it, then they POISON the monkey kidney cells, then they CLAIM it was the virus that killed the cells.
It is a SCAM. And you fall for it because you REFUSE to do the research necessary to understand what they are REALLY saying and doing.
That means in a test tube, not in a person or animal.
You also cited ONLY a portion of the actual paper. That means you did not READ the actual paper, which is where you will find HOW they claim they did what they claim they did.
You are very lazy. You not only do not understand what you are reading, but you refuse to learn how to read these papers so you can understand what you are reading.
Good luck to you, but I have no interest in discussing this any further because you are not being intellectually honest.
It's just a typical paper, the sort of thing I read to understand what's happening.
I'm not going to discuss it anymore either fren, let's just hope it's over soon.