First and foremost anyone claiming a virus, even a bacteriophage, exists, needs to conclusively show that nucleic acids actually exist in the real world, and not by indirect inferences, need to show them by any microscope method they would wish, that is the first step to actually trying to establish a true science, but even them, i hardly could be convinced of anything said in regards to such things. My actual point about reality is more or less the one expressed by the two gentleman in this video and I wholeheartedly would recommend any truth seeker to adopt a similar view from now on:
Inside The Vatican’s Surprising Alliance With Biotech Venture Capital
BY: MAUREEN MULLARKEY
JULY 15, 2021
“The pressure for universal injection with a biological agent still under probation is unprecedented. Equally remarkable is the papal embrace of vaccine politics and its network of commercial partners and global governments. Propelled by COVID, the military-industrial complex of 60 years ago has its parallel in the medical-industrial complex. And the Vatican approves.”
Things are getting very desperate Christine... the crew at the Doherty Institute have discovered that garlic kills “COVID” 🤨
I think the most disappointing thing to observe is the amount of people standing on their soap boxes announcing “see, I told you we didn’t need vaccine mandates!!! ‘Cause garlic kills COVID!!!” due to their complete inability to discern that the whole point of the “discovery” and media hype is to continue to convince everyone that there is this “virus” called “COVID” that garlic can “kill”!? 🤦🏻♂️
Christine PHENOMENAL article on david martine malleable reality ect. i went to Robert Malones tweeter and read what he said about no virurs people (which i am proud to say i am 100%%%% a no virus person) i don't know wheather to laugh or cry or both based on what he says-------it gets worse ------ if you scroll down just a little on his tweeter Robert Malone is foaming at the mouth about how wonderful the (rockefeller foundation and the WHO have formed a partnership to expand global pandemic preparedness in era of climate change)--------i am not makeing this up thats what it says and then i went to the link at the rockefeller foundation website and read the the whole article its all true-----i am using your term now virus pushers ( i love it) ------------my heart goes out to the family and friends of DR Rasid Buttar with his passing he was a great person i will miss him dearly he was one of the very few men men i looked up to in this nightmare world we live in
I will read the rest of your post tonight. But in the meaantime, it occures to me to ask myself, why would negative control studies in virus genetic sequencing be needed, when the parts and pieces of genetic material come from an unknown array of substances and microbes and fragments glopped together in a stew? Virologist computer programs create never-found-intact sequences built from bits of unknown origin. Therefore, what purpose would negative control studies attain? There's no rational "positive" study at the outset of this pretend procedure.
I totally agree :) The point of these "control" investigations is that they don't even attempt a half-assed "control" to see if they can end up with the same result using material that they don't think contains a "virus".
That is an indication of how far off the rails the 'science' has gone. Had they used controls in the first place, they would have realized that virology is not a science and only finds what they have been expecting/paid to find, rather than what is there or not there.
Excellent exposure once again of these fraudsters (in positions of authority!) and how they operate. Anybody who responds to FOIRs by saying that the requested information is “confidential” — like those who when questioned about their criminal activity say “no comment” — is clearly engaging in either a cover-up of their ignorance or is tacitly admitting guilt. It’s really quite obvious with these short (oftentimes single-word) responses used to quickly dismiss the requests.
Saying they "followed the leads of experts” but then refusing to give any additional information about the experiments they conducted, or claiming something like purification or genomic sequence obtained from a negative control was “unnecessary,” reveals that they’re just participants in the scam. As professionals (so-called “scientists”) at universities, "institutes," or other official (gov't) entities, they should be able to give detailed and logical responses to any and every request while providing proof that the scientific method was rigorously adhered to in all studies claiming viral existence. Arrogant refusals of follow-ups and further investigations like that of Mr. Martin Hendry (I refuse to call people like that “professors” or “doctors”) are also more proof of the scam via admissions of guilt. Obtaining these admissions is absolute gold, Christine. Thank you.
But the best response by far (and kudos to them for a flat-out admission) is: "We haven't tried anything you asked for.” lol
Me: Over 30 years, never ill, never got a cold or the flu or a coronavirus: Mix one heaped teaspoon of salt (I use shop bought, Iodine based, table salt) in a mug of clean cold or warm water, cup a hand and pour in some solution, sniff or snort the entire contents up your nose, in small doses, spitting out anything which comes down into your mouth. If a burning sensation, then you have a virus in your nasal passages, behind your eyes, in the escutcheon tubes to your inner ears, brain bulb, brain stem (hence Long Covid) so wait until burning stops (2-3 minutes) then blow out your nose with toilet paper and flush away, washing your hands afterwards. Do my free salt water cure morning, noon, night, or more often if you want for a quicker result, until it feels like you are flushing with water - job done - or go to the sea and sniff or snort salt water up your nose and around your nasal passages - same thing.
The 5 day isolation, is when the Coronavirus transmutes to Covid in your head, passed down into your body in the one liter of snot we each produce daily, the engine oil of the body, in my opinion - a vaccine in your arm is not going to heal a Coronavirus in your head, nor the residue after a Covid type flu has passed, in your head, is it?
It can take up to 2-3 weeks after clearing a virus infection in the head, for Covid to occur in the body.
My free salt water cure does what no synthetic mRNA vaccine will ever be able to do - it kills the virus in the nasal passages of the head, before it gets to become anything else and it is the method which has kept me "never ill" for over 30 years and there is no reason why your health should not be the same as mine, if you do as I do. Cost zero - time taken less than 3 minutes, each complete snort or sniffle.
Needless to say, do whenever you think you might have caught an airborne nasal infection, from someone else.
Probably good for Long Covid, as it flushes your nasal passages out and leaves no place, not washed. So much for synthetic mRNA vaccines - you get a head cold and you inject a vaccine in your arm to clear it - like duh!! - much laughter, you have got to be kidding, right?
