What does the vaccine 💉 from? What do we put in a syringe 💉? Solution from the defunct Covid Virus 😷 ? The editors together with the scientists were poisoned in a long expedition in search of 🔦 Sars-CoV-2. Dealing with documents. Part 1.
24-ዘዐሀዩ ጠልፘልጓፗበይ 📓 'ናልናዘዓሀልዩ'⏳ƬɼⅈᎴʋℓɛ ℵ 🔬Ꮥɑℽʂ 🎙
Torsten Engelbrecht, Dr. Stefano Skoro and Konstantin Demeter
In a request for a study that shows the complete insulation and cleanup of particles allegedly SARS-CoV-2, Michael Laue of one of the world's most important representatives of the COVID-19 "panic" and the German Robert Koch Institute (RKI). ), replied that:
I do not know any scientific article in which the isolated SARS-CoV-2 would be cleaned up.
About PCR
Although the entire world relies on RT-PCR (PCR) to "diagnose" Sars-Cov-2 infection, science has long known that PCRs are not suitable for this purpose.
The blockages and sanitary-epidemiological measures around the world are based on the number of cases and mortality rates generated by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests used to identify "positive" patients, with "positive" usually equating to "infected ", Which is fundamentally wrong and criminal.
But if you look closely at the facts, you can conclude that these PCR tests do not make sense as a diagnostic tool for identifying a suspected infection with a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.
UNREASONABLE Mantra "Testing, Testing, Testing ..."
At a media briefing on COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:
“We have a simple message for all countries: test, test, test”
Tedros Adhanom Gebreyesus
The message was spread by headlines around the world, for example by Reuters and the BBC.
Back on May 3, the moderator of Heute magazine, one of the most important news magazines on German television, conveyed to his audience the mantra of this dogma:
"Testing, testing, testing is the credo at the moment, and this is the only way to really understand how quickly the coronavirus is spreading."
This indicates that the belief in the validity of the PCR tests is so strong that it fits with a religion that has little to no controversy.
So, to begin with, it is very remarkable that Carey Mullis himself, the inventor of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology, said that PCR is not suitable for diagnosing an infection. Although his invention earned him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993.
Unfortunately, Mullis passed away last year at the age of 74, but there is no doubt that he was gone. he considered PCR unsuitable for detecting viral infection.
The reason is that the intended use of PCR was and remains an application as a production method to reproduce DNA sequences millions and billions of times, rather than as a diagnostic tool for detecting viruses.
PCR - well suited for establishing paternity, as well as for catching criminals, i.e. in forensics.
How the declaration of viral pandemics based on PCR tests can end in disaster, Gina Kolata described in her 2007 New York Times article "Belief in Rapid Testing Leads to an Epidemic That Didn't Happen"
LACK OF A VALID GOLD STANDARD
What's more, it's worth mentioning that the PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients suspected of being infected with the so-called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them.
This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their accuracy, strictly speaking, their "sensitivity" and "specificity" - by comparison with the "gold standard", that is, the most accurate method available.
If we had a new blood test for [bacteria] Staphylococcus aureus, we already had culture media, this is our gold standard that we have used for decades, and we could compare this new test to that. But we don't have a gold standard for COVID-19.
But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for detecting SARS-CoV-2 and diagnosing COVID-19, or instead indicating that only a virus confirmed by isolation and purification (virus isolation) can be the solid gold standard. The WHO seriously states that the PCR assay itself "may be the best gold standard available." But this is not scientifically based.
NO EVIDENCE OF VIRAL ORIGIN OF RNA
Now the question is: what is required in the first place to isolate / prove the existence of a virus?
We need to know where the RNA comes from, for which the PCR tests are calibrated.
As textbooks (eg White / Fenner. Medical Virology, 1986) and also from leading virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier or Dominique Dwyer, particle cleaning - that is, separating an object from everything else that is not that virus object, like for example, Nobel laureate Marie Curie in 1898 purified 100 mg of radium chloride by extracting it from tons of uranium - a necessary precondition for proving the existence of a virus, thus proving that the RNA of the particle in question comes from a new virus.
The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA, but cannot determine where those particles are from. This must be determined in advance.
And since the PCR tests are calibrated against gene sequences (in this case, RNA sequences, since SARS-CoV-2 is considered an RNA virus), we need to know that these gene fragments are part of the target virus. And to know this, it is necessary to perform the correct isolation and purification of the alleged virus.
Therefore, we turned to scientific groups dealing with relevant articles that are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 to prove whether the electron microscopic images taken in their in vitro experiments (outside of a living organism) show purified viruses.
But not a single team could answer yes to this question.
We only received responses like "No, we did not receive an electron micrograph showing high purity."
We asked several study authors, "Do your electron micrographs show a purified virus?" They gave the following answers:
It's more than a remarkable statement, it admits the full is gone. This assignment is consistent with the statements presented in the coVID-19 COVID-19 tests, published by OffGuardian on June 27, 2020, and the tests are useless for diagnosing a viral infection.
