by Jon Rappoport, April 21, 2021
(To
join our email list, click here.)
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
[1], 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) [2].
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…"
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) [3]. 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
[4]) 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.
SOURCES:
[1] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/
[2]
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article
[3]
https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html
[4]
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/