I've successfully won Oregon Health Authority public records appeals ... DM me if you want me to file a well-formed public records appeal. I actually sued the Multnomah County Health Dept. and won. I'll need a copy of the original request - this goes to Rosenbaum, though. In their response, they failed to cite a valid exception to the law.
Turns out that another colleague was very recently denied on the same grounds, by Jeanne, when he asked for the death rates of jabbed vs unjabbed!
And ironically, according to Jeanne:
"The retention schedule for public records requests is five years. OAR 166-300-0015(23). If records are not purged and a request is made, those records would be available. All public records requests directed to Oregon Health Authority are assigned a reference number (e.g., your request is 2022-0952). Moreover, all requests are posted online and are searchable.https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ERD/Pages/Public-Records-Requests.aspx."
The full names of the people making requests is made public. But reports, protocols, etc containing no personal information are being denied.
And there's this:
Oregon Health Authority Condemned by Scientists For Scrubbing Report on Wireless Hazards in Schools
Thanks a lot Tom, I appreciate it. It was a colleague who filed this request and I'm not sure if he already followed up with them. His request and his comments on their response are in the pdf, and yes it looks like you are correct, she didn't cite a valid exemption.
For anyone following along, here is the section of the (corporate by-)law that was cited:
"That section actually applies to information gathered about individuals, 'cause ORS433.008 Section 6 then follows up and says:
Nothing in this section:
Prevents the authority or a local public health administrator from publishing statistical compilations and reports relating toreportable disease investigations if the compilations and reports do not identify individual cases or sources of information;
I did not ask for personal information at all, just asked for Health Agency records of the ways they had gone about confirming the "virus" and the "disease"."
The state of Oregon's refusal is highly fishy, i believe it's in open violation of FOI laws, since the inquiries did not request records of private information, only a matter of general knowledge of the science involved. Thanks, Christine.
BTW, your old friend Mongol (:-) ) tried pushing the "PCR test is valid, COVID proven via excess deaths spikes" argument on the Substack of a mutual friend of ours, but didn't do too well. I see he's trying the same thing here.
As a control experiment for the metagenomic assembly of Wuhan-Hu-1/MN908947, you can search the NCBI's sequence read archive for a sequencing run of a human lung metagenome that was published before 2020, download the FASTQ files of the run, and then use MEGAHIT to assemble contigs for the reads. You won't get any contigs that match long segments of SARS2 with a low error rate: https://output.jsbin.com/suwuxoy#Other_lung_metagenomes_can_be_used_as_controls_for_MEGAHIT_assembly.
1) there is no known "virus" that needs sequencing (kinda important, don't you think?),
2) relying on yet another "meta-genomic" in silico sequence in a database - no thanks;
3) this would not control for all the RNA that was actually in the RNA soup extracted from the cell culture (RNA from the man/woman and whatever bacteria/fungi and other sources were in their clinical sample of bodily fluid/tissue, RNA from the cell line and its contaminants, RNA from the fetal bovine serum).
I wasn't relying on a metagenomic sequence but on a metagenomic set of raw reads. How else do you propose performing the control experiment for the metagenomic assembly of Wuhan-Hu-1? Don't you need another set of raw reads that is comparable to Wu et al.'s set of raw reads? I don't know how to do the sequencing part myself, but I can try to do a control experiment for the assembly part if I search for RNA-Seq reads that are derived from a BALF sample of a human pneumonia patient and I then test if it's possible to assemble a contig of SARS2 from the reads.
For example when USMortality said on Twitter that Wu et al. didn't use any controls when they used MEGAHIT to assemble Wuhan-Hu-1, sense_strand replied to him: "Any metatranscriptomics experiment before 2019 is a control. Tell me if you find SARS-CoV-2." (https://twitter.com/sense_strand/status/1644033990851002368) That's basically what I tried to do on the JS Bin page I linked.
Wu et al.'s metagenomic raw reads were produced with RNA-Seq which doesn't required doing cell culture or using fetal bovine serum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA-Seq#Library_preparation. This is what Wu et al. wrote in their methods: "Total RNA was extracted from the BALF sample using the RNeasy Plus Universal Mini kit (Qiagen) following the manufacturer's instructions. The quantity and quality of the RNA solution was assessed using a Qbit machine and an Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies) before library construction and sequencing. An RNA library was then constructed using the SMARTer Stranded Total RNA-Seq kit v.2 (TaKaRa). Ribosomal RNA depletion was performed during library construction following the manufacturer's instructions. Paired-end (150-bp reads) sequencing of the RNA library was performed on the MiniSeq platform (Illumina). Library preparation and sequencing were carried out at the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, Fudan University, Shanghai, China."
You can tell which reads match bacteria if you just do a BLAST search for the read and check if its best matches are bacteria. And you can also tell if a contig matches bacteria by doing a BLAST search for the contig. That's what Wu et al. did in their Supplementary Table 1. Metagenomic assemblers like MEGAHIT know how to separate reads from different organisms into different contigs. You don't need to remove bacterial reads in order to accurately assemble contigs for viral reads, except in some rare cases where there's assembly errors. But the assembly errors are usually near the ends of contigs, and they're easy to spot if you just align the contig with sequences of its sister species and you find that there's an insertion near either end of the contig which is missing from the sister species.
Pardon me, you're correct that in the Wu study they took all the RNA from the BALF, not a cell culture (cell culture supernatant is often/typically used).
But you're still left with the problems that:
- there is no known "virus" to sequence - which you are always perfectly happy to overlook, for some reason
the rest is moot, but some additional points are that:
- assembling is not sequencing
- you're assuming that every bacteria, fungi, has already been accurately sequenced with their genomes uploaded
- you wouldn't be using the same sets of reads that were used by Wu et al. (minus the RNA from the imaginary virus)
From Wu et al:
"In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents.....
