Posted on 05/11/2021 5:24:51 PM PDT by ransomnote
The argument over whether or not there are isolated samples of the Covid-19 virus is key to understanding many other arguments about the current plandemic.
"There cant be an (SARS-2) isolate to find or purify because then the whole narrative of the virus and later mutations, PCR, and Vaxes, would fall apart. Thats why there are many papers doing cell culture, metagenomic or PCR testing, and EM photos but NO DENSITY GRADIENT purification. Do you get whats happening?" ~ FReeper Magic Bullet
Those who claim that there are isolated samples of the Covid virus, hundreds made everyday in every country by thousands of researchers on demand, fall silent when I point out that supposedly 'everyone has' isolated samples of the virus, but no one used it to produce the PCR test or the vaccines. "Everybody has it" but "nobody used it"
This is likely at least one key reason the PCR test does not detect the presence of the Covid-19 virus, nor does it detect those ill from it both by the 'test's design, and from the decision to run excessive numbers of cycles during the assay.
Throughout the plandemic, I've waited for someone to develop an accurate test that identifies Covid-19 in all the people sick with flu, pneumonia etc. I suspect those who say the virus is present in the mouth and nasal swabs are unnecessary are correct. I now realize no accurate Covid test will be forthcoming.
Back to the lack of isolated samples of the virus the CDC claims poses an existential risk to humanity:
Western researchers apparently waited to begin vaccine development until China released to them what China claims is the accurate, computer generated model of the genome. A Moderna engineer remarked that the day he saw that China had released the genome, he started work because he now had everything he needed.
Note: Our 'vaccines' are based on the genome that China released, supposedly to protect us from the virus that China released. Note also, western technology could have used the same inappropriate methods to create a computer model of the virus as China used, but instead we waited for this handoff.
There are research papers that state the use of the live virus and offer images and content that would require access to the live virus. But how can they have it when other researchers are always told no such samples exist, and live samples were not used to create the vaccines or PCR test?
FReeper Magic bullet worked to clarify this availability issue which supports statements by independent researchers who say they are denied isolated Covid samples.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3945205/posts?page=93#93
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3945205/posts?page=95#95
Now when I look at articles that state use of the live virus, I routinely find that they receive funding from the NIH or are Chinese researchers.
This information is going to become harder to find as the public continues to ask questions about how involved the CDC and NIH funding and collaborating with China and this kind of research- but basically researchers who are counted as 'insiders' to the Covid-19 industry say they have live virus and if not on the inside (independents), have been continuously told that live virus samples are unavailable.
There is a bottleneck somewhere, on both isolated samples, and drugs/treatments that could be under development to treat this disease, but are not.
Maybe drug researchers are forbidden from publishing their progress - all I've heard from Faucists are that there are no effective treatments, which is patently false.
Dr. Zelenko, Dr. McCullough and others have devloped treatment protocols which reduce risk of death among the most vulnerable, by 85%. Why wouldn't the CDC point the public to available treatments and medications?
The reason that the CDC has always pretended that there are no, and never will be, effective treatments is because if alternative treatments exist, the 'vaccines' would not qualify for Emergency Use Authorization. This is why the CDC and other Faucists shout down safe, effective FDA approved medications like HCQ and Ivermectin, in use and well tolerated for years.
Isn't odd that the CDC is vigorously against treating sick people? The CDC moved to prevent off-label prescriptions normally allowed, to prevent those dying from receiving any attempt at drug intervention? In this supposed "crisis", the CDC wouldn't even give Emergency Use Authorization to FDA approved drugs like HCQ, which had been used for chronic illnesses like Lupus for decades.
The CDC is also far more vigorous in advocating experimental vaccine technology than it is in advocating important prophylatic measures like Vitamin D and Zinc, which can greatly support the public health during the Covid-19 season, or any viral outbreak. Why aren't these essential nutrients part of the national Covid-19 response driven by the CDC? Free zinc and D3 supplements to schools and other public venues? That would be a powerful approach to boosting overall public health and reducing Covid-19.
