<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#f9f9fa">
<p> </p>
<div id="toolbar" class="toolbar-container scrolled"> </div>
<div class="container" style="--line-height: 1.6em;" dir="ltr">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element"> <a
class="domain reader-domain"
href="https://fos-sa.org/2021/08/10/has-sars-cov-2-been-isolated-and-purified-to-show-existence/">fos-sa.org</a>
<h1 class="reader-title">Has SARS-COV-2 been isolated and
purified to show existence?</h1>
<div class="credits reader-credits">Published by FOS-SA Freedom
Of Speech View all posts by FOS-SA</div>
<div class="meta-data">
<div class="reader-estimated-time" dir="ltr">16-21 minutes</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<div>
<figure><img data-attachment-id="5719"
data-permalink="https://fos-sa.org/image-39-9/"
data-orig-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-39.png"
data-orig-size="772,441" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"","orientation":"0"}"
data-image-title="image-39" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption=""
data-medium-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-39.png?w=300"
data-large-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-39.png?w=772"
src="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-39.png?w=772"
alt="" width="352" height="201"></figure>
<p>Due to an influx of emails and comments, we felt the
need to recap why we believe SARS-COV-2 has yet to be
proven to exist. Firstly one has to discuss what process
virologists use in the discovery of a new virus.</p>
<h2>Isolation versus Purification</h2>
<p>Virologists must know that the common definition of
isolation and purification are virtually identical. For
example, according to the Oxford English Dictionary:</p>
<ul>
<li>Isolation • “The action of isolating; the fact or
condition of being isolated or standing alone;
separation from other things or persons;
solitariness”.</li>
<li>Purification • “Freeing from dirt or defilement;
cleansing; separation of the dross, dregs, refuse, or
other debasing or deteriorating matter, to obtain the
substance in a pure condition”.</li>
</ul>
<p>One can argue about subtleties, but if you took some
ore and isolated gold, it would be the same as purifying
gold. But with viruses, virologists have thoroughly
debased the word “isolation” while rarely using the word
“purification”.</p>
<p>Since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples
from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with
a similar disease. They then minimally process this
sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue
culture containing usually four to six other types of
material — <strong>all of which contain identical
genetic material as to what is called a “virus.”</strong> The
tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally
disintegrates into many types of particles, some of
which contain genetic material. Against all common
sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific
integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.”
This brew containing fragments of genetic material from
many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis,
which then creates in a computer-simulation process the
alleged sequence of the suspected virus, a so-called <em>in
silico genome</em>. At no time is an actual virus
confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome
extracted and sequenced from a real virus.</p>
<p>The proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate
a new virus is to firstly take samples (blood, sputum,
secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms
that are unique and specific enough to characterize an
illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or
products that also contain genetic material, the
virologist macerates, filters, and ultracentrifuges
i.e. <em>purifies</em> the specimen. This common
virology technique, done for decades to isolate
bacteriophages1 and so-called giant viruses in every
virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate
with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized
and shaped particles. These particles are then isolated
and purified virus.</p>
<p>These identical particles are then checked for
uniformity by physical or microscopic techniques. Once
the purity is determined, the particles may be further
characterized. This would include examining the
structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the
particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized
by extracting the genetic material directly from the
purified particles and using genetic-sequencing
techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also
been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to
confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous
(outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be,
and not the normal break-down products of dead and dying
tissues.2 (we know that virologists have no way to
determine whether the particles they are seeing are
viruses or just typical break-down products of dead and
dying tissues.)3</p>
<p>If we have come this far, then we have fully isolated,
characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous
virus particle. However, we still have to show it is
causally related to a disease. This is carried out by
exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are
usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the
manner in which the disease is thought to be
transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same
disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings,
one has now shown that the virus actually causes
disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission
of an infectious agent.</p>
<p>None of these steps has even been attempted with the
SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been
successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic
virus. Our research indicates that a single study
showing these steps does not exist in the medical
literature.</p>
<p><sup>1</sup> Isolation, characterization and analysis
of bacteriophages from the haloalkaline lake Elmenteita,
KenyaJuliah Khayeli Akhwale et al, PLOS One, Published:
April 25, 2019. <a rel="noreferrer noopener"
href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734"
target="_blank">https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734</a> —
accessed 2/15/21<br>
<sup>2</sup> “Extracellular Vesicles Derived From
Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and