Sequencing reads were first adaptor and quality trimmed using the Trimmomatic program32. The remaining 56,565,928 reads were assembled
de novo using both Megahit (v.1.1.3)9 and Trinity (v.2.5.1)33 with
default parameter settings. Megahit generated a total of 384,096 assembled
contigs (size range of 200–30,474 nt), whereas Trinity generated
1,329,960 contigs with a size range of 201–11,760 nt"
I don't know what the purpose would be to use "the same sets of reads that were used by Wu et al. (minus the RNA from the imaginary virus) from Wu et al.". But the following code removes reads that match SARS2 from Wu et al.'s raw reads, then runs MEGAHIT on the filtered reads, and then checks if any of the created contigs match SARS2. I got a total of 11,951 contigs with a maximum length of 8,942. But as expected, zero of the contigs aligned against SARS2:
Sorry, I was too busy responding to all of your comments at Coppolino's blog. And the MEGAHIT command I posted took about 2 hours to run, and I got it wrong the first time so I had to run it a second time.
There's a huge number of SARS2 sequences which have zero nucleotide changes from the third version of the Wuhan-Hu-1 sequence published by Wu et al.
The NextStrain clade of Wuhan-Hu-1 is 19A, even though there's some samples classified under 19A which have additional mutations. Even in NextStrain's global subsample of about 3,000 SARS2 sequences where there's not that many sequences from early 2020, the samples Netherlands/Oss_1363500/2020 (from 2020-02-29) and USA/WI-UW-247/2020 (from 2020-03-28) are listed as having zero nucleotide changes from Wuhan-Hu-1:
In the first version of Wuhan-Hu-1 published at GenBank, there's two assembly errors where they accidentally included a 618-base segment of human DNA at the 3' end and they included a wrong 24-base segment at the 5' end. So other people have probably not independently reproduced the first version of Wuhan-Hu-1 unless they somehow managed to reproduce the exact same errors.
I think by 16 million you mean that there's about 16 million SARS2 sequences at GISAID, but many of them represent identical variants.
Lorenzo Subissi was asked: "Are you aware of any scientific publication with the control conducted and documented?" He replied "I am not." But that doesn't mean that no control experiment exists for the de-novo assembly of SARS2, but it could just mean that Subissi didn't know about any control experiment, or that Subissi knew about a control experiment but not an experiment which was featured in a scientific publication. I have done a kind of a redneck version of the control experiment myself, but I didn't write a scientific publication about it, and Subissi probably doesn't know about my experiment.
In both cases the text was missing an article after the phrase "I am", so for example they said "I am molecular biologist" instead of "I am a molecular biologist". Both Robert Karlsson and Daniel also used the phrase "Sorry to bother you". And both email threads look like they were saved as PDF from Gmail's webmail or a similar interface (because I don't know if for example mobile applications for Gmail produce the same kind of PDFs). And both PDFs used an American date format but a 24-hour clock. When I tried printing an email thread from Gmail's webmail interface, my version of Gmail used an American date format but a 12-hour clock.
The person who sent the emails wrote with such bad grammar that I doubt that he's either a biochemist or a molecular biologist.
I googled for `site:fluoridefreepeel.ca "quoted text hidden" -massey` to search if there were more email threads by Daniel the molecular biologist from Norway, who is also known as Robert Karlsson the biochemist from Sweden.
Daniel, Robert, and Igson all followed an inconsistent convention where they sometimes placed two or three empty lines before their signature but sometimes only a single line. Igson and Robert both wrote "sars-cov-2" in lowercase.
Both Igson and Daniel wrote in a clumsy way where they included many parenthesized phrases in the middle of their sentences. Igson wrote:
> Did you or your colleagues try to extract RNA from uninfected supernatant and cells treated the same way as infected cells and supernatant but virus-free (without patient sample), and to generate the reads and implement" de novo "approach (de novo assembly ) or to align (mapping assembly) the reads to sars-cov-2 genome? (extraction of RNA, library preparation, sequencing and assembly of sars-cov-2 genome). Do you have raw data (raw reads) published and documented for the control?
And Daniel wrote:
> When using methods in virology for sequencing and assembly of nucleic acids originating from virus-infected cells/supernatant, do you (you=your group or any relevant WHO laboratories) use or advice laboratories with this negative control:
> Use of RNA from uninfected cells and/or uninfected supernatant (cell cultures) treated in the same way as infected cell cultures but without any virus, and attempt of assembly ("de novo", mapping, alignment) of a virus genome with the reads derived from the RNA.
Amazing how you spend soooo much time on my substack making countless useless, distracting comments about fake-sequencing, and take such a close interest/concern in such minute details, but are A-OK with the complete and utter lack of science showing the imaginary virus even exists, and the admitted lack of even half-assed controls used in the fake-sequencing process.
Again I have to wonder who you are and what you get out of this.
LOL. A "redneck version" of the experiment? Right. I've done a hippie version which demonstrates the existence of unicorns, but did not publish it.
"The person who sent the emails wrote with such bad grammar that I doubt that he's either a biochemist or a molecular biologist."
You must not know many scientists. LOL. I couldn't write for shit when i graduated with an engineering degree. Most of my students at UC Berkeley, largely engineering or hard science majors, couldn't write very well. You are basically charging Christine with fraud. And your excuse for Subisi is below pathetic.
"a sequencing run of a human lung metagenome that was published before 2020, download the FASTQ files of the run, and then use MEGAHIT to assemble contigs for the reads. You won't get any contigs that match long segments of SARS2"
Human lung tissue is of known provenance. It was sequenced, i.e. broken down from the full ACTUAL genome, nice try calling it a metagenome. What was ASSEMBLED for SARS-CoV-2 came from a bunch of segments of UNKNOWN provenance. no telling that any of the 400k-1.2M possible genomes assembled out of the mess (depending upon the program used) consisted entirely of sequences from the same entity. You are deceptively equating sequencing and assembling, this is a core deception of metagenomics.
