The CDC has an 80 page guide1 for using their RT-PCR test to detect SARS Cov2 virus, known as Covid-19. One would expect that the CDC would have an isolated copy of the virus in order to determine effectiveness of the PCR test and know whether or not a person is infected with Covid-19. That’s why it’s surprising that buried in the document (on page 42 of the revised December 2020 version) the CDC admits that it has no isolated sample of the Covid-19 virus.
“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 (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen.”
Another surprise is how the original PCR test to detect Covid-19, developed by German scientist Dr. Christian Drosten and colleagues at the Berlin Virology Institute and accepted by the WHO, did not have an isolated Covid-19 virus available either.2 Here’s what they did (emphasis added):
“In the present case of 2019-nCoV, virus isolates or samples from infected patients have so far not become available to the international public health community. We report here on the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation, designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”3
In November 2020, a group of scientists sent a letter to the Eurosurveillance Editorial Board asking them to retract the Drosten paper because it is “severely flawed with respect to its biomolecular and methodological design”.4 It has not been retracted.
Prof. Saeed Qureshi explains how the Covid-19 pandemic was able to happen:
“Perhaps the absurdity of the whole situation is that no one isolated and identified the virus (the poked-material), but a test was developed to measure the unknown virus. Only physicians or virologists can pull such a trick. In reality, developing tests fall under analytical chemistry science; however, the job was never assigned to it but kept within the medicine area.
“If chemistry scientists and laboratories had assigned the task of isolating the virus and developing its test, the pandemic would never have existed from day one. Scientifically, it is impossible to develop and validate a test without having the reference material in hand – isolated virus, i.e., no virus specimen, no valid test, no pandemic. Therefore, the declaration of the virus and its disease certainly reflect ignorance about the science of medicines.”5
Considering the above, it is no wonder that scientists and others question the Covid narrative.
The following paper, given to Rodef Shalom 613 by the author, who holds a degree in molecular biology, provide further insight into the situation.
The COVID Story
Oct – Dec 2020 (Revised with additions Jan 2021)
- According to the mainstream narrative, on the 31st of December, 2019, the Chinese government announced that starting around December, many people in China got ill with a mysterious pneumonia. In early January 2020, the Chinese government announced that this mysterious illness is caused by a coronavirus, and that its genome has been sequenced (in an incredibly short amount of time6), and then shared this genetic sequence with the rest of the world. Question: If anyone from the “West” would be asked if news from China is trustworthy, everyone would say “no”, but suddenly in the case of this flu, everyone believed the story of the Chinese government without question. Then subsequently when this illness was found in other parts of the world, no one bothered looking for other causes for this illness, since they believed that the Chinese government had already explained and proven this illness’s cause7. Therefore, no other country other than China has published any research papers trying to prove the existence of this virus. Why are we trusting China?
But a much more powerful question can be asked. The media reports tell us that:
- There are many people who have been diagnosed with the COVID illness, but have no virus8
- That over half of the people with this illness who had the virus, but now no longer have the virus, nonetheless continue to have the illness (they display symptoms, some steady, some fluctuating), and in many cases acquire new symptoms9
These three abovementioned points clearly show that there is absolutely no correlation at all between this virus and this illness. Since someone can have this illness without the presence of the virus10 and the virus can be present without the person having the illness, that means that there is no correlation between this virus and this illness11, and the virus can be present without the person having the illness, that means that there is no correlation between this virus and this illness12, and if there is no correlation between the virus and the illness, then for sure there is no causation between the virus and the illness (meaning that this virus is not the cause of this illness).
Read more here.
