# News & Current Events > Coronavirus SARS-CoV2 >  CDC admits COVID-19 never isolated

## Firestarter

Ive seen some stories by conspiracy theorists claiming that the COVID-19 virus has never been isolated. Unfortunately all of these stories were too complex and/or long.

Wouldnt you know it? A document published on 13 July 2020 (4 months after the pandemic had already been started) the almighty Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Viral Diseases (CDC) explicitly confirms no _virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available_: 


> Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA




You have to scroll down all the way  to page 39, to the section Performance Characteristics".
As no COVID-19 virus has ever been isolated, all the coronavirus tests are complete and utter BS, because they dont even know what theyre looking for.

You could compare this to a positive DNA-test or fingerprint, where no DNA or fingerprint was available, so instead they compared it to something generated by a computer simulation: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...snt-available/

----------


## Anti Globalist

People have to be out of their minds to trust the CDC.  They have contradicted themselves throughout the whole year.

----------


## Firestarter

There used to be genuine “scientific” criteria to determine whether a virus causes a disease – it must meet the 4 scientific criteria of Koch’s postulates.
Because of new and improved detection methods, Koch’s postulates should be handled stricter, but instead big pharma replaced these postulates with pseudoscience, so they can invent (causes of) diseases out of thin air.

See the 4 scientific criteria of Koch’s postulates – including isolating the “microorganism”:

1) The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms;
2) The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture;
3) The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism;
4) The microorganism must be reisolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch%27s_postulates

----------


## The Northbreather

> I’ve seen some stories by “conspiracy theorists” claiming that the COVID-19 virus has never been isolated. Unfortunately all of these stories were too complex and/or long.
> 
> Wouldn’t you know it? A document published on 13 July 2020 (4 months after the “pandemic” had already been started) the almighty Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Viral Diseases (CDC) explicitly confirms no “_virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available_”: 
> 
> 
> You have to scroll down all the way  to page 39, to the section “Performance Characteristics".
> As no COVID-19 virus has ever been isolated, all the coronavirus tests are complete and utter BS, because they don’t even know what they’re looking for.
> 
> You could compare this to a “positive” DNA-test or fingerprint, where no DNA or fingerprint was available, so instead they compared it to “something” generated by a computer simulation: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...snt-available/


David Richard Crowe, author of The Infectious Myth wrote about this extensively.

He died suddenly this year one month after being told he had cancer...

----------


## Firestarter

> People have to be out of their minds to trust the CDC.  They have contradicted themselves throughout the whole year.


It looks to me like most people over here (the Netherlands) believe (or at least accept) the coronavirus police state. I have the impression that in North America an even larger portion of the population believes all the propaganda we’re spoonfed with.
That’s besides that when you need a (medical) doctor, the chances are he believes the BS of the CDC.


It looks like the almighty CDC contradicts itself, because on 5 May 2020 it claimed:



> SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.


https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...l-culture.html


Here’s the CDC’s article on isolating the virus. From June 2020 (that’s before admitting that COVID-19 had NOT been isolated).
One of many problem is that they claim to have used PCR to isolate the virus (which is impossible!):
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

----------


## Firestarter

> David Richard Crowe, author of The Infectious Myth wrote about this extensively.
> 
> He died suddenly this year one month after being told he had cancer...


The following paper by David Crowe looks like it’s aimed at “professionals” – scientists and other quacks working in the medical field – but for most others it’s boring (and too long).
If you’re interested in:
No purified coronavirus was isolated and why this is important;
Why the PCR test shouldn’t be used like this.
This could be THE paper you want to read.

David Richard Crowe died on 12 July 2020 of “cancer”, aged 63 years.

As they haven’t been able to purify viral particles of COVID-19, every “positive” test is per definition - a false positive.

As there are no distinctive symptoms, a COVID-19 infection cannot be diagnosed in any other way either.

The COVID-19 test is based on PCR, which doesn’t produce a positive/negative result, but the number of cycles required to detect sufficient material to beat the arbitrary cut-off between positive and negative. Because of this the best the test could do is estimate the chance that the subject is infected, but I think it’s safe to say that the PCR test could only determine a non-infection (as it is excellent to find very small amounts).
There is no “scientific” certainty of what the cut-off number of cycles would be to produce a negative – some say as low as 30 others go as high as 45 cycles as the cut-off (to produce a negative test result – no infection).

