Identification. Virus vs mosquito
Posted by:
fresh
()
Date: April 21, 2020 12:53PM We didn't even get into stage one
How virus identified From one source... Virus identification is performed either by indirect immunofluorescence of virus-infected cells using group- and type-specific monoclonal antibodies, or RT-PCR on extracts of cell supernatants using specific primers or probes Neither of the above is accurate One is indirect The other is not accurate due to methodology Another method is electron microscope That also has limitations being static etc Here's a resource [www.labome.com] As the above states all methods have limitations So when we talk about claiming that a virus is causing an epidemic we need at least three steps as many people have been saying one is identifying exists Two proving that is infecting the body and three it's contagious. we talk a lot about infection and contagion not a lot of time has spent on the actual identification of it so as you can see with the above that is really depending on processes that are simply not accurate As opposed to identifying a mosquito we have the ability to observe its form and functions To say well yes this mosquito injected proboscis and had this effect etc So since scientists at cdc and elsewhere claim that this virus is causing an epidemic it falls upon them to satisfy these requirements And so what have they done to identify? They used inaccurate PCR and as you can see below in this reference they need to find the genetic sequence and if you look at it you can see that a lot of estimation and modification and millions of base pairs etc [mra.asm.org] That's not science That's VOODOO. And not just because it's over my head Too much opportunity for error Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|
|