Regeneration,” Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and
Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. <a
rel="noreferrer noopener"
href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full"
target="_blank">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full</a> —
accessed 2/15/21<br>
<sup>3</sup> “The Role of Extracellular Vesicles as
Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” Flavia Giannessi,
et al, Viruses, 2020 May</p>
<h5>Dr Lanka’s conducted a study to reproduce this
process, except they used proper control experiments to
show that each one of these steps can be done without
the presence of a virus.</h5>
<ul>
<li>In other words, cytopathic effects are observed due
to cell starvation and the introduction of antibiotics
and other toxic chemicals;</li>
<li>Computer programs can manufacture “viral” sequences
without the need for an actual virus to be present
and, finally;</li>
<li>The particles seen under the electron microscope are
normal constituents of dead and dying cells.</li>
</ul>
<p>This was the first study of its kind, and it is truly
revolutionary.</p>
<p><a
href="https://odysee.com/@DeansDanes:1/cpe-english:f">https://odysee.com/@DeansDanes:1/cpe-english:f</a></p>
<p>The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention and
the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre published the
first full SARS-CoV-2 genome (MN908947.1 ). This has
been updated many times. However, MN908947.1 was the
first genetic sequence describing the alleged COVID 19
etiologic agent (SARS-CoV-2).</p>
<p>All subsequent claims, tests, treatments, statistics,
vaccine development and resultant policies are based
upon this sequence. If the tests for this novel virus
don’t identify anything capable of causing illness in
human beings, the whole COVID 19 narrative is nothing
but a charade.</p>
<p>The WUHAN researchers stated that they had effectively
pieced the SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequence together by
matching fragments found in samples with other,
previously discovered genetic sequences. From the
gathered material, they found an 87.1% match with SARS
coronavirus (SARS-Cov). They used de novo assembly and
targeted PCR and found 29,891-base-pair, which shared a
79.6% sequence match to SARS-CoV.</p>
<p>They had to use de novo assembly because they had no
prior knowledge of the correct sequence or order of
those fragments. Quite simply, the WHO’s statement that
Chinese researchers isolated the virus on the 7th
January is false.</p>
<p>The Wuhan team used 40 rounds of RT-qPCR amplification
to match fragments of cDNA (complementary DNA
constructed from sampled RNA fragments) with the
published SARS coronavirus genome (SARS-CoV).
Unfortunately, it isn’t clear how accurate the original
SARS-CoV genome is either.</p>
<h2>Exhibit: A – The test was produced BEFORE having virus
material available.</h2>
<h4>Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by
real-time RT-PCR- published on 23 Jan 2020</h4>
<p>Background: The ongoing outbreak of the recently
emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge
for public health laboratories as<span><strong><em>
virus isolates are unavailable</em></strong></span>
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<span><em> <strong>without having
virus material available</strong></em></span>.
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. </p>
<p> A novel coronavirus currently termed 2019-nCoV was
officially announced as the causative agent by Chinese
authorities on 7 January. A viral genome sequence was
released for immediate public health support via the
community online resource virological.org on 10 January
(Wuhan-Hu-1, GenBank accession number MN908947 [2]),
followed by four other genomes deposited on 12 January
in the viral sequence database curated by the Global
Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID). The<span><strong><em>
genome sequences suggest presence of a virus</em></strong></span>
closely related to the members of a viral species termed
severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related CoV, a
species defined by the agent of the 2002/03 outbreak of
SARS in humans [3,4]. The species also comprises a large
number of viruses mostly detected in rhinolophid bats in
Asia and Europe.</p>
<figure></figure>
<h2>Exhibit: B – NO PROOF FOR THE RNA BEING OF VIRAL
ORIGIN</h2>
<p>What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We
need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are
calibrated comes from.</p>
<p>As textbooks (eg, White / Fenner. Medical Virology,
1986, p. 9) as well as leading virus researchers such
as <a target="_blank"
href="https://translate.google.com/website?sl=de&tl=en&ajax=1&elem=1&se=1&u=http://www.torstenengelbrecht.com"
rel="noreferrer noopener">Luc Montagnier or Dominic
Dwyer state</a> , particle purification – ie the
separation of an object from everything else that is not
that object, as for instance Nobel laureate Marie Curie
purified 100 mg of radium chloride in 1898 by extracting
it from tons of pitchblende – is an essential
pre-requisite for proving the existence of a virus, and
thus to prove that the RNA from the particle in question
comes from a new virus.</p>
<p>The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive,
which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of
DNA or RNA – but it cannot determine <em>where these
particles came from</em>. That has to be determined
beforehand.</p>
<p>And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene
sequences (in this case, RNA sequences because
SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be an RNA virus), we have to
know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for
virus. And to know that, correct isolation and
purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.</p>
<p>Hence, we have asked the science teams of the relevant
papers which are referred to in the context of
SARS-CoV-2 for proof whether the electron-microscopic
shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show
purified viruses.</p>
<p>But not a single team could answer that question with
“yes” – and NB., Nobody said purification was not a
necessary step. We only got answers like <em>“<strong>No,
we did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the
degree of purification</strong>”</em> (see below).</p>
<p>We asked several study authors, “Do your electron
micrographs show the purified virus?”, They gave the
following responses:</p>
<p><strong>Study 1:</strong> Leo LM Poon; Malik Peiris.