Study 1: Leo L. M. Poon; Malik Peiris. "Emergence of a New Human Coronavirus Threatens Human Health" Nature Medicine, March 2020
Answer author: Malik Peiris
Date: May 12, 2020
Answer: “An image is a virus growing from an infected cell. It is not a purified virus. "
Study 2: Myung-Guk Han et al. “Identifying a coronavirus isolated from a COVID-19 patient in Korea,” Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives, February 2020.
Answer author: Myung-Guk Han
Date: May 6, 2020
Answer: "We could not assess the degree of purification because we do not purify and concentrate the virus grown in cells."
Study 3: Wang Bom Park et al. "Virus isolation from the first SARS-CoV-2 patient in Korea," Journal of Korean Medical Science, February 24, 2020.
Answer author: Van Bom Park
Date: 19 March 2020
Answer: "We have not received an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification."
Study 4: Na Zhu et al., New Coronavirus in Pneumonia Patients in China, 2019, New England Journal of Medicine, February 20, 2020.
Answer author: Wenjie Tang
Date: March 18, 2020
Answer: "[We are showing] an image of precipitated virus particles, not purified ones."
With regard to the documents mentioned, it is clear that what is shown in electron micrographs (EM) is the end result of the experiment, which means that there is no other result from which they could make EM.
That is, if the authors of these studies admit that their published EOs do not show purified particles, then they definitely do not contain purified particles that are claimed to be viral. (In this context, it should be noted that some researchers use the term “isolation” in their articles, but the procedures described therein do not represent a proper isolation (purification) process. Therefore, in this context, the term “isolation” is misused.
Thus, the authors of the four main works of early 2020, which claim that a new coronavirus was discovered, admit that they have no evidence that the genome of the virus originated from virus-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind.
In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not facts.
We also contacted Dr. Charles Kalischer, an experienced virologist.
In 2001, Science magazine published a "fervent plea ... to the younger generation" from several veteran virologists, including Kalischer, which stated that:
“Modern methods of detecting viruses, such as polymerase chain reaction, say little or nothing about how the virus multiplies, which animals carry it, or how it causes disease in humans. It's like trying to say that someone has bad breath by looking at their fingerprint. "
Dr. Charles Kalisher
And so we asked Dr. Kalischer if he knew of any article in which SARS-CoV-2 was isolated and finally really purified. His answer:
»I do not know of such a publication. I looked after each one. "
Dr. Charles Kalisher
In fact, this means that it cannot be concluded that the RNA gene sequences that scientists took from tissue samples prepared in the mentioned in vitro tests and for which the PCR tests are finally "calibrated" belong to a particular virus - in this case SARS-CoV- 2.
KOCH POSTULATES ARE NOT OBSERVED
In addition, there is no scientific evidence that these RNA sequences are the causative agent of what is called COVID-19.
To establish a causal relationship, one way or another, that is, in addition to isolating and purifying the virus, it would be absolutely necessary to conduct an experiment that would satisfy Koch's four postulates.
The microorganism / virus is constantly found in the body of sick people (or animals) and is absent in healthy people.
The microorganism / virus must be isolated from a sick person (or animal) and its strain must be grown in pure culture.
Just to allocate it every time, huge funds are needed.
When infected with a pure culture of the microorganism / virus, a healthy person (or animal) becomes ill.
Who did it: infecting people, but no one, it's impossible. And animals will not give a clear picture.
The microorganism / virus must be re-isolated from the experimentally infected person (or animal).
But there is no such experiment, and there never was, as Emory Devereaux and Rosemary Frey recently said.
One example is a study published in the journal Nature on May 7. This test, among other procedures to invalidate the study, did not meet any of the postulates.
For example, the alleged "infected" laboratory mice did not show any significant clinical symptoms clearly associated with pneumonia, which, according to the third postulate, should actually occur if a dangerous and potentially deadly virus were actually acting there. And the slight tousling and weight loss that were temporarily observed in animals are insignificant, not only because they could be caused by the very procedure of the injection with a substance unknown to the body, but also this fact. that the weight is back to normal.
It is significant that none of the leading German representatives of the official SARS-Cov-2 / COVID-19 theory:
- Robert Koch Institute (RKI), Alexander S. Kekule (University of Halle),
Hartmut Hengel and Ralf Bartenschlager (German Society for Virology),
the aforementioned Thomas Löscher, Ulrich Dirnagl (Charite Berlin) or Georg Bornkamm (virologist and professor emeritus of the Helmholtz Center Munich) could answer the following question that was sent to them:
If the particles claimed to belong to SARS-CoV-2 have not been purified, how do you want to be sure that the RNA gene sequences of these particles belong to a particular new virus?
In particular, if there are studies showing that substances such as antibiotics, which are added to tubes in in vitro experiments conducted to detect viruses, can "stress" the cell culture in such a way that new gene sequences are formed that have not previously been discovered - as an aspect that Nobel laureate Barbara McClintock already drew attention to in her Nobel Lecture back in 1983.
But we did not receive any responses until June 18, 2020, after months of no response. In the end, we only achieved this with the help of a Berlin lawyer, Vivian Fischer.
Charite admits that they did not use refined particles.