A human lung metagenome sample doesn't necessarily consist of lung tissue but it can also consist of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid like in the case of the reads from Wu et al. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/?term=SRR10971381).
Only a small fraction of the MEGAHIT contigs from Wu et al. are meant to represent parts of the genome of SARS2, or it may even be only a single contig. From their Supplementary Table 1, you can see the top BLAST hits for their 50 most abundant contigs: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-020-2008-3/MediaObjects/41586_2020_2008_MOESM1_ESM.pdf. One of the top 50 contigs matched the Zhoushan bat sarbecovirus ZC45, but the other 49 contigs all matched bacteria like prevotella, veillonella, and leptotrichia.
In the STAT analysis which shows how many reads match different organisms, different species of prevotella and leptotrichia also rank the highest along with humans and SARS 2:
Their full set of Wu et al.'s 384,096 contigs cannot be reproduced because in the set of raw reads they uploaded to the SRA, they masked about half of the reads so that the reads consist of only N letters. The masked reads probably consist of human reads, and Wu et al. may have decided to mask the reads because they accidentally included a 618-base segment of human DNA at the end of the first version of MN908947: https://output.jsbin.com/suwuxoy#Why_is_the_longest_MEGAHIT_contig_not_reproducible_. Also Wu et al.'s exact set of contigs cannot be reproduced because they didn't specify which settings they used with Trimmomatic.
When I used MEGAHIT to assemble Wu et al.'s reads after doing trimming with Trimmomatic, I got the same 22,169 contigs that are included in this file posted by USMortality, because he ran Trimmomatic and MEGAHIT with the same settings as me: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/USMortality/Megahit-SARS-CoV-2/master/out/final.contigs.fa. Only one out of all 22,169 contigs matched SARS2:
When I aligned all contigs against a file of about 15,000 virus reference sequences, I only got 7 additional contigs which matched viruses. 4 contigs matched streptococcus phage PH10. And the remaining 3 contigs matched human endogenous retrovirus K113, but its genome is about 99% identical with a part of the human genome, so the contigs probably just matched the human genome:
Amazing how you spend soooo much time on my substack making countless useless, distracting comments about fake-sequencing, and take such a close interest/concern in such details, but are A-OK with the complete and utter lack of science showing the imaginary virus even exists, and the admitted lack of even half-assed controls used in the fake-sequencing process.
Again I have to wonder who you are and what you get out of this.
Kicking ass as usual, Christine. You're a bright star.
Thought you might enjoy this:
https://michaelschuval.substack.com/p/supermarket-section?sd=pf
First and foremost anyone claiming a virus, even a bacteriophage, exists, needs to conclusively show that nucleic acids actually exist in the real world, and not by indirect inferences, need to show them by any microscope method they would wish, that is the first step to actually trying to establish a true science, but even them, i hardly could be convinced of anything said in regards to such things. My actual point about reality is more or less the one expressed by the two gentleman in this video and I wholeheartedly would recommend any truth seeker to adopt a similar view from now on:
https://youtu.be/XGoBTrrBh-I
Inside The Vatican’s Surprising Alliance With Biotech Venture Capital
BY: MAUREEN MULLARKEY
JULY 15, 2021
“The pressure for universal injection with a biological agent still under probation is unprecedented. Equally remarkable is the papal embrace of vaccine politics and its network of commercial partners and global governments. Propelled by COVID, the military-industrial complex of 60 years ago has its parallel in the medical-industrial complex. And the Vatican approves.”
Source: https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/15/inside-the-vaticans-surprising-alliance-with-biotech-venture-capital/
Things are getting very desperate Christine... the crew at the Doherty Institute have discovered that garlic kills “COVID” 🤨
I think the most disappointing thing to observe is the amount of people standing on their soap boxes announcing “see, I told you we didn’t need vaccine mandates!!! ‘Cause garlic kills COVID!!!” due to their complete inability to discern that the whole point of the “discovery” and media hype is to continue to convince everyone that there is this “virus” called “COVID” that garlic can “kill”!? 🤦🏻♂️
Link: https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/health-and-wellness/doherty-finds-garlic-kills-covid-20230530-p5dcgn
Christine PHENOMENAL article on david martine malleable reality ect. i went to Robert Malones tweeter and read what he said about no virurs people (which i am proud to say i am 100%%%% a no virus person) i don't know wheather to laugh or cry or both based on what he says-------it gets worse ------ if you scroll down just a little on his tweeter Robert Malone is foaming at the mouth about how wonderful the (rockefeller foundation and the WHO have formed a partnership to expand global pandemic preparedness in era of climate change)--------i am not makeing this up thats what it says and then i went to the link at the rockefeller foundation website and read the the whole article its all true-----i am using your term now virus pushers ( i love it) ------------my heart goes out to the family and friends of DR Rasid Buttar with his passing he was a great person i will miss him dearly he was one of the very few men men i looked up to in this nightmare world we live in
I will read the rest of your post tonight. But in the meaantime, it occures to me to ask myself, why would negative control studies in virus genetic sequencing be needed, when the parts and pieces of genetic material come from an unknown array of substances and microbes and fragments glopped together in a stew? Virologist computer programs create never-found-intact sequences built from bits of unknown origin. Therefore, what purpose would negative control studies attain? There's no rational "positive" study at the outset of this pretend procedure.
I totally agree :) The point of these "control" investigations is that they don't even attempt a half-assed "control" to see if they can end up with the same result using material that they don't think contains a "virus".
That is an indication of how far off the rails the 'science' has gone. Had they used controls in the first place, they would have realized that virology is not a science and only finds what they have been expecting/paid to find, rather than what is there or not there.