“Emergence of a novel human coronavirus threatening
human health” <em>Nature Medicine</em>, March 2020</p>
<p><strong>Replying Author:</strong> Malik Peiris</p>
<p><strong>Date:</strong> May 12, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Answer: </strong><em>“The image is the virus
budding from an infected cell.<strong> It is not
purified virus</strong>. “</em></p>
<p><strong>Study 2:</strong> Myung-Guk Han et al.
“Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient
in Korea with COVID-19”, <em>Osong Public Health and
Research Perspectives</em> , February 2020</p>
<p><strong>Replying Author:</strong> Myung-Guk Han</p>
<p><strong>Date:</strong> May 6, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Answer: </strong><em>“We could not estimate the
degree of purification because<strong> we do not
purify</strong> and concentrate the virus cultured
in cells. “</em></p>
<p><strong>Study 3:</strong> Wan Beom Park et al. “Virus
Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in
Korea”, <em>Journal of Korean Medical Science</em> ,
February 24, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Replying Author:</strong> Wan Beom Park</p>
<p><strong>Date:</strong> March 19, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Answer: </strong><em>“We did not obtain an
electron micrograph showing the <strong>degree of
purification</strong>. “</em></p>
<p><strong>Study 4:</strong> Na Zhu et al., “A Novel
Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China”,
2019, <em>New England Journal of Medicine</em> ,
February 20, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Replying Author:</strong> Wenjie Tan</p>
<p><strong>Date:</strong> March 18, 2020</p>
<p><strong>Answer: </strong><em>“[We show ] an image of
sedimented virus particles, <strong>not purified ones</strong>.
“</em></p>
<figure><img data-attachment-id="5716"
data-permalink="https://fos-sa.org/image-38-9/"
data-orig-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-38.png"
data-orig-size="1280,653" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"","orientation":"0"}"
data-image-title="image-38" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption=""
data-medium-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-38.png?w=300"
data-large-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-38.png?w=1024"
src="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-38.png?w=1024"
alt=""></figure>
<p>Source: <a
href="https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/">COVID19
PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless </a></p>
<h2>Exhibit: C – CDC and EU Commission acknowledge that
the virus has never been isolated</h2>
<p>It is unequivocally recognized by both the European
Commission and the US CDC, the most important national
health organization in the world that the virus has
never been isolated. The European Commission, which in
its document of 16 April 2020 last wrote: “Since no
virus isolates with a quantified amount of the
SARS-CoV-2 are currently available …”1 </p>
<p>The CDC writes: “Since no quantified virus isolates of
the 2019-nCoV are currently available…”2 </p>
<p>In short, both Europe and the US say the same thing:
they call a material in which the virus has not been
quantified “isolated virus”. But if it hasn’t been
quantified, how can it be an isolated virus? </p>
<p><em>“In other words, it is a Frankenstein virus which
has been concocted and stitched together using genomic
database sequences (some viral, some not). It has
never been properly purified and isolated so that it
could be sequenced from end-to-end once derived from
living tissue; instead, it’s just digitally assembled
from a computer database. In this paper, the CDC
scientists state they took just 37 base pairs from a
genome of 30,000 base pairs which means that about
0.001% of the viral sequence is derived from actual
living samples or real bodily tissue. In other words,
they took these 37 segments and put them into a
computer program, which filled in the rest of the base
pairs. </em></p>
<p><a
href="https://fos-sa.org/Users/User/Downloads/Working%20document%20test%20performance%2016%20April%202020.pdf">file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Working%20document%20test%20performance%2016%20April%202020.pdf</a>
page19</p>
<p>C<a
href="https://web.archive.org/web/20201029124047/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download">enters
for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Viral
Diseases, CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus 2 (2019-nCoV)
Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel</a> , 13/07/2020,
p.39.</p>
<h2>Exhibit: D – FOIs reveal that health/science
institutions around the world have no record of
SARS-COV-2 isolation/purification anywhere, ever</h2>
<p><strong>Here are five compilation pdfs containing FOI
responses from 79 institutions in 22
countries/jurisdictions, re the
isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”, as
well as emails from authors of studies that claimed to
have “isolated the virus” and an email from the Head
of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron
Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert
Koch Institute, </strong>last updated July 13, 2021</p>