Virologists at the Charite Clinic declare:
"RNA was extracted from clinical samples using the MagNA Pure 96 system (Roche, Penzberg, Germany) and from cell culture supernatants using a viral RNA mini-kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany)."
This means that they simply assumed that the RNA was viral.
Incidentally, Corman et al. The document, published on January 23, 2020, did not even go through the proper peer review process and the procedures described in it were not followed by supervision - although it is only thanks to these two things that scientific work becomes truly scientific.
WRONG TEST RESULTS
It is also certain that we cannot know the rate of false-positive results of PCR tests without widespread testing of people who definitely do not have the virus confirmed by this test-independent method (which has a solid gold standard).
Therefore, it is not surprising that there are several works that illustrate irrational test results.
For example, as early as February, the health authority in Guangdong Province of China announced that people had fully recovered from the disease caused by COVID-19, started testing "negative" and then "positive" again.
A month later, an article published in the Journal of Medical Virology showed that 29 out of 610 patients at the Wuhan hospital had 3 to 6 test results that ranged between negative, positive, and questionable.
A third example is a study from Singapore in which tests were performed almost daily on 18 patients, and most of them went from “positive” to “negative” back to “positive” at least once and up to five times in one patient.
Even Wang Chen, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, admitted in February that PCR tests are "only 30-50 percent accurate," while Xing Hang Li of the Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory sent a letter to the coronavirus response team on March 22, 2020 WHO and Anthony S. Fauci, stating that:
It has been widely reported on social media that RT-qPCR [quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR] test kits used to detect SARSCoV-2 RNA in human samples give many false positives and are not sensitive enough to detect some real positive cases. "
In other words, even if we theoretically assume that these PCR tests can indeed detect a viral infection, the tests will be practically useless and will only cause unwarranted fear among "positive" people.
All of this is consistent with the fact that the CDC and the FDA, for example, admit in their files that so-called "SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests" are not suitable for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2.
In the "CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel" file dated March 30, 2020, for example, it says:
The detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of an infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent of clinical symptoms. "
As well as:
This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens. ”
And the FDA recognizes that:
“Positive results do not rule out bacterial infection or coinfection with other viruses. The detected agent may not be the specific cause of the disease. "
HIGH CQ VALUES MAKE TEST RESULTS EVEN MORE SENSE
Another important issue is that many PCR tests have a "quantitative cycle score" (Cq) value of more than 35 cycles, and some, including the "Drosten PCR test," even have a Cq of 45.
The Cq value indicates how many DNA replication cycles it takes to detect a real signal from biological samples.
"Cq values above 40 are suspicious due to the perceived low efficacy and generally should not be reported," the MIQE guidelines said.
MIQE stands for "Minimum Information for Publishing Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments", a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information required for evaluating real-time PCR publications, also called quantitative PCR or qPCR.
Inventor Carey Mullis himself agreed when he stated:
If you have to go through more than 40 cycles to amplify a gene with a single copy, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR. "
The MIQE guidelines were developed under the auspices of Stephen A. Bustin, professor of molecular medicine, world renowned expert on quantitative PCR and author of the AZ book on quantitative PCR, which has been called the "bible of quantitative PCR
Carrie Mullis on PCR
Immunologist on the futility of IFA
One crucial point in this analysis was that studies claiming to prove that SARS-CoV-2, a new and potentially deadly virus, did not have a sub-mail, all because studies claim the "isolation" of the so-called SARS-CoV-2 was virtually none conducted, that is, did not purify the particles that are said to be the new virus.
This is confirmed by the responses of the scientists of the relevant studies to our request, which are shown in the table in our article - among them there is the most important article in the world about the detection of SARS-CoV-2 (author of zhu et al.), published in the New England Journal of Medicine on February 20, 2020, and now even in RKI.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017?articleTools=true
By the way, there is another corroborating response from the authors of the Australian study.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.5694/mja2.50569
WANTED: SARS-COV-2 VIRUS
In addition, Christine Massey, a former Canadian biostatistician in cancer research, and her new colleague Michael Speth, as well as several people around the world (most of whom prefer to remain anonymous) have submitted information and inquiries to dozens of medical and scientific institutions and several political offices around the world.
They are looking for any records that describe the release of the SARS-COV-2 virus from any pure sample taken from a patient.
But all 46 responders failed to provide or quote any recordings describing the SARS-COV-2 isolation, and the German Ministry of Health completely ignored their Freedom of Information request.
German entrepreneur Samuel Eckert asked health authorities from various cities such as Munich, Dusseldorf and zurich to conduct a study proving the complete isolation and clean-up of the so-called SARS-CoV-2.
REWARDS FOR PROOF OF ISOLATION AND CAUSALITY
Samuel Eckert has even offered a total of €230,000 to Christian Drosten if he can present excerpts of the text from publications that scientifically prove the process of singling out SARS-CoV-2 and its genetic substance. The deadline (December 31, 2020) has expired, and Drosten did not respond to Eckert.