Because the PCR test shouldn’t be used like this, repeatedly test result have gone from positive/negative/positive and back again in a couple of days.

David Crowe – _Flaws in Coronavirus Pandemic Theory_ (Version 6 was first published on 12 March 2020; the latest is dated 6 June 2020, 5 weeks before his death): https://theinfectiousmyth.com/book/CoronavirusPanic.pdf
(http://web.archive.org/web/20200404182313/https://theinfectiousmyth.com/book/CoronavirusPanic.pdf)


The following relatively long article has more information on the NOT isolation of the amazing COVID-19.
A virus should be isolated purified viruses, but all the 4 scientific papers that claimed to have “isolated” THE coronavirus, admitted that their pictures aren’t of purified, isolated viruses.

Co-author of “Emergence of a novel human coronavirus threatening human health” (March 2020), Malik Peiris, admitted:
“_The image is the virus budding from an infected cell. It is not purified virus_”

Co-author of “Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient in Korea with COVID-19” (February 2020), Myung-Guk Han, admitted:
“_We could not estimate the degree of purification because we do not purify and concentrate the virus cultured in cells_”

Co-author of “Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea” (24 February 2020), Wan Beom Park, admitted:
“_We did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification_”

Co-author of “A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China” (20 February 2020), Wenjie Tan, admitted:
“_[We show] an image of sedimented virus particles, not purified ones_”: https://www.globalresearch.ca/nation...itives/5720271
(https://archive.is/egYbP)

----------


## Firestarter

> Here’s the CDC’s article on isolating the virus. From June 2020 (that’s before admitting that COVID-19 had NOT been isolated).
> One of many problem is that they claim to have used PCR to isolate the virus (which is impossible!):
> https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article


Dr. Tom Cowan has this to say on the CDC’s claim that the magical COVID-19 was isolated using PCR.
“_To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn's hair, hooves and horn.
The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by "consensus," sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary "unicorn," so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn._”


Cowan claims that the following is even more of a “blockbuster”. While obviously he’s right, I disagree that this is even more important.
Not having the virus isolated in the first places, makes all of the following “research” useless as they don’t know what they’re looking for…

Here’s the quote from the CDC’s scientific-looking paper…



> Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells...
> Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection.


 
Cowan in short explains from the previous quote that the CDC here has proven that the (not) isolated COVID-19 doesn’t infect human cells in a test tube (so doesn’t infect humans!)…
“_What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible "hosts" or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19.

The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this "new coronavirus" is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix._”: https://www.sott.net/article/443103-...RS-CoV-2-virus
(https://archive.is/QpyhS)

----------


## Firestarter

In 2008, none other than Anthony Fauci co-authored a paper on the Spanish Flu Epidemic that shows that most of the victims of the “Spanish Flu” in reality died from (secondary) bacterial pneumonia.
Of course wearing a mask could cause bacterial pneumonia – but hey these are 2020s, where “we” will all go down together!




> The postmortem samples we examined from people who died of influenza during 1918–1919 uniformly exhibited severe changes indicative of bacterial pneumonia.
> (...)
> The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria.
> (...)
> The viruses that caused the 1957 and 1968 pandemics were descendants of the 1918 virus in which 3 (the 1957 virus) or 2 (the 1968 virus) new avian gene segments had been acquired by reassortment [21]. Although lower pathogenicity resulted in far fewer deaths, hence fewer autopsies, most 1957–1958 deaths were attributable to secondary bacterial pneumonia, as had been the case in 1918.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599911/

----------


## Voluntarist

Per registered decision, member has been banned for violating community standards as interpreted by TheTexan (respect his authoritah) as authorized by Brian4Liberty Ruling

May God have mercy on his atheist, police-hating, non-voting, anarchist soul.

----------


## Voluntarist

Per registered decision, member has been banned for violating community standards as interpreted by TheTexan (respect his authoritah) as authorized by Brian4Liberty Ruling

May God have mercy on his atheist, police-hating, non-voting, anarchist soul.

