CNBC:
“A total of 1,082,549 new coronavirus cases [in the US] were reported
Monday, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University, as the
highly infectious omicron variant continues to spread throughout the
country and beyond.”
“The
new daily tally brings the total number of cases confirmed in the U.S.
since the start of the pandemic to 56,189,547.” That’s 56 MILLION.
As
I reported yesterday, once you accept the existence of SARS-CoV-2,
you’re completely stuck with this outcome: EVERYONE WILL BECOME
INFECTED. There’s no way to stop it.
No treatment or intervention or restriction will stop it.
The
only thing that would stop the spread is the mass acquisition of
natural immunity. That’s it. There is no other overall solution.
In
an atmosphere of open discourse, with no fear of reprisal, any honest
medical statistician would tell you that, with 56 million cases in
nation of 330 million people, it’s inevitable that everyone will become
infected.
BUT
I also mentioned yesterday---and dozens of times over the past
year---that ‘infected’ and ‘a case of COVID’ only requires a positive
test.
Nothing more. Symptoms are unnecessary. You can be perfectly healthy. You tested positive? You’re a case.
You’re one of millions of people who are perfectly healthy AND are told they’re “infected” and they’re “cases.”
This,
of course, is absurd. A sensitive enough test for, say, flu viruses,
could prove half the country is composed of “flu cases.”
Actually,
it gets even worse, because the COVID test can be (and has been) rigged
to produce a Niagara of false-positives, since early 2020.
You’re perfectly healthy, you test positive, you’re told you’re “an infected case,” AND the test result was a false positive.
The
overwhelming majority of people who are called “infected” and “cases”
are perfectly healthy. They’ve merely tested positive. AND worse, the
test was rigged to turn out cascades of false-positive results.
But
a screaming headline about a million new cases in one day stirs up fear
and justifies whatever fascist responses government officials want to
impose. Which is the whole point of the exercise.
I’ve
been covering medical and public health issues since 1982, and I’ve
never seen anything that vaguely approaches the current level of
bullshit science.
Furthermore,
the current “explosion of new cases” is being blamed on the Omicron
variant. As I’ve detailed, the COVID test isn’t geared to detect that
specific strain. To confirm the presence of Omicron, special genetic
sequencing of a patient’s test sample would have to be done. Ordinary
labs aren’t set up to do that sequencing.
So
instead, from a relatively few sequencings, a predictive computer model
is built, and that model estimates how many Omicron cases there are.
With
this modeling, we’re now into the very worst of fake science. I’m
talking sophisticated nonsense that only professional grifters and con
artists can turn out.
I’ve saved the best for last. Here is one of my articles that explains why the virus---SARS-CoV-2---doesn’t exist.
Therefore,
the various variants don’t exist. Therefore, the test is “detecting”
something that doesn’t exist. Therefore, all the case numbers are
rubbish.
I’ve detailed, in the past, the reasons why people have been getting sick and dying. None of the reasons is SARS-CoV-2.
~~~
---Dr.
Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step
analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the
virus exists---
The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”
But what if the virus doesn’t exist?
People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.
“Isolation”
should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding
material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”
I
took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in
which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to
Dr. Andrew Kaufman, and he provided his analysis in detail.
I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, "Severe
Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus
Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 --
June 2020)".
First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.
The
researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number
of compounds. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the
virus” is in this soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus
from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not
occurring.
They
set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the
soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the
virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.
There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.
Finally,
the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that
they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”
Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:
STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”
KAUFMAN:
“Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source
of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from
clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation
means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a
virus when you add it to something else?”
STUDY:
“…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3
cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with
heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”
KAUFMAN:
“Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition
[to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic
material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from
viruses.”
STUDY:
“…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For
isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50
μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture
plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and
serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”
KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”
STUDY:
“…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10%
fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2×
antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of
2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”
KAUFMAN:
“Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that
cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have
proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”
KAUFMAN:
“Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture.
Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by
commercially available filters (GIBCO). Finally, bacteria may be easily
seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were
contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin
and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we
are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at
‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These
will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”
STUDY: “…We added [not isolated]
100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions
and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a
humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for
cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for
SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory
syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols...”
STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”
KAUFMAN:
“There was no negative control experiment described. Control
experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results.
Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics,
minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the
cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of
the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come
from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since
that would not contain a virus.”
STUDY:
“…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for
confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate
to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”
KAUFMAN:
“How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist?
What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the
origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture
containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows,
and monkeys?”
---end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis---
My
comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that
isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not
occurring.
Dr.
Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells
and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are
creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells
are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr.
Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death
that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that
“the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.
And
finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of
“the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is
present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists?
Readers
who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of
the “pandemic” during the past year) will ask: Then why are people
dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered
these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article
is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?
The answer is no.
~~~
(The link to this article posted on my blog is here -- with sources.)
(Follow me on Gab at @jonrappoport)
No comments:
Post a Comment