And another deadline passed on December 31 without providing the desired documentation. In this case, the German journalist Hans Tolzin offered a reward of 100,000 euros for a scientific publication, which describes a successful attempt to infect a specific SARS-CoV-2, reliably leading to respiratory diseases in the subjects.
https://corona-transition.org/die-coronavirus-wette-100-000-eur-fur-virusbeweis
VARIATION OF PARTICLE SIZES ALSO REDUCES THE HYPOTHESIS ABOUT THE VIRUS TO THE ABSURD.
Recently, we have been frightened by the proposed new strains of "SARS-CoV-2", but this statement is not based on reliable scientific data.
First, you can't determine the variant of the virus unless you've isolated the entire original virus.
Secondly, there are already tens of thousands of suspected new strains "detected" since last winter around the world.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/05/mutated-covid-virus.aspx
In fact, the GISAID virus data bank currently has more than 452,000 different genetic sequences that claim to be a SARS-Cov2 variant.
So, to say that suddenly there are "new strains" is nonsense even from an orthodox point of view, because from this point of view viruses are constantly mutating.
Thus, they can constantly claim to have found new strains, increasing fear.
This fear-mongering becomes even more absurd when you look at the electronic microphotographs printed in the relevant studies that show the particles that are supposed to represent SARS-CoV-2.
These images show that these particles vary greatly in size. In fact, it measures from 60 to 140 nanometers (nm). A virus that is so extreme in size and scatter in size cannot actually exist.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2001017
According to virology, each virus has a fairly stable structure. So, with SARS-Cov2 they take the freedom to determine, which once again confirms that everything related to this particular virus is even more random than usual. And this unlimited definition virus has led to the fact that the Wikipedia article on coronavirus has been changed and now reports that "each VIRION SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of about 50 to 200 nm".
It's like saying that John changes his height from 1 to 4 meters depending on the circumstances!
What is presented as SARS-Cov2 is actually particles of all kinds, which can also be seen from the images provided in the article. Below is a photo in which Na zhu, Ph.D presents as a photo of SARS-Cov2:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2001017
FreeRuler can measure the particles that the authors refer to SARS-CoV-2. The enlarged particles on the left photo are about 100 nm each (on a scale of 100 nm). But in the image on the right, all the small particles marked by arrows as SARS-CoV-2, measured on a scale of 1 micromole (1000 nm), have completely different sizes.
Black arrows actually point to bubbles. The measurement of some of these particles by the ruler shows that in the central bubble the highest particle in the center is almost 52 nm in size, which is below the range proposed by Na zhu, Ph.D. (60 to 140 nm), the particle size located directly to the right is slightly larger, about 57.5 nm, but still below the limit; while the largest particle (yellow arrow) is almost at the center of the lowest bubble, measuring approximately 73.7 nm, getting into wider boundaries, finally on the lower left bubble the largest particle has a size of 155.6 nm, that is much higher than the maximum limit defined by Na zhu, Ph.D (140 nm).
It is likely that the amendment made recently in Wikipedia was aimed at solving this problem.
There are other good reasons to believe that particles called SARS-CoV-2 may actually be harmless or even useful particles called "extracellular vesicles" (EV), which are extremely different sizes (20 to 10,000 nm), but which for the most part range from 20 to 200 nm and include so-called "exosoms".
Why are viruses so popular with modern medicine?
Everything we know about the supposedly lethal properties of influenza, HIV and many other viruses is, to put it mildly, a hoax. To create an invisible barrier to the socialization of the population is the true goal. Managing people through fear, the source of which is invisibility, which could be more ingenious.
The advantages of viral infections are obvious, in contrast to microbial and even more fungal.
To see a virus, a specialized laboratory is needed; in order to prove its connection with an infection, you need to carry out daunting work on its isolation, isolation and sequencing of this genetic material. There are from 1 to 5 such laboratories even in large countries, and most of them simply do not exist. To see bacteria, you need a simple laboratory of which in any city from tens to hundreds. Well, mushrooms can even be grown at home. Therefore, it is quite simple to check the existence of fungi and bacteria, and the presence of a virus is almost impossible, even modern science hardly carries out the isolation of any sections of genetic material from some, for example, lung fluid, in which there are from 10 thousand to a million data sequences.
Hence the conclusion: the virus is invisible, like God, you need to believe in it, i.e. in fact, take his word for those who supposedly can see it. But for faith in the virus to be powerful and strong, you need to create the illusion of its existence.
And fear comes to the rescue, which is also used to strengthen faith in God in some religious movements. The next step is ritual and symbolism, which is also present in various religious movements, in our case, these are masks, gloves, distance. Masks are of course the leaders of symbolism. they are on the face.
Next, NLP methods come into play, which are included in the general process through the Internet and the media and begin to use fear to create a herd effect of faith and obedience.
Now let's look at what is really known about viruses and methods of diagnosing "viral diseases", in the light of new discoveries about which modern medicine does not apply.
You need to understand that viruses can rule the world, and this was shown by 2020, through "dangerous" diseases you can do anything you want with humanity, we have observed all this in 2020 and are seeing it now.
It is an extremely powerful force on this planet, influencing everyday interactions from the handshake to national vaccination programs and global campaigns to eradicate disease.