----------


## Firestarter

> *FACT CHECK: Fauci study did not attribute 1918 Spanish flu deaths to bacterial pneumonia caused by masks* ... basically, it's your normal progression of virus to pneumonia:


You seem to insinuate that I claimed that Fauci’s study concluded that the “bacterial pneumonia” was caused by mask wearing, which I didn’t…



> In 2008, none other than Anthony Fauci co-authored a paper on the Spanish Flu Epidemic that shows that most of the victims of the “Spanish Flu” in reality died from (secondary) bacterial pneumonia.
> Of course wearing a mask could cause bacterial pneumonia – but hey these are 2020s, where “we” will all go down together!


You’re also wrong that this is “normal progression”….





> https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...al%20community.
> 
> ... but don't let me interrupt a good conspiracy theory.


This is also complete BS propaganda. It is claimed that the virus was isolated using PCR, which is completely preposterous.




> Dr. Tom Cowan has this to say on the CDC’s claim that the magical COVID-19 was isolated using PCR.
> “_To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn's hair, hooves and horn.
> The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by "consensus," sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary "unicorn," so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn._”

----------


## Firestarter

The following informative paper – only 12 pages – concludes that not only COVID-19 has never been isolated, but in fact a coronavirus has never been isolated at all!
They used small parts of this not-isolated “virus” (is it even a virus?) to detect “something” for evidence of a COVID-19 caused epidemic (pandemic) that in fact responds “positive” to many small fragments of the human genome or microbial fragments…




> The genetic sequences used in PCRs to detect suspected SARS-CoV-2 and to diagnose cases of illness and death attributed to Covid-19 are present in dozens of sequences of the human genome itself and in those of about a hundred microbes.
> (...)
> 
> And the conclusions are extremely serious: none of the seven "human coronaviruses" have actually been isolated and all the sequences of the primers of their respective PCRs as well as those of a large number of fragments of their supposed genomes are found in different areas of the human genome and in genomes of bacteria and archaea, such as these:
> (...)
> 
> And that indicates that the sequence of that initial PCR primer that is supposed to be specific to SARS-CoV-2 actually corresponds to 74 fragments of the human genome and a hundred microbial fragments as well!


 https://ia801504.us.archive.org/16/i...ber%202020.pdf
(https://archive.is/ZaLwK)

----------


## Contumacious

> I’ve seen some stories by “conspiracy theorists” claiming that the COVID-19 virus has never been isolated. Unfortunately all of these stories were too complex and/or long.
> 
> Wouldn’t you know it? A document published on 13 July 2020 (4 months after the “pandemic” had already been started) the almighty Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Viral Diseases (CDC) explicitly confirms no “_virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available_”: 
> 
> 
> You have to scroll down all the way  to page 39, to the section “Performance Characteristics".
> As no COVID-19 virus has ever been isolated, all the coronavirus tests are complete and utter BS, because they don’t even know what they’re looking for.
> 
> You could compare this to a “positive” DNA-test or fingerprint, where no DNA or fingerprint was available, so instead they compared it to “something” generated by a computer simulation: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...snt-available/


Exactly.

SO if the virus has not been isolated then the tests that are being currently used are garbage. 

.

----------


## Firestarter

An opinion piece, published last 13 November in the “reputable, scientific” BMJ…



> Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.1 Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.
> (...)
> 
> The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines.17 Government appointees are able to ignore or cherry pick science—another form of misuse—and indulge in anti-competitive practices that favour their own products and those of friends and associates.18


 https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425
(https://archive.is/y52sv)

----------


## Firestarter

While the PCR tests are unreliable, as they don't even know what they're looking for as the virus was never isolated, the "quick test" kits are completely preposterous.


Tanzanian President John Magufuli showed that the imported COVID-19 test kits were useless, as a goat and a pawpaw (that’s fruit) had tested positive for COVID-19.