Instead the public is offered donuts and preferred seating at baseball parks if they get the experimental 'vaccines'. The CDC is working to acclimate the public to the idea of outsourced immune response, as it has declared boosters and follow-up 'vaccines' will not have to undergo the very limited trials that the experimental doses are still undergoing.
Given the CDC is 100% reliant on 'vaccines' to save the Republic, you'd think they'd want to know how well these 'products' are tolerated, but you'd be wrong. The CDC isn't even enterring most of the reports they receive regarding adverse reactions to the 'vaccines' into their database. Unprecedented numbers of deaths and injuries have been reported to occur during the first 2 or 3 days following vaccination, but apparently the CDC doesn't want to know about it, and doesn't want the public to know about it.
What else isn't the CDC talking about? Why isn't there an accurate test for Covid-19 this late in the plandemic? WHere are discussions of the treatments that the CDC is most interested in offering to those who don't want to participate in vaccine experiments? Why has the CDC dispensed with the idea of doctors treating patients when they become ill with Covid, especially given that more and more vaccinated people are becoming ill with Covid-19?
I wonder if these mysetries point to the possibility the CDC quieltly patented the SARS-2 (Covid-19) virus the same way it quietly patented the SARS-1 virus in 2003.
Recall the SARS outbreak in Southern China in 2003?
SARS | Home | Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome | SARS-CoV Disease | CDC
The CDC patented the SARS-1 virus, the means to test for it, and the ability to measure it. That gave the CDC control over who could study it, who could develop tests for it etc. The initial patent was filed in 2003, I'll link to one of the renewals. The patent expired in 2017 (what else happened in 2017?) and was then reinstated.
I say "quietly" because after patenting it, the CDC filed to keep the patent confidential for some period of time. Therefore, it's possible that the CDC patented the SARS-2 virus and filed, again, to keep that information confidential.
The following is an excellent video describing the patent and includes insights by former national intelligence analyst David E. Martin. PHD. and others regarding the management of the planedemic.
PLANDEMIC 2 - INDOCTORNATION (full movie) (bitchute.com)
A confidential patent on Covid-19 virus would explain the issue of 'no isolated samples available' and 'no accurate test for Covid' and basically give the CDC ultimate control over who studies it, how it's tested etc. And if one wants to orchestrate a pandemic, that kind of control would be essential.
Information control has been the topic of plandemic planning in the international community for years. I'll put a link to one such effort below. We know Fauci was smirking about there being a plandemic during President Trump's administration, and Bill Gates, top donor of the CDC's Foundation, is on film smirking that the next one will definitely get attention.
Johns Hopkins and other (previously) prestigious organizations are the information hubs for Covid-19. Such hubs exist in many nations around the world. In Israel, citizens and physicians organized to route around their information control hub in that country to shove information out to the public which refutes the false, glowing narrative about the 'freedom' provided by vaccination.Israeli People Committee’s Report Find Catastrophic Side Effects Of Pfizer Vaccine To Every System In Human Body
For these reasons, I am praying more for my country than I have in the past. Our needs are great. Our God is greater.
“Everybody has it” but “nobody used it”
The his is a very good point. If they had it isolated then traditional live attenuated vaccine would be out there wouldn’t it?
And if it is isolated, why is there NOT a traditional vaccine? So many questions, so little answers.
The Faucian Bargain is no bargain.
About on par with the Faustian Bargain.
Because gene therapy to eventually monkey around with everyone’s dna is what it’s really about?
This may not by the ordinary population control ghouls behind it but the transhumanist sub-breed.
You quite obviously have no scientific training.
Have you ever developed a PCR assay? Run a PCR reaction? Used PCR for anything? Can you describe exactly how a PCR reaction works? Do you have any idea why PCR reaction results become questionable when you run the reaction for more cycles?
Are you aware that one cannot patent a naturally occurring organism, protein, nucleic acid sequence, etc.? If you would have read the entire patent that you linked, you would know that there is no patent on SARS-1. On page 72, the last page of the patent, it states exactly what was patented: kits and methods for detection of SARS-1. As for the expiration of the patent in 2017, it probably was not renewed because SARS-1 disappeared and there is no possibility of making a profit by selling SARS-1 PCR kits.
