“The central question raised in this study is the following: is there reliable evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?
The study provides documentation based on Freedom of Information requests addressed to Health /Science institutions in a large number of countries.
The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation/ purification undertaken by the numerous Health /Science institutions which were contacted.
It is worth noting that according to the Berlin Virology Institute, the WHO in January 2020 did not have in its possession details regarding the isolation and identity of SARS-CoV-2.
Moreover, because the relevant details concerning isolation /purification were not available, the WHO decided pursuant to the advice of the Berlin Virology Institute to “customize” The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) using the “similar” 2003 SARS virus (subsequently renamed SARS-1) as “a point of reference” for detecting genetic fragments of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2.
Bear in mind, this totally flawed RT-PCR test is being used not only to detect V-the virus, it is now being used to ‘detect” the variants of SARS-CoV-2.
Supporting documents including the responses by Health /Science institutions, CDC, etc are provided in this study. Also more documents can be consulted by downloading the relevant pdf files compiled by the researchers.”
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 4, 2021, January 6, 2022
Read the article here :
Public Health England did not have the information requested.
Andrew Johnson Delivered
Dear Public Health England,
I would like to see:
All records in the possession, custody or control of Public Health England describing the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient, where the patient sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material (i.e. monkey kidney cells aka vero cells; liver cancer cells).
Please note that I am using “isolation” in the every-day sense of the word: the act of separating a thing(s) from everything else. I am not requesting records where “isolation of SARS-COV-2” refers *instead* to:
• the culturing of something, or
• the performance of an amplification test (i.e. a PCR test), or
• the sequencing of something.
Please also note that my request is not limited to records that were authored by the PHE or that pertain to work done by the PHE. My request includes any sort of record, for example (but not limited to) any published peer-reviewed study that the PHE has downloaded or printed.
Please provide enough information about each record so that I may identify and access each record with certainty (i.e. title, author(s), date, journal, where the public may access it).”
“Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/μL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen.”
Background: The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur.
Aim: We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.
Methods: Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.
Results: The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive – Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project.
Conclusion: The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks.
Keywords: 2019-nCoV; RT-PCR; Wuhan; diagnostics; laboratory; novel coronavirus; outbreak; testing.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest: None declared.