Excellent exposure once again of these fraudsters (in positions of authority!) and how they operate. Anybody who responds to FOIRs by saying that the requested information is “confidential” — like those who when questioned about their criminal activity say “no comment” — is clearly engaging in either a cover-up of their ignorance or is tacitly admitting guilt. It’s really quite obvious with these short (oftentimes single-word) responses used to quickly dismiss the requests.
Saying they "followed the leads of experts” but then refusing to give any additional information about the experiments they conducted, or claiming something like purification or genomic sequence obtained from a negative control was “unnecessary,” reveals that they’re just participants in the scam. As professionals (so-called “scientists”) at universities, "institutes," or other official (gov't) entities, they should be able to give detailed and logical responses to any and every request while providing proof that the scientific method was rigorously adhered to in all studies claiming viral existence. Arrogant refusals of follow-ups and further investigations like that of Mr. Martin Hendry (I refuse to call people like that “professors” or “doctors”) are also more proof of the scam via admissions of guilt. Obtaining these admissions is absolute gold, Christine. Thank you.
But the best response by far (and kudos to them for a flat-out admission) is: "We haven't tried anything you asked for.” lol
Thanks, and I can't take credit because other people obtained these responses, I'm just helping to disseminate them :)
Me: Over 30 years, never ill, never got a cold or the flu or a coronavirus: Mix one heaped teaspoon of salt (I use shop bought, Iodine based, table salt) in a mug of clean cold or warm water, cup a hand and pour in some solution, sniff or snort the entire contents up your nose, in small doses, spitting out anything which comes down into your mouth. If a burning sensation, then you have a virus in your nasal passages, behind your eyes, in the escutcheon tubes to your inner ears, brain bulb, brain stem (hence Long Covid) so wait until burning stops (2-3 minutes) then blow out your nose with toilet paper and flush away, washing your hands afterwards. Do my free salt water cure morning, noon, night, or more often if you want for a quicker result, until it feels like you are flushing with water - job done - or go to the sea and sniff or snort salt water up your nose and around your nasal passages - same thing.
The 5 day isolation, is when the Coronavirus transmutes to Covid in your head, passed down into your body in the one liter of snot we each produce daily, the engine oil of the body, in my opinion - a vaccine in your arm is not going to heal a Coronavirus in your head, nor the residue after a Covid type flu has passed, in your head, is it?
It can take up to 2-3 weeks after clearing a virus infection in the head, for Covid to occur in the body.
My free salt water cure does what no synthetic mRNA vaccine will ever be able to do - it kills the virus in the nasal passages of the head, before it gets to become anything else and it is the method which has kept me "never ill" for over 30 years and there is no reason why your health should not be the same as mine, if you do as I do. Cost zero - time taken less than 3 minutes, each complete snort or sniffle.
Needless to say, do whenever you think you might have caught an airborne nasal infection, from someone else.
Probably good for Long Covid, as it flushes your nasal passages out and leaves no place, not washed. So much for synthetic mRNA vaccines - you get a head cold and you inject a vaccine in your arm to clear it - like duh!! - much laughter, you have got to be kidding, right?
What virus, lady?!
I'm guessing you're new to this site? :)
That’s okay.
Some people like to be linked-in to what is not happening in front of them.
If you get nothing from it - never mind.
Thank you for you.
-Tom
Robert,
You are not in front of anything. You have no “charge”. Everything is reactive and derivative.
Bottom Line:
You Are The “Before There Was A Vaccine” Guy.
& The “Here’s Where It Got Fucked Up” Guy.
Un fuck it. Yours needs to be a campaign:
1. Declare Victory REPEATEDLY For Natural Immunity ... All Else Follows.
2. Re-Write The Testing/Trial Protocols. That Is Your Vehicle. It Undoes The Past. And It Blazes The Trail To A Better Future.
I have never been more right. Sir.
I think you're on the wrong substack?
.
Dr. Malone,
Declare Victory For Natural Immunity.
Your Reluctance Is What’s Killing You Inside.
Sir.
.
Immunity to what?
.
It’s Not That I’m Anti-Vax.
It’s Just That I Am In The Middle Of
A Rock ... Scissors ... Paper
Challenge With Robert Malone
To The Count Of 17 Trillion Billion Zillion.
.
.
It’s Not That I’m Anti-Vax.
It’s Just That I Am In The Middle Of
A Rock ... Scissors ... Paper
Challenge With Robert Malone
To The Count Of 17 Trillion Billion Zillion.
.
I've successfully won Oregon Health Authority public records appeals ... DM me if you want me to file a well-formed public records appeal. I actually sued the Multnomah County Health Dept. and won. I'll need a copy of the original request - this goes to Rosenbaum, though. In their response, they failed to cite a valid exception to the law.
Tom, are there transcripts available from your case? Or, any records that I could look at?
Turns out that another colleague was very recently denied on the same grounds, by Jeanne, when he asked for the death rates of jabbed vs unjabbed!
And ironically, according to Jeanne:
"The retention schedule for public records requests is five years. OAR 166-300-0015(23). If records are not purged and a request is made, those records would be available. All public records requests directed to Oregon Health Authority are assigned a reference number (e.g., your request is 2022-0952). Moreover, all requests are posted online and are searchable.https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ERD/Pages/Public-Records-Requests.aspx."
The full names of the people making requests is made public. But reports, protocols, etc containing no personal information are being denied.
And there's this:
Oregon Health Authority Condemned by Scientists For Scrubbing Report on Wireless Hazards in Schools
https://washingtonspectator.org/oregon-health-authority-forbes/
Thanks a lot Tom, I appreciate it. It was a colleague who filed this request and I'm not sure if he already followed up with them. His request and his comments on their response are in the pdf, and yes it looks like you are correct, she didn't cite a valid exemption.