In the current transhuman culture of vaccination, an unvaccinated child is "inferior", "dirty", perhaps even "subhuman" compared to those who consider vaccination to be the answer to what improves the human immune system, and this was recently confirmed by the ECHR that this is the case. the situation is, denying the right to a person to choose, declaring war on him.
In fact, that man is a child of nature and God is denied, and is promoted by the ideas of transhumanism, an improved, robotic, tolerant, insensitive, but systemic being.
At the same time, everything that is promoted by pharmaceutical medicine (Big Pharma) is in fact not backed up by research, but even if they are (scientific papers), they are not the ultimate truth, and as a rule, everything is lobbied by Big Pharma. If such false research cannot be promoted with money, then everything is done to suppress real scientific research that contradicts their lobby.
All this fundamental research into what exactly these "pathogens-viruses" are, how they infect us, still do not answer any critically asked question.
But what if much of what is assumed and considered about the danger of viruses and partly microbes is completely destroyed in the light of new discoveries in the field of microbiology and virology?
Groundbreaking research shows that a new frontier for personalized pharmaceutical medicine lies in the virome field. But viruses are not harbingers of disease, but on the contrary are an integral part of immune modulation and susceptibility to disease.
Viruses are not enemies, but our assistants and friends
"Influenza virus" does not even exist, in the sense of the monolithic vector of the disease, especially existing outside of us, all the viruses of conventional medicine are entities about which they do not even really talk about, where and how they "inhabit" and where they actually appear. Many people 80-90% think that viruses live in an external environment and fly through the air. By the way, this also showed 2020. In fact, it's just the genetic material of your own body.
More than 200 viruses cause influenza and flu-like diseases, the symptoms of which are: fever, headache, rag and body aches, cough and runny nose, loss of commencery and appetite, as well as sudden fainting and complicated by pneumonia and chemical pneumonia, as well as meningitis. And all these symptoms are now being used by globalists to keep the world at bay.
Real "viral" diagnosis
Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot distinguish diseases from one another. Both last for several days and rarely lead to death or serious illness.
Again it should be noted to diagnose a viral disease you need to do the incredible.
First, it is necessary to see through an electron microscope the affected areas in all the dead at autopsy to find the same sequence of nucleotides in the lesion.
The destruction of the natural morphology of cells caused by the preparation of a sample for images of a translucent electron microscope ensures this. Below are some of the steps (fixation and embedding) through which an already modified sample of cell culture passes to prepare for visualization:
Then, when you get viral culture, you need to observe the four postulates of Koh. This is the most complex manipulation in gene ingerium, worth a lot of money. The same cannot be said about the incomprehensible PCR tests, which are unknown primer because, for example, the covid virus has not been isolated, but PCR tests are used everywhere. Not only is their effectiveness 5-25%, in addition to this PCR test does not make a connection between the genetic material and what caused the disease.
Another difficulty and falsehood of obtaining a "virus" that refers to several of Koch's postulates (let's take more details because it is very important) is its isolation from other genetic material. First, the release of "viruses" uses a huge amount of chemicals, including a huge number of antibiotics, which destroy neighboring cells and change the genetic material they are seeking, then the smears themselves do not, as the rpavilo does not undergo purification procedures (for example, cat-shaped PCR tests take them almost on the street), except when the work is carried out in laboratories with a level 4 level of safety.
Therefore, at best, vaccines can only be effective against influenza A and B, which make up about 10% of all circulating viruses, but still not because the viruses themselves are like we have already figured out and there is a component of our immunity. Therefore, on this basis it is a struggle with their own immunity, including wearing masks, which actively reduce immunity.
Influenza virus, it's not what's written in Wikipedia or even in virology books
Here are the results, in fact the first study of 2015, Conservative and owner-specific features of the architecture of virion flu. This is the first study ever to penetrate the molecular depths of what the flu virus actually consists of. Surprisingly, given the long history of using and promoting the flu vaccine, the full description of what proteins it contains and where they come from has never been done before.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25226414/
Here's a quote from this study:
Viruses use virions to spread between hosts, and the composition of virions is therefore the main determinant of viral transmission and immunogenicity
It turns out without virion it is a chain of nucleotides safely because it can not transfer itself from the cell to the host cell.
The point is that the very things we attribute to so much lethality -- viral nucleic acids -- are not even alive and cannot infect the body without the involvement of all other components (proteins, lipids, extraviral nucleic acids) that are not technically viral in origin, participating in the process.
So, if non-viral components are necessary for the virus to cause harm, how can we continue to claim that we are dealing with a monolithic diseased "somewhere out there" that "infects" us as a passive victim? This is fundamentally pointless, given these findings. It also clearly undermines the incessant, fear-based rhetoric of those who take a pro-vaccine stance to force the masses to undergo a largely faith-based rite of vaccination.
The following quote from this study:
However, the virions of many viruses are complex and pleomorphic, making it difficult to analyze them in detail
This suggests that it is virtually impossible to create a vaccine for a specific virus of the same flu. And if even possible, due to the low pathogenicity of this "disease" its effectiveness is equal to practical zero ...
