COVID 19 TESTING IS CRAP

 

-

My letter to the Editor of globalresearch.ca web site:

 

Dear Prof. Chossudovsky, szanowny Panie Professorze!

Being a biochemist (graduated Moscow State University 1978 in bioorganic chemistry), I take the liberty of pointing at this statement in the article https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-rt-pcr-how-to-mislead-all-humanity-using-a-test-to-lock-down-society/5728483 by Dr. Pascal Sacré:

"It is not the whole virus that is identified, but sequences of its viral genome.
This does not mean that this gene sequence, a fragment of the virus, is not specific to the virus being sought, but it is an important nuance nonetheless:
RT-PCR does not reveal any virus, but only parts, specific gene sequences of the virus." (end of quote) which in my opinion is not perfectly correct.

The correct alternative would be as follows:

It is not the whole virus that is identified, but three very short nucleic acid sequences which are more or less complementary to the very short oligonucleotide sequences of two primers and one TaqMan fluorescence probe used in the RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 assay. By making the synthetic oligonucleotide sequences of these two primers and one TaqMan fluorescence probe sufficiently short (and cheap to produce), the specificity of the assay can be dramatically reduced, so that any biological sample, be it of bacterial, plant or animal origin, will appear as "positive" in the "SARS-CoV-2 assay".

Considered in detail, it means:

- First, "plain" PCR detects DNA material which contains the sequences complementary to the sequences of the primers (short synthetic oligonucleotides) used. This DNA material is not necessarily the target sequence of SARS-CoV-2. It can be of any other origin, and shorter (and cheaper) the primers are, more probable is the amplification of any non-SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid material and, correspondingly, its false identification as "SARS-CoV-2".

- Second, the inferior specificity being true for high-temperature bacterial DNA-polymerases used for PCR assay is substantially worse for reverse transcriptase (RT) (used in RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 assay to convert RNA sequences into "complementary" DNA sequences) which is notorious for its poor specificity of action, i.e. its tendency to reverse-transcript sample RNA into DNA sequences which do not perfectly match the primers and template used.

- Third, the method of TaqMan fluorescence probe used in RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 assay is an additional source of false positive results because the length of the TaqMan probe oligonucleotide sequence is always very short and therefore allows binding (and splitting by DNA-polymerase) to PCR-amplified DNA sequences which are not specific, i.e not necessarily correspond to the SARS-CoV-2 RNA sequence crucial for the correct result of the assay.

No wonder that there are numerous false positives of SARS-CoV-2 assay.

Therefore the passage in the article by Dr. Sacré everyone should read and remember is this:

"In the NYT, experts compiled three datasets with officials from the states of Massachusetts, New York and Nevada that mention them.
Conclusion?
“Up to 90% of the people who tested positive did not carry a virus.»"(end of quote)

Frankly and clearly it means: COVID-19 testing is CRAP!

Best regards,

Alexej Brykowski (behaviorist-socialist and behaviorist-socialist-ru)

.