For anyone following along, here is the section of the (corporate by-)law that was cited:
https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_433.008
Here is my colleague's comment:
"That section actually applies to information gathered about individuals, 'cause ORS433.008 Section 6 then follows up and says:
Nothing in this section:
Prevents the authority or a local public health administrator from publishing statistical compilations and reports relating toreportable disease investigations if the compilations and reports do not identify individual cases or sources of information;
I did not ask for personal information at all, just asked for Health Agency records of the ways they had gone about confirming the "virus" and the "disease"."
The state of Oregon's refusal is highly fishy, i believe it's in open violation of FOI laws, since the inquiries did not request records of private information, only a matter of general knowledge of the science involved. Thanks, Christine.
BTW, your old friend Mongol (:-) ) tried pushing the "PCR test is valid, COVID proven via excess deaths spikes" argument on the Substack of a mutual friend of ours, but didn't do too well. I see he's trying the same thing here.
Lol, thanks Jeff :) And yes the response from Jeanne seems inaccurate for sure!
As a control experiment for the metagenomic assembly of Wuhan-Hu-1/MN908947, you can search the NCBI's sequence read archive for a sequencing run of a human lung metagenome that was published before 2020, download the FASTQ files of the run, and then use MEGAHIT to assemble contigs for the reads. You won't get any contigs that match long segments of SARS2 with a low error rate: https://output.jsbin.com/suwuxoy#Other_lung_metagenomes_can_be_used_as_controls_for_MEGAHIT_assembly.
A few problems with your suggestion:
1) there is no known "virus" that needs sequencing (kinda important, don't you think?),
2) relying on yet another "meta-genomic" in silico sequence in a database - no thanks;
3) this would not control for all the RNA that was actually in the RNA soup extracted from the cell culture (RNA from the man/woman and whatever bacteria/fungi and other sources were in their clinical sample of bodily fluid/tissue, RNA from the cell line and its contaminants, RNA from the fetal bovine serum).
I wasn't relying on a metagenomic sequence but on a metagenomic set of raw reads. How else do you propose performing the control experiment for the metagenomic assembly of Wuhan-Hu-1? Don't you need another set of raw reads that is comparable to Wu et al.'s set of raw reads? I don't know how to do the sequencing part myself, but I can try to do a control experiment for the assembly part if I search for RNA-Seq reads that are derived from a BALF sample of a human pneumonia patient and I then test if it's possible to assemble a contig of SARS2 from the reads.
For example when USMortality said on Twitter that Wu et al. didn't use any controls when they used MEGAHIT to assemble Wuhan-Hu-1, sense_strand replied to him: "Any metatranscriptomics experiment before 2019 is a control. Tell me if you find SARS-CoV-2." (https://twitter.com/sense_strand/status/1644033990851002368) That's basically what I tried to do on the JS Bin page I linked.
Wu et al.'s metagenomic raw reads were produced with RNA-Seq which doesn't required doing cell culture or using fetal bovine serum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA-Seq#Library_preparation. This is what Wu et al. wrote in their methods: "Total RNA was extracted from the BALF sample using the RNeasy Plus Universal Mini kit (Qiagen) following the manufacturer's instructions. The quantity and quality of the RNA solution was assessed using a Qbit machine and an Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies) before library construction and sequencing. An RNA library was then constructed using the SMARTer Stranded Total RNA-Seq kit v.2 (TaKaRa). Ribosomal RNA depletion was performed during library construction following the manufacturer's instructions. Paired-end (150-bp reads) sequencing of the RNA library was performed on the MiniSeq platform (Illumina). Library preparation and sequencing were carried out at the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, Fudan University, Shanghai, China."
You can tell which reads match bacteria if you just do a BLAST search for the read and check if its best matches are bacteria. And you can also tell if a contig matches bacteria by doing a BLAST search for the contig. That's what Wu et al. did in their Supplementary Table 1. Metagenomic assemblers like MEGAHIT know how to separate reads from different organisms into different contigs. You don't need to remove bacterial reads in order to accurately assemble contigs for viral reads, except in some rare cases where there's assembly errors. But the assembly errors are usually near the ends of contigs, and they're easy to spot if you just align the contig with sequences of its sister species and you find that there's an insertion near either end of the contig which is missing from the sister species.
Pardon me, you're correct that in the Wu study they took all the RNA from the BALF, not a cell culture (cell culture supernatant is often/typically used).
But you're still left with the problems that:
- there is no known "virus" to sequence - which you are always perfectly happy to overlook, for some reason
the rest is moot, but some additional points are that:
- assembling is not sequencing
- you're assuming that every bacteria, fungi, has already been accurately sequenced with their genomes uploaded
- you wouldn't be using the same sets of reads that were used by Wu et al. (minus the RNA from the imaginary virus)
From Wu et al:
"In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents.....
Sequencing reads were first adaptor and quality trimmed using the Trimmomatic program32. The remaining 56,565,928 reads were assembled
de novo using both Megahit (v.1.1.3)9 and Trinity (v.2.5.1)33 with
default parameter settings. Megahit generated a total of 384,096 assembled
contigs (size range of 200–30,474 nt), whereas Trinity generated
1,329,960 contigs with a size range of 201–11,760 nt"
I don't know what the purpose would be to use "the same sets of reads that were used by Wu et al. (minus the RNA from the imaginary virus) from Wu et al.". But the following code removes reads that match SARS2 from Wu et al.'s raw reads, then runs MEGAHIT on the filtered reads, and then checks if any of the created contigs match SARS2. I got a total of 11,951 contigs with a maximum length of 8,942. But as expected, zero of the contigs aligned against SARS2:
wget ftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR109/081/SRR10971381/SRR10971381_{1,2}.fastq.gz
curl 'https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/efetch.fcgi?db=nuccore&rettype=fasta&id=MN908947.3'>sars2.fa
bowtie2-build sars2.fa{,}
bowtie2 -p3 -x sars2.fa -1 SRR10971381_1.fastq -2 SRR10971381_2.fastq --no-unal|samtools sort -@2 ->sorted.bam
for x in 1 2;do samtools view sorted.bam|cut -f1|seqkit grep -f- SRR10971381_$x.fastq>SRR10971381.2_$x.fq;done
megahit -1 SRR10971381.2_1.fq -2 SRR10971381.2_1.fq -o megawufiltered
bowtie2 -p3 -x sars2.fa -fU megawufiltered/final.contigs.fa --no-unal|samtools sort -@2 ->sorted2.bam
Funny how you only responded after 7 hours, perhaps figuring that by now people on the East Coast are asleep? Good job trolling.