Read more:
Here we solve this problem by identifying and quantifying viral proteins using mass spectrometry, producing a complete and quantifiable model of hundreds of viral and host-coded proteins that make up the pleomorphic virions of the influenza virus. We show that the initial construction of influenza virions, which includes a significant amount of host proteins, as well as the viral protein NSI, is constructed with the presence of numerous functions that depend on the host. As a result, influenza virions produced by mammals and native birds have different protein compositions
This unequivocally proves that at least influenza viruses have an endogenous nature and are made up of host proteins, which it supposedly parasites.
There is also a significant problem with the production of influenza vaccines. Currently, the antigen of the human influenza vaccine is produced through insects and chicken eggs. This means that the viral particles extracted from these media will contain alien proteins and will therefore cause different and/or unpredictable immunological reactions in humans than would be expected from viral particles of human influenza. One possibility is that dozens of foreign proteins found in avian influenza could theoretically produce antigens in humans, which give an intersection to the structures of the body itself, thus leading to autoimmune diseases.
The apotheosis of viral nature research.
A quote from this study, which completely degrades the pathogenicity of viruses and their function in general:
Finally, we note that flu-virions have a common protein structure with exosomals, we assume that flu-virions are formed by rupture or death in the production of microvesicles (exos)
From this we can conclude that viruses are most likely exosomes, the more their similarity in the electron microscope is also striking, zzosoma is similar to what is shown in the picture which frightens humanity. And this ball with spikes is exactly virion, i.e. the pathogenic shell of the virus, which can cling to other cells. That's right, if we talk about exosoms.
And what is the function of exosom?
Exosoma is a mechanism of coordination and mutual assistance of the body's cells i.e. part of the immune system.
A prerequisite for the life of a multicellular organism is intercellular relationships, allowing to coordinate the biochemical processes that occur in its cells. Such communication allows you to control and direct the development and work of the body. For example, the development of the embryo requires the most complicated regulation: it is necessary that all cells correctly send signals about themselves and respond correctly to signals received from outside. Inadequate response to such a signal can lead to developmental abnormalities or diseases such as cancer. Signals are transmitted by hormones, cytokines and chemokines, growth factors, neurotransmitters, metabolites, ions, etc.
Cytokines are small peptide information molecules. Cytokines have a molecular mass not exceeding 30 kD.
Cytokin is released to the surface of Cell A and interacts with the receptor of the nearby B cell.
Their main producers are lymphocytes.
In addition to lymphocytes, they are secreted by macrophages, granulocytes, reticular fibroblasts, endothelial cells and other cell types.
The transmission of signals can be carried out both by secretion into extracellular space, and through slit contacts directly between cells. However, these modes of signal transmission involve either close contact between cells or too simple to share complex information at a distance.
As it turned out recently, there is another way of transmitting information between cells - tiny extracellular bubbles released by cells into the environment and spread by blood flow throughout the body. From the opening to the beginning of the 21st century, no one was particularly interested in them. Then it turned out that they have the ability to regulate the immune responses of the body. When nucleic acids were found in them in 2007, it became clear that this is an under-studied mechanism for coordinating and "mutual assistance" of the body's cells.
Due to the fact that these bubbles carry proteins, lipids and nucleic acids, they are able to affect the cell-recipient in a much more complex way than individual dissolved substances. The added convenience here is that the contents of the bubble are surrounded by a membrane that protects it from exposure to the environment. The receptors on the surface of the membrane deliver exactly to the address. Travel such "packages" the most economical "water transport" - with fluid circulating on the blood and lymphatic vessels. This ensures the exchange of information between remote cells in a wide variety of organs and parts of the body.
In addition to transferring information, extracellular vesicles can participate in "mutual assistance" mechanisms - to deliver ready-made proteins needed by the "recipient." For example, extracellular bubbles called exosomals transport the membrane protein synaptotagmin-4 from neurons to muscle cells.
Exosomals are microscopic extracellular vesicles (bubbles) with a diameter of 30 to 100 nanometers, released into the intercellular space by cells of various tissues and organs. The exosome cavity has a cytoplasmic origin and contains proteins, RNA and lipids, and the exosomal membrane is formed as a result of insertion inside the endosomal membrane.
The scheme of exos formation. The fate of the endosomal depends on the labeling of its membrane with certain lipids: if it is marked with lysobisphatidilylic acid (red dots), its contents will be destroyed, and if ceramides are pushed out of the cell. These processes are led by HTFase Rab, different members of this family of proteins perform different functions: Rab5 manages the formation of the endosomal, Rab7 organizes the degradation of the contents of the multivesicular endosomal in the lysosome, and Rab11, Rab27 and Rab35 are necessary for the secretion of exosom into extracellular space. It is shown that exosoms contain about 4000 different proteins, more than 1500 different microRNAs and mRNAs, as well as DNA
Exosomes are found in various tissue fluids in the body, such as serum, cerebrosal fluid, as well as urine, saliva and breast milk.
The functions of exos are varied: intercellular communication, participation in protein secretion, immune response relief and more. However, the role of exosom has not yet been fully explored.