Seriously, helping to spread misinformation helps no one, and has a great potential to cause harm.
“…Seriously, helping to spread misinformation helps no one, and has a great potential to cause harm.”
************************************
Well, spreading misinformation is what she/he/it does. It’s all she/he/it does.
You quite obviously have no scientific training.
Have you ever developed a PCR assay? Run a PCR reaction? Used PCR for anything? Can you describe exactly how a PCR reaction works? Do you have any idea why PCR reaction results become questionable when you run the reaction for more cycles?
Are you aware that one cannot patent a naturally occurring organism, protein, nucleic acid sequence, etc.? If you would have read the entire patent that you linked, you would know that there is no patent on SARS-1. On page 72, the last page of the patent, it states exactly what was patented: kits and methods for detection of SARS-1. As for the expiration of the patent in 2017, it probably was not renewed because SARS-1 disappeared and there is no possibility of making a profit by selling SARS-1 PCR kits.
Seriously, helping to spread misinformation helps no one, and has a great potential to cause harm.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kary Mullis said the PCR test he created was not useful in determining whether or not someone had any kind of disease. He explained it was a research tool, and my paraphrase of his explanation is that his invention was used to exaggerate (amplify) tiny amounts of material that would otherwise be overlooked in a sample.
National File ^ | March 15, 2021 | Patrick Howley
(...) Kary Mullis, who won a 1993 Nobel Prize for inventing the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing process later used to diagnose Coronavirus cases, said that Dr. Anthony Fauci lacks knowledge of medicine and is willing to lie on television. Mullis also admitted in another set of videotaped remarks that a PCR test “doesn’t tell you that you’re sick.” (...)
03/15/2021 10:44:41 PM PDT · by SecAmndmt · 41 replies
For this reason, the PCR test can identify fragments of viruses that were defeated before the person ever beacme ill. It can identify inactive fragments in someone who was sick from a respiratory disease (including flu) 2 months ago.
It also tests positive for fruit, goats, Coca Cola and "Spanish Water" because it's not detecting live viruses, it's basically detecting chains of molecules that can be present in many different substances.
Given that you consistently claim to have medical expertise, and you consistently work to distort and deflect from the truth, I conclude you post to intentionally conceal the truth from the public, which is not helpful at all, is it?
Tom Horn, or Chuck Missler, reference?
"11. The PCR tests do not detect SARS-CoV-2 particles, but particles from any number of viruses you might have contracted in the past, and that a lawsuit for crimes against humanity is being launched by a German attorney for this fraud.
Even Fauci admits PCR tests don't work. The WHO backs him up. In this CDC document), testing guidelines state that false negatives and positives are possible - page 39.
The PCR test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens - page 40. But most importantly, on page 1, SARS-CoV-2 was never isolated in the first instance: "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".
Neither the CDC can provide samples of SARS-CoV-2, nor can Stanford and Cornell labs, and in a CNN interview Fauci said he was not getting tested and there is no need to test asymptomatic people. No Jab For Me"
Sometimes I've seen a vax company or other researcher claim they used the live virus but it's not an isolated sample, which is the only sample capable of proving that Covid responded a certain way to specific conditions.
I've seen assertions that isolated samples were used - but usually quickly find that NIH funded the research etc.
I posted about the fact that the PCR had a hideous false positive rate, and an unknown rate of false negatives:
Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics – the Deadly Danger of False Positives (freerepublic.com)
Because the truth coming from a former Chief Science Officer at Pfizer was hard to take, the source was attacked as a 'former employee' as if he were naturally "disgruntled' and lying.
So then I posted about how wildly successful he was licensing and developing drugs licensed from Pfizer after he was no longer employed there.
Turning Pfizer Discards Into Novartis Gold: The Story Of Ziarco
I went looking to see if this inaccurate test was used in the 'vaccine' trials and of course, it was. Moderna specifies that a person in their trial would be 'diagnosed' with Covid-19 if they had a positive PCR test and at least one symptom, however Covid-19 shares symptoms with other respiratory illnesses.