<p><strong>Part 1:</strong> <a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-existence-causation-47-institutions-Feb-12-2021-chrono-part-1.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noopener"><strong>https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-existence-causation-47-institutions-Feb-12-2021-chrono-part-1.pdf</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Part 2: </strong><a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-existence-causation-47-institutions-Feb-12-2021-chrono-part-2.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noopener"><strong>https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-existence-causation-47-institutions-Feb-12-2021-chrono-part-2.pdf</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Part 3: </strong><a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-purification-existence-part-3-April-3.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noopener"><strong>https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/FOI-replies-SARS-COV-2-isolation-purification-existence-part-3-April-3.pdf</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Part 4:</strong> <a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FOI-replies-re-SARS-COV-2-purification-existence-June-3-2021-part-4.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noopener"><strong>https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FOI-replies-re-SARS-COV-2-purification-existence-June-3-2021-part-4.pdf</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Part 5: </strong><a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FOI-replies-re-SARS-COV-2-purification-existence-July-13-2021-part-5.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noopener"><strong>https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FOI-replies-re-SARS-COV-2-purification-existence-July-13-2021-part-5.pdf</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Source: </strong><a target="_blank"
href="https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/"
rel="noreferrer noopener">https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/</a></p>
<h2>Exhibit: E Dr.Wu Zunyou-Chinese Center for Disease
Control- “They did not isolate the virus”.</h2>
<figure></figure>
<h2>Exhibit: F – <a rel="noreferrer noopener"
target="_blank"
href="https://fos-sa.org/2021/08/02/fda-document-admits-covid-pcr-test-was-developed-without-isolated-covid-samples-for-test-calibration-effectively-admitting-its-testing-something-else/">FDA
document admits “covid” PCR test was developed without
isolated covid samples for test calibration,
effectively admitting it’s testing something else</a></h2>
<p>Please note this an updated version of C<a
href="https://web.archive.org/web/20201029124047/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download">enters
for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Viral
Diseases, CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus 2 (2019-nCoV)
Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel</a> and is
effective: 07/21/21 so essentially they still DONT have
ANY quantified virus isolates </p>
<p>The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays
contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV)
Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in
Limit of Detection studies. Since <strong><em><span>no
quantified virus isolates</span></em></strong> of
the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time,
the test was developed, and this study conducted</p>
<figure><img data-attachment-id="5714"
data-permalink="https://fos-sa.org/image-37-9/"
data-orig-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-37.png"
data-orig-size="746,354" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"","orientation":"0"}"
data-image-title="image-37" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption=""
data-medium-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-37.png?w=300"
data-large-file="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-37.png?w=746"
src="https://fossaorg.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-37.png?w=746"
alt=""></figure>
<p><a href="https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download">https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download</a></p>
<h2>Exhibit: G – SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: UK
Government Couldn’t Produce Evidence</h2>
<p>The governments of many nations around the world
couldn’t seem to come up with a real virus either when
challenged to do so. More evidence proving the “virus”
is constructed on a computer database from a digital
gene bank comes from <a
href="https://hive.blog/worldnews/@francesleader/email-exchange-with-uk-mhra-exposing-the-genomic-sequence-of-sarscov2"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Frances
Leader</a>, who questioned the UK MHRA (Medicines and
Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) whether a real
isolated virus was used to make the <strong>COVID vax</strong> (read
more about the <a
href="https://thefreedomarticles.com/not-a-vaccine-mrna-covid-vaccine-chemical-pathogen-device/"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">COVID
vaccine which is not a vaccine here</a>). Leader found
that the WHO protocols that Pfizer used to produce the
mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences
that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Leader asked if
the “virus” was actually a computer generated genomic
sequence, and ultimately the MHRA confirmed they had no
real specimen:</p>
<div>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“The DNA template does not come directly from
an isolated virus from an infected person.”</em></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p>These are just a few examples, there are many more. So
has SARS-COV-2 been isolated and purified to show
existence? You decide.</p>
<p>Extracts cited:</p>
<p>T Engelbrecht, K Demeter, Cowan & Kaufman, I
Davis, C Massey, fos-sa.org, M Freeman</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</body>
</html>