Only in 2013, the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine (2013): Vesicular Transportation was awarded the Nobel Prize for Vesicular Transport.
It turns out a full view of exosomals we have only since 2013 officially, another study, says that viruses are exosoms, which means that they are our assistants and with them is not what you need to fight, but on the contrary they need to help developing and strengthening their immunity in the fresh air, healthy food and harmonious relationships in full-fledged families.
Conclusion: Prior to these studies, all ideas about the nature of viruses of their pathogenicity and the healing of vaccines were simply wrong.
It is necessary to revise all viral paradigms in light of new discoveries, which, strangely enough, are not advertised.
Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman - The secretion, isolation and pathogenicity of "viruses." Exosomos - Viruses.
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/12/7/763
Exosomonys are particles produced by our cells that contain nucleic acids, lipids and proteins that are involved in various activities useful to our body, such as transporting immune molecules and stem cells, as well as eliminating catabolic cell debris.
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/cookieAbsent
And these exosomos are suspiciously similar to viruses, especially in the pathogenic stage, hence the question of the substance of viruses as pathogenic objects
Exosomos are perhaps the largest proportion of extracellular vesicles and have been the subject of numerous studies for more than 50 years. Although few have heard of these useful particles, the scientific literature on them is huge, and only on PubMed, if you introduce "exosome", more than 14,000 studies are presented!
We can't go into detail about extracellular vesicles and exosoms here, but it's important to point out how indistinguishable they are from viruses, and several scientists believe that in fact what is defined as a dangerous virus is nothing more than a useful exosoma.
This is clearly seen under the electron microscope:
As you can see, the largest of the exosomes has the same size and structure as the purported SARS-CoV-2, and therefore it can be assumed that in a large sea of particles contained in the supernatate COVID-19 bronchoalveolar fluid of the patient, what is accepted for SARS-CoV-2 is just an exosomes.
WHY CLEANING IS VITAL TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF SARS-COV-2
So, logically, if we have a culture with countless extremely similar particles, particle cleaning should be the very first step to be able to really identify particles that are considered viruses (in addition to clearing particles, of course, then it is also necessary to unmistakably determine, for example, that particles can cause certain diseases in real, and not only in the laboratory).
Therefore, if there has been no "cleaning" of particles, how can we claim that the resulting RNA is a viral genome?
And how then can such RNA be widely used to diagnose infection with a new virus, whether it is PCR testing or otherwise? We have asked these two questions to numerous representatives of official kovid propaganda around the world, but no one could answer them.
Consequently, the fact that the sequences of RNA genes that scientists extracted from tissue samples produced in their in vitro studies, for which the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR "calibrated" tests - which supposedly belong to a new pathogenic virus called SARS-CoV-2 - were finally prepared based only on faith, not on facts.
Therefore, it cannot be concluded that the sequences of the RNA gene "taken" from tissue samples prepared in these studies, for which PCR tests are calibrated, belong to a particular virus, in this case SARS-CoV-2.
Instead of in all studies claiming that they isolated and even tested the virus, something completely different was done: the researchers took samples from the throat or lungs of patients, ultra-centrifugated them (at high speed) to separate larger/heavy particles from smaller and lighter molecules, and then simply took a supernatant, the top of the centrifuged material.
This is what they now call "isolate the virus," which is then used by PCR. But this supernatant contains all sorts of molecules, billions of different micro and nanoparticles, including the aforementioned extracellular vesicles (EV) and exosomoma, which are produced by our own body:
Nowadays it is almost impossible to separate extracellular vesicles (EV) and exosomals, and to say to viruses that these viruses (and especially as they are pathogenic) by using canonical methods of secreting vesicles, such as differential ultra-centrifugation, because they are often jointly deposited because of their same size
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7291340/pdf/viruses-12-00571.pdf
So, scientists "create" a virus using the PCR method: you take primers, i.e. pre-existing genetic sequences available in genetic banks, you modify them based on purely hypothetical considerations and put them in contact with the supernatant broth until they attach (anneal) to some RNA in the broth; then, using the reverse transcriptase enzyme, you transform the "caught" RNA into artificial or complementary DNA (cDNA), which only then can be processed by PCR and expanded after a certain number of PCR cycles (amplifications).
(Each cycle doubles the amount of DNA, but the more cycles it takes to obtain detectable "viral" material, the lower the reliability of the PCR, that is, its ability to actually "get" something meaningful from the supernatant. 25 cycles usually make no sense. and all current circulating tests or PCR protocols always use more than 25 cycles, in fact usually 35 to 45.)
To make matters worse, the primers are 18-24 bases (nucleotides) each, and the SARS-Cov2 virus is thought to be 30,000 nucleotides in size, so the primer represents only 0.08 percent of the virus genome.
This makes it even less possible to pick the specific virus you are looking for in such a tiny area, much less in a sea of billions of very similar particles.