You are assuming SARS2 actually exists to match to. IN fact, no one has ever matched Fan Wu, that's why we supposedly have 16 million variants.
Any proof that contagion theory is valid?
Sorry, I was too busy responding to all of your comments at Coppolino's blog. And the MEGAHIT command I posted took about 2 hours to run, and I got it wrong the first time so I had to run it a second time.
There's a huge number of SARS2 sequences which have zero nucleotide changes from the third version of the Wuhan-Hu-1 sequence published by Wu et al.
The NextStrain clade of Wuhan-Hu-1 is 19A, even though there's some samples classified under 19A which have additional mutations. Even in NextStrain's global subsample of about 3,000 SARS2 sequences where there's not that many sequences from early 2020, the samples Netherlands/Oss_1363500/2020 (from 2020-02-29) and USA/WI-UW-247/2020 (from 2020-03-28) are listed as having zero nucleotide changes from Wuhan-Hu-1:
curl https://data.nextstrain.org/files/ncov/open/global/metadata.tsv.xz|gzip -dc>global.tsv;cut -f1,7,9,20,21,57 global.tsv|sort|awk -F\\t '$4=="19A"'|column -ts$'\t'
In the first version of Wuhan-Hu-1 published at GenBank, there's two assembly errors where they accidentally included a 618-base segment of human DNA at the 3' end and they included a wrong 24-base segment at the 5' end. So other people have probably not independently reproduced the first version of Wuhan-Hu-1 unless they somehow managed to reproduce the exact same errors.
I think by 16 million you mean that there's about 16 million SARS2 sequences at GISAID, but many of them represent identical variants.
Dude, there were no controls done with MN908947, or any other significant study. The WHO's Lorenzo Subisi admits this, above.
Lorenzo Subissi was asked: "Are you aware of any scientific publication with the control conducted and documented?" He replied "I am not." But that doesn't mean that no control experiment exists for the de-novo assembly of SARS2, but it could just mean that Subissi didn't know about any control experiment, or that Subissi knew about a control experiment but not an experiment which was featured in a scientific publication. I have done a kind of a redneck version of the control experiment myself, but I didn't write a scientific publication about it, and Subissi probably doesn't know about my experiment.
BTW in the thread of emails sent to Lorenzo Subissi, the first email started: "My name is Daniel [blanked]. I am molecular biologist from Norway." (https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/WHO-team-geschwarzt-Lorenzo-Subissi.pdf)
In Massey's previous post where she linked to a similar PDF about a thread of emails sent to Joshua Quick, the first email started with "My name is Robert Karlsson. I am biochemist from Sweden." (https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Joshua-Quick-re-Arctic-WGS-controls.pdf, https://christinemasseyfois.substack.com/p/germ-fois-joshua-quick-king-of-primers)
In both cases the text was missing an article after the phrase "I am", so for example they said "I am molecular biologist" instead of "I am a molecular biologist". Both Robert Karlsson and Daniel also used the phrase "Sorry to bother you". And both email threads look like they were saved as PDF from Gmail's webmail or a similar interface (because I don't know if for example mobile applications for Gmail produce the same kind of PDFs). And both PDFs used an American date format but a 24-hour clock. When I tried printing an email thread from Gmail's webmail interface, my version of Gmail used an American date format but a 12-hour clock.
The person who sent the emails wrote with such bad grammar that I doubt that he's either a biochemist or a molecular biologist.
I googled for `site:fluoridefreepeel.ca "quoted text hidden" -massey` to search if there were more email threads by Daniel the molecular biologist from Norway, who is also known as Robert Karlsson the biochemist from Sweden.
I found a third PDF which looks like it was saved from Gmail's webmail interface: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/DGF-Denmark-Igson-Negrin-PACKAGE.pdf. Like the email threads by Robert Karlsson and Daniel, it also uses a 24-hour clock but an American date format with the month before the day. The emails were sent by Igson Negrin who is a Norwegian Lankatard. In 2021 he also sent emails to the U.S. CDC and to Ulrike Kammerer (https://twitter.com/ReusVisser/status/1437198824804687879).
Daniel, Robert, and Igson all followed an inconsistent convention where they sometimes placed two or three empty lines before their signature but sometimes only a single line. Igson and Robert both wrote "sars-cov-2" in lowercase.
Both Igson and Daniel wrote in a clumsy way where they included many parenthesized phrases in the middle of their sentences. Igson wrote:
> Did you or your colleagues try to extract RNA from uninfected supernatant and cells treated the same way as infected cells and supernatant but virus-free (without patient sample), and to generate the reads and implement" de novo "approach (de novo assembly ) or to align (mapping assembly) the reads to sars-cov-2 genome? (extraction of RNA, library preparation, sequencing and assembly of sars-cov-2 genome). Do you have raw data (raw reads) published and documented for the control?
And Daniel wrote:
> When using methods in virology for sequencing and assembly of nucleic acids originating from virus-infected cells/supernatant, do you (you=your group or any relevant WHO laboratories) use or advice laboratories with this negative control:
> Use of RNA from uninfected cells and/or uninfected supernatant (cell cultures) treated in the same way as infected cell cultures but without any virus, and attempt of assembly ("de novo", mapping, alignment) of a virus genome with the reads derived from the RNA.