Pfizer was coy about using the PCR. It specified its results were based on 'laboratory testing'. Pfizer seemed to know that at some point, the PCR test would be exposed so they I had to look through several documents and find the original filing to discover they used the PCR, but in that documented employed the inventor's original name for the assay (the inventor didn't consider it a test).
Based on the realization that isolated samples are not available, and were not used to develop the test that supposedly detects the illness in people, I wondered how the vaccine developers could say anything about their lab results, which should be scrambled as to who has what illness (flu, likely) and when they had it (all those false positives).
I came to the conclusion the vaccine trial data is likely fake to some degree. Moderna hadn't released large portions of raw data when I first started looking, and the editor of a British medical journal was working with the scraps of data released and, at the time, said 'efficacy' was much lower than claimed.
I don't believe what they have told us.
How can we believe what they say about the flu vax, or anything else? I've discovered that the CDC has a Foundation to which George Soros and Bill Gates (largest donor) contribute, and the board of the foundation includes former ambassadors to the UN and EU. What could possibly go wrong?
Good job
No, it’s me just not trusting people.
Even if the researchers who pursue such powers are not corrupt those who fund them, especially those wanting arbitrary power to rule, should not be trusted, period.
And I would opine that even if our society wasn’t riddled with those who give every outward sign of having been turned over reprobate minds per Romans 1.
I agree that our Government evil, and certainly act like they are under the spell of demonic powers (’We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, powers, rulers of darkness, and spiritual wickedness in high places...’). But the ‘trans-humanism’ angle is something that I don’t read about too often.
But the ‘trans-humanism’ angle is something that I don’t read about too often.
~~~~~~~~~
You know, I’m still pondering about a statment made by Lt General McInnery a few months ago (he’s retired, I didn’t spell his name right). He said that China had created genetically modified ‘super soldiers’ that looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger (sp?) ‘on steroids’. The General wasn’t joking.
Despite the view that it’s a recent phenomenon I reason that it has roots (excluding any proverbial sorcerers) that go all the way back to Karl Marx himself.
While I personally cannot vouch for the accuracy of the claim some time back I came across the story that on reading Darwin’s work that Marx was to have hammered off a note to Engels that he had found a basis for their views in naturalism.
Now here I’m not referring to the use of Darwin’s juggernaut in schools to accommodate children of thinking about life in a way that needs no divine, of getting them to take that proverbial first sip that leads them away from faith while at the same time not caring how dated the evolution they teach about is because there is no desire for anyone to drink deeply so that they might find God at the bottom of the glass ... at least till they have first been made well conditioned materialists.
Rather I’m referring to the idea that, human beings not actually being fit to live in Marx’s delusional fairy story, Marx must have recognized that if there could be natural selection there could be unnatural selection as well, carefully directed against human nature itself till Man should give way to mannish beings with a different nature fit for the fairy tale.
What attracts me to this is that it helps explain the attraction of Lysenkoism, or the effort to produce a more socialistic nature, and even helps make sense of the oftentimes claimed disdain for evolution ... which would then be seen as a rival to what might be termed socialistic evolution.
Now, this is speculative but if accurate it pushes the origin of “scientific”transhumanism back numerable decades to actually form an underlying principal of WHY the Soviet states, including the ChiComs who have arguably only veered into fascism to keep themselves in power till they have the hegemony they lust after, were not aberrations of Marxism but in the sweet spot of where Marxist ideologies must take Mankind, inflicting if able untold generations of suffering and hardship in the name of the new natively socialistic man-like creatures to inherit everything.
Also, again if correct, this shows that the Revolution is ultimately against what it is to be.Man and likewise shows that Cultural Marxism, like lysenkoism, didn’t fall far from Marx’s poisonous tree.
Or, such are my thoughts.
exDemMom, House Atreides, gas_dr, et al. are all in on the plandemic narrative that has been forced down everyones throat for political, financial and tyranny reasons. They are invested in the lie and will not get off of it.
I agree with you. Not one of them is in any way an expert on COVID19 or any other virus. They post long paragraphs containing crap data from others who have an agenda.
BTTT For your usual in depth work. Well done, ransomnote!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.