But that's not all. Since the virus you are looking for is new, it is obvious that there are no ready-made genetic primers (oligonucleotides) corresponding to a specific fraction of the new virus, so you take primers that you think may be closer to the putative structure of the virus, but this is an assumption. and when you apply primers to the supernatant broth, your primers can attach to any of the billions of molecules present in it, and you have no idea what you have created in this way, or if there is any virus that you are looking for. In fact, it is a new creation, created by researchers who then named it SARS-CoV-2, but there is no connection with the alleged "real" virus responsible for this disease.
THE "VIRUS GENOME" IS NOT ANYTHING OTHER THAN A COMPUTER MODEL
The complete genome of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was never sequenced, but instead was "assembled" on a computer. California physician Thomas Cowen called it "scientific fraud." And he is far from the only one!
Cowan wrote on October 15, 2020:
This week, my colleague and friend Sally Fallon Morell brought my attention to an amazing CDC article published in June 2020.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article
The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of scientific research for the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus to share this information with other scientists for their own research.
By carefully reading this important article, some shocking conclusions can be drawn.
A section of the article subtitled "Whole Genome Sequencing" showed that "instead of isolating the virus and sequencing the genome from start to finish," the CDC "developed 37 pairs of nested PCR covering the genome, based on a reference to the coronavirus sequence of the gene.bank (GenBank NC045512).
So, one might ask, how did they sequence the virus, i.e. genetically analyzed?
Well, they didn't analyze the entire genome, but instead took some of the sequences found in the cultures, declared without proof that they belonged to a new particular virus, and then made a kind of genetic computer puzzle to fill the remaining gaps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSBQUIEUbQ8
"They use computer simulation to simply create the genome from scratch," says molecular biologist Andrew Kaufman.
https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/sovi/bio-credentials/
Perhaps it is not surprising then that one of the test primers, developed by the Pasteur Institute,
exactly corresponds to the sequence of chromosome No.8 of the human genome.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT SARS-COV-2 OR VIRUSES CAN "FLY"
Presumably, to stop the spread of the suspected new virus, we are forced to practice various forms of social distancing and wearing masks. Behind this approach is the idea that viruses, and in particular SARS-CoV-2, which is believed to be responsible for covid-19 respiratory disease, are transmitted by air or, as has been said more often, through sprayed droplets in the air from those who cough, sneeze or, in the opinion of some, simply talk.
But the truth is that all these theories about airborne transmission of viruses are only hypotheses that have never been proven.
There was no evidence of that from the beginning. According to Nature in an April 2020 article, experts do not agree that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by airborne droplets and, in the words of WHO itself, "evidence is inconclusive".
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00974-w
Even from an orthodox point of view, the only studies in which the transmission of coronavirus (not SARS-Cov2) by air has been "proven" have been conducted in hospitals and nursing homes, in places that are believed to produce all kinds of infections according to hygienic conditions.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7151430/pdf/main.pdf
But no study has ever proven that there is transmission of viruses in open or enclosed but well-ventilated premises. Even assuming that the transmission is airborne, it was stressed that for "infection" it was necessary that the people between whom the alleged transmission took place were in close contact for at least 45 minutes, and this study is also a hypothesis.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00974-w
In short, all radical measures of distancing have no scientific basis.
NO ASYMPTOMATIC "INFECTION"
Since particle cleaning is a prerequisite for further steps, i.e. evidence of causality and "calibration" of tests, we have a diagnostically inconsequential test and therefore the mantra "test, test, test" Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus of WHO.
This is especially true for testing people without symptoms. In this context, even a Chinese study from Wuhan, published in Nature november 20, 2020
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w
Nearly 10 million people have been tested there, and all asymptomatic positive cases, repeated positive cases and their close contacts have been isolated for at least 2 weeks prior to PCR.
https://immi-i.com/shvejtsarskij-immunolog-nazval-mifom-nalichie-bessimptomnyh-bolnyh-covid/
The test gave a negative result, found that:
All close contacts of asymptomatic positive cases have had a negative result, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases found in this study are unlikely to be contagious.
Even the orthodox British Medical Journal recently joined the criticism.
Shortly before Christmas, the article "COVID-19: Mass testing is inaccurate and gives a false sense of security" was published in the scientific journal, the Minister admits.
https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/371/bmj.m4916.full.pdf
which explains that testing in some parts of the UK is simply not entirely correct for asymptomatic people and claiming that it cannot pinpoint whether it is positive or negative, as Collective Evolution wrote.
Already a few weeks before that you could read in the BMJ that :
https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/371/bmj.m4425.full.pdf
Mass testing on COVID-19 is an ill-conceived, unfinished and expensive mess.
and:
Screening of healthy population on COVID-19 has incomprehensible value, but is introduced across the country
And this:
"The UK's response to the pandemic is too dependent on scientists and other public servants with troubling competing interests, including a stake in companies producing diagnostic tests, treatment drugs and COVID-19 vaccines.
In addition, lawyer Rainer Fulmih, a member of the German extra-parliamentary investigative committee "Stiftung Corona Ausschuss", said that Stefan Hawkertz, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology, told him that so far no scientific evidence of asymptomatic infection had been found.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kANkpqtWLN4
💫🍷🎂🍷
𝚼𝖔𝖚𝖗 𝕵𝖔𝖐𝖊𝖗 🃏
Continuation follows...