Amazing how you spend soooo much time on my substack making countless useless, distracting comments about fake-sequencing, and take such a close interest/concern in such minute details, but are A-OK with the complete and utter lack of science showing the imaginary virus even exists, and the admitted lack of even half-assed controls used in the fake-sequencing process.
Again I have to wonder who you are and what you get out of this.
LOL. A "redneck version" of the experiment? Right. I've done a hippie version which demonstrates the existence of unicorns, but did not publish it.
"The person who sent the emails wrote with such bad grammar that I doubt that he's either a biochemist or a molecular biologist."
You must not know many scientists. LOL. I couldn't write for shit when i graduated with an engineering degree. Most of my students at UC Berkeley, largely engineering or hard science majors, couldn't write very well. You are basically charging Christine with fraud. And your excuse for Subisi is below pathetic.
"a sequencing run of a human lung metagenome that was published before 2020, download the FASTQ files of the run, and then use MEGAHIT to assemble contigs for the reads. You won't get any contigs that match long segments of SARS2"
Human lung tissue is of known provenance. It was sequenced, i.e. broken down from the full ACTUAL genome, nice try calling it a metagenome. What was ASSEMBLED for SARS-CoV-2 came from a bunch of segments of UNKNOWN provenance. no telling that any of the 400k-1.2M possible genomes assembled out of the mess (depending upon the program used) consisted entirely of sequences from the same entity. You are deceptively equating sequencing and assembling, this is a core deception of metagenomics.
A human lung metagenome sample doesn't necessarily consist of lung tissue but it can also consist of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid like in the case of the reads from Wu et al. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/?term=SRR10971381).
Only a small fraction of the MEGAHIT contigs from Wu et al. are meant to represent parts of the genome of SARS2, or it may even be only a single contig. From their Supplementary Table 1, you can see the top BLAST hits for their 50 most abundant contigs: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-020-2008-3/MediaObjects/41586_2020_2008_MOESM1_ESM.pdf. One of the top 50 contigs matched the Zhoushan bat sarbecovirus ZC45, but the other 49 contigs all matched bacteria like prevotella, veillonella, and leptotrichia.
In the STAT analysis which shows how many reads match different organisms, different species of prevotella and leptotrichia also rank the highest along with humans and SARS 2:
curl 'https://trace.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Traces/sra-db-be/run_taxonomy?acc=SRR10971381&cluster_name=public'>SRR10971381.stat
jq -r '[.[]|.tax_table[]|.parent]as$par|[.[]|.tax_table[]|select(.tax_id as$x|$par|index($x)|not)]|sort_by(-.total_count)[]|((.total_count|tostring)+";"+.org)' SRR10971381.stat
Their full set of Wu et al.'s 384,096 contigs cannot be reproduced because in the set of raw reads they uploaded to the SRA, they masked about half of the reads so that the reads consist of only N letters. The masked reads probably consist of human reads, and Wu et al. may have decided to mask the reads because they accidentally included a 618-base segment of human DNA at the end of the first version of MN908947: https://output.jsbin.com/suwuxoy#Why_is_the_longest_MEGAHIT_contig_not_reproducible_. Also Wu et al.'s exact set of contigs cannot be reproduced because they didn't specify which settings they used with Trimmomatic.
When I used MEGAHIT to assemble Wu et al.'s reads after doing trimming with Trimmomatic, I got the same 22,169 contigs that are included in this file posted by USMortality, because he ran Trimmomatic and MEGAHIT with the same settings as me: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/USMortality/Megahit-SARS-CoV-2/master/out/final.contigs.fa. Only one out of all 22,169 contigs matched SARS2:
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/USMortality/Megahit-SARS-CoV-2/master/out/final.contigs.fa
curl 'https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/efetch.fcgi?db=nuccore&rettype=fasta&id=MN908947.3'>sars2.fa
bowtie2-build sars2.fa{,}
bowtie2 -p3 -x sars2.fa -fU final.contigs.fa --no-unal|samtools sort ->temp.bam
When I aligned all contigs against a file of about 15,000 virus reference sequences, I only got 7 additional contigs which matched viruses. 4 contigs matched streptococcus phage PH10. And the remaining 3 contigs matched human endogenous retrovirus K113, but its genome is about 99% identical with a part of the human genome, so the contigs probably just matched the human genome:
wget https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/refseq/release/viral/viral.1.1.genomic.fna.gz
seqkit fx2tab viral.1.1.genomic.fna.gz|sed $'s/A*\t$//'|seqkit tab2fx|bbmask.sh window=20 in=stdin out=viral.fa
bowtie2-build viral.fa{,}
bowtie2 -p3 -x viral.fa -fU final.contigs.fa --no-unal|samtools sort ->temp2.bam
x=temp2.bam;samtools coverage $x|awk \$4|cut -f1,3-6|(gsed -u '1s/$/\terr%\tname/;q';sort -rnk4|awk -F\\t -v OFS=\\t 'NR==FNR{a[$1]=$2;next}{print$0,sprintf("%.2f",a[$1])}' <(samtools view $x|awk -F\\t '{x=$3;n[x]++;len[x]+=length($10);sub(/.*NM:i:/,"");mis[x]+=$1}END{for(i in n)print i"\t"100*mis[i]/len[i]}') -|awk -F\\t 'NR==FNR{a[$1]=$2;next}{print$0"\t"a[$1]}' <(seqkit seq -n viral.fa|gsed 's/ /\t/;s/, .*//') -)|column -ts$'\t'
contig = creation, not discovery
Amazing how you spend soooo much time on my substack making countless useless, distracting comments about fake-sequencing, and take such a close interest/concern in such details, but are A-OK with the complete and utter lack of science showing the imaginary virus even exists, and the admitted lack of even half-assed controls used in the fake-sequencing process.
Again I have to wonder who you are and what you get out of this.
I don't think "Mongol" is an individual, but part of a team, perhaps M77?