|↑1||”CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel”, https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download, p. 2|
|↑2||”I’M A Clinical Lab Scientist, COVID-19 Is Fake, Wake Up America!”. Rights And Freedoms, 2021, https://rightsfreedoms.wordpress.com/2021/02/15/im-a-clinical-lab-scientist-covid-19-is-fake-wake-up-america/. See section “False Positives” and the Identification of the Virus.|
|↑3||Drosten, Christian, et al. “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR”. Eurosurveillance, vol 25, no. 3, 2020. European Centre For Disease Control And Prevention (ECDC), doi:10.2807/1560-7917.es.2020.25.3.2000045, https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045#html_fulltext|
|↑4||”Retraction Request Letter To Eurosurveillance Editorial Board – CORMAN-DROSTEN REVIEW REPORT”. Cormandrostenreview.Com, 2020, https://cormandrostenreview.com/retraction-request-letter-to-eurosurveillance-editorial-board/|
|↑5||Qureshi, Saeed, A., Ph.D., “The science of medicines is not science at all –|
virus monitoring and vaccine developments confirmed it”, Drug-Dissolution-Testing.Com, 2021, http://www.drug-dissolution-testing.com/blog/files/science-of-medicines.pdf
|↑6||“Chinese researchers sequenced the new virus in days & swiftly shared their results internationally.” “Best we be prepared”, New Scientist editorial, Feb 1 2020.|
|↑7||Holshue, M. L., et al. First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States. N Engl J Med 382, 929-936 (2020)|
|↑8|| – Dr. Alain Chaoui, head of Congenial Healthcare, a US practice with 50,000 patients across five locations said, “A lot of my patients who have symptoms, who I clinically think have COVID-19, are testing negative.” “Doctors raise concern about ‘false negative’ results. Some health experts have suggested the rate of false-negative tests could be up to 30 percent.” (Boston Globe 02/04/2020 How accurate are coronavirus tests?); “I Had COVID-19 But Tested Negative 5 Times. Here’s What You Should Know About Testing.” (Huffington Post 08/25/2020); “Wilkes is one of the many across the world who believe they have gotten sick with the coronavirus, but tested negative, despite symptoms and progression that point to the contrary. A Redwood City resident among the passengers of the quarantined Diamond Princess cruise ship took seven coronavirus tests over a two-week period with results fluctuating between positive, negative and inconclusive. Dr. Joseph Fair, a virologist and epidemiologist, tested negative for COVID-19 four different times despite being hospitalized in New Orleans.” (sfchronical.com; en-us/health/medical/why-some-people-get-coronavirus-symptoms-but-still-test- negative/ar-BB15z49e)
– David Crowe (a researcher with a degree in biology and mathematics, and host of The Infectious Myth podcast) described a case in the literature of a woman who had been in contact with a suspect case of COVID-19 (in Wuhan) they believed was the index case. “She was important to the supposed chain of infection, so because of this they tested her 18 times, different parts of the body, like nose, throat —different PCR tests. 18 different tests. And she tested negative every time. And then they— because of her epidemiological connection with the other cases, they said: “We consider her infected. So, they had 18 negative tests and they said she was infected.” uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus, the paper referred to is: Chan, J. F-W. et al., A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person to person transmission: a study of a family cluster. Lancet 20 30154-9 (2020)[ref].
|↑9||Long Covid symptoms can include breathlessness, pain, fatigue, brain fog, blood clots, organ damage & much more. 88% of people hospitalized with covid-19 in an Italian study still had symptoms after two months (JAMA, doi.org/gg4hvp); 55% of people in a French study reported fatigue 110 days after being hospitalized with covid-19, also a third reported memory loss (Journal of Infection, doi.org/ghdhzf); From a SARS (2003) long term study of people hospitalized, 40% said they still experienced chronic fatigue almost four years after hospital discharge (JAMA Internal Medicine, doi.org/c7xcvp). These sources plus more are brought down in “Long covid: Symptoms that won’t stop.” New Scientist, Oct 31 2020.|
|↑10||See second half of footnote 3. In David Crowe’s interview, he continued, “Now why was she important? Well, there was only one other person who could have theoretically transmitted the virus if the original patient, outside the family was who they thought it was. But secondly, she had the same exact symptoms as everybody else. Right? So, four people in her family came down with fever and cough and headaches, fatigue and all these kinds of big symptoms. So, if she could get those symptoms without the virus, then you, you’ve got to say, well, why couldn’t everybody else’s symptoms be explained by whatever she had? I mean, maybe they, they ate some bad seafood or something and so they all got sick, but it had nothing to do with the coronavirus. But because three out of the four, tested positive, then they were, they were all considered infected”|
|↑11||Even though theoretically a weak correlation could still be present given these abovementioned facts (if “ill with no virus” and “asymptomatic but infected” were infrequent), if these were rare exceptions. But, according to many reports, most cases where a person has the virus, he has no illness, and in many cases when a person has the illness he doesn’t have the virus. Studies show that there is a high percentage of cases which are asymptomatic (without symptoms/without this illness). E.g. 86% of cases in a study analyzing 375 Chinese cities between Jan 10-23, 2020 were found to be asymptomatic or such mild symptoms that they were undocumented (science,doi.org-ggn6c2). 60% of people who tested positive in Vo, Italy were found to have no symptoms ( “Infectious Without Symptoms” New Scientist, March 28 2020,), also see footnote 3.|
|↑12||Even though theoretically a weak correlation could still be present given these abovementioned facts (if “ill with no virus” and “asymptomatic but infected” were infrequent), if these were rare exceptions. But, according to many reports, most cases where a person has the virus, he has no illness, and in many cases when a person has the illness he doesn’t have the virus. Studies show that there is a high percentage of cases which are asymptomatic (without symptoms/without this illness). E.g. 86% of cases in a study analyzing 375 Chinese cities between Jan 10-23, 2020 were found to be asymptomatic or such mild symptoms that they were undocumented (science,doi.org-ggn6c2). 60% of people who tested positive in Vo, Italy were found to have no symptoms ( “Infectious Without Symptoms” New Scientist, March 28 2020,), also see footnote 3.|