- Joined
- Oct 12, 2017
- Posts
- 9,633
- Reaction score
- 30,053
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #976
Maybe because it's misinformation, much like most of the claims made in the video by the "average scientist" Wilson that you have adopted for your "Ministry of Truth" without allowing any debate, even though his claims are can be easily rebutted or discredited.
Just a couple more from his video.
Hadn't heard of Deusburg that apparently Malone talked about, but Wilson puts up a news article about him that included "Kary Mullis, winner of the 1993 Nobel prize in chemistry for discovering the PCR agreed with him, saying he has seen "no scientific evidence" proving HIV causes AIDS."
Mullis never found a scientific paper that proved HIV caused AIDS and protested they’re making this connection by misusing his PCR test. Unfortunately he died a few months before COVID-19 was known, so imagine what he would have thought about his PCR being used for that?
"We all have retroviruses and they’re, literally, blowing this way out of proportion. They’re amplifying it a TRILLION times, that’s what a PCR cycle of 40 does in magnifying the HIV retrovirus.”
According to him on his 1992 Spin interview, “PCR made it easier to see that certain people are infected with HIV and some of those people came down with symptoms of AIDS. But that doesn’t begin even to answer the question, ‘Does HIV cause it?’”
PCR, simply put, is a thermal cycling method used to make up to billions of copies of a specific DNA sample, making it large enough to study. PCR is an indispensable technique with a broad variety of applications including biomedical research and criminal forensics.”
“PCR basically takes a sample of your cells and amplifies any DNA to look for ‘viral sequences’, i.e. bits of non-human DNA that seem to match parts of a known viral genome. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery. Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues."
According to Mullis himself, PCR cannot be totally and should never be used as a tool in “the diagnosis of infectious diseases.”
"PCR, if you do it well, can find almost anything in anybody. They make up their own rules as they go, they change them when they want to and Tony Fauci doesn't mind going on TV in front of the people that pay his salary and lie directly into the camera." Dr Kary Mullis inventor of the PCR test.
"You never or almost can never culture a virus from a 37 threshold cycle. Even 36. You gotta say, you know it's dead nucleotides. Period." Tony Fauci
“PCR basically takes a sample of your cells and amplifies any DNA to look for ‘viral sequences’, i.e. bits of non-human DNA that seem to match parts of a known viral genome. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery. Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues."
What is when humanity want to know all the details and stuff and guys like Fauci get up there and start talking and Fauci doesn’t know anything about anything. And I’d say that to his face. Nothing! The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there you’ll know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and doesn’t understand medicine and should not be in a position he’s in.
Most of those people at the top are just total administrative people who don’t know anything that’s going on in the body. Those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have – that we pay them to take care of our health in some way. They’ve got a personal agenda, they make up their own rules, they change them when they want to.
Tony Fauci does not mind going on TV inform of people that pay his salary and lie directly into the camera. You can’t expect the sheep to respect difference in viruses, they don’t know the difference. Basically, the vast majority do not have the ability to judge who is and who isn’t a good scientist. It’s a problem that been around for centuries.
Science is being judged by people who don’t understand it. Fauci? Fauci doesn’t know enough. If Fauci wants to get on TV with someone that knows a bit about this and DEBATE THEM, HE COULD EASILY DO IT, because he’s been asked. He’s been asked to come and debate me at the USC on the stage in front of the student body. I’ve wanted to debate someone who’s on the other side, but Fauci doesn’t want to do it.
Contrary to Wilson's claims that it is impossible for a PCR to find other viruses, at Australia's Doherty Inst. specificity was evaluated on a subset of 24 samples for test cross-reactivity to other common respiratory virus agents, 4 samples (influenza virus A, parainfluenza type-1, rhinovirus, parainfluenza) tested positive for SARS CoV 2 above Ct 38, which was recommended for use to detect SARS CoV 2, others were invalid at Ct 32.
The said that Best practice in executing confirmatory testing of samples detecting SARS CoV 2 producing Ct values > 38, will be important to test for other viruses according to manufacturers instructions for use (IFU).
https://www.health.gov.au/sites/def...ute-bgi-sars-cov-2-real-time-pcr-platform.pdf
Pretend that was the point you were trying to make, and that my response was anything but tongue in cheek.