More recently, an Austrian parliamentary member exposed the defectiveness of the bought COVID-19 rapid tests by showing in parliament that Coca Cola tested positive for COVID-19.
He commented: 


> The corona mass tests are worthless! This was also shown by a simple experiment in parliament, in which a cola had a positive result! But this black-green government spends tens of millions in tax money on precisely these tests.


 https://greatgameindia.com/coca-cola-covid-19-positive/

----------


## Firestarter

In January, my friends of NBC did some story on the COVID-19 origin probably being the infamous meat market in Wuhan, China.

When the reporter asks the Chief Epidemiologist of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Wu Zunyou, why the data from the Wuhan market was not released for public examination, he answers: “_They didn’t isolate the virus, that is the issue_” (1:37 mark).

----------


## Firestarter

The following horrible "conspiracy theorist" argues that the coronavirus "pandemic" is a "hoax".
The most important argument presented (certainly in the context of this thread) is explaining that COVID-19 was never isolated.

Instead they falsely used the PCR test to detect 3 viral genes, falsely claiming this is "isolation".
Because these 3 primers only cover about half of the virus' genome, if the PCR test (after how many cycles?) is used to detect these 3 primers, this does not prove the presence of this virus (and is certainly no "isolation").

See the following 2 excerpts from the article.



> When a team of Moroccan researchers investigated the epidemiology of Moroccan cases of SARS-CoV-2 they found that just 9% tested positive for three genes, 18% were positive for two and 73% percent for just one. Although, reliant upon the WHO protocols, an unknown number may have been positive for none.
> The WHO do not require the detection of three or even two viral genes, one is fine. In fact a negative result is still considered a possible indicator of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The repeating of tests is encouraged, presumably until a positive test is returned.
> (...)
> 
> 
> When the researchers from the Spanish medical journal D-Salud ran the WHO's specified nucleotide sequences through the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST), which allows a comparison with published nucleotide sequences stored by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) genetic database (called GenBank), they found the WHO protocols matched numerous microbial sequences and genetic fragments of human chromosomes.


https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/covid-19-hoax
(https://archive.is/MXLnl)

----------


## merkelstan

Well i'm tired bros, but here's what i can add.

The 45-cycle PCR test is completely insane.  What you get each cycle is a doubling of sensitivity.  To actually detect a thing that's actually there you use something like 30 cycles.  45 just pings positive on any noise, it's completely useless.  And this fraud german $#@! whose name i forgot pushed this, and the WHO accepted it.  It's $#@!ing clown world.

As to 'no isolated virus' i don't know what that $#@!ing means.  They've sequenced it.  They $#@!ing created it.  Just because no quantitative isolate is available to a particular group at a particular time doesn't mean it was never isoldated.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...-a9399226.html

----------


## Firestarter

I'm sometimes surprised when reading stories like the following from the mainstream media, and all the good citizens still believe everything they tell us about the corona "pandemic"...

The UK Biocentre seems to mix up different samples when doing COVID PCR tests, leading to contamination and false positives.




Senior UK government officials are "_estimating that as few as 2% to 10% of positive results may be accurate in places with low Covid rates_" for rapid coronavirus testing.



> As of today, someone who gets a positive LFD result in (say) London has at best a 25% chance of it being a true positive, but if it is a self-reported test potentially as low as 10% (on an optimistic assumption about specificity) or as low as 2% (on a more pessimistic assumption).


https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...alse-positives

----------


## Firestarter

According to the following scientific-looking paper, the WHO-protocol was directly derived from the January 2020 Corman-Drosten paper, before the pandemic was started.
The greatest flaw in the COVID-19 PCR testing protocol is that the COVID virus was never properly isolated and because it looks for only 3 small segments of a coronavirus, positives are concluded when no COVID-19 is found...



> The first and major issue is that the novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (in the publication named 2019-nCoV and in February 2020 named SARS-CoV-2 by an international consortium of virus experts) is based on in silico (theoretical) sequences, supplied by a laboratory in China [1], because at the time neither control material of infectious (“live”) or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 nor isolated genomic RNA of the virus was available to the authors. To date no validation has been performed by the authorship based on isolated SARS-CoV-2 viruses or full length RNA thereof.
> ...
> This method to model SARS-CoV-2 was described in the Corman-Drosten paper as follows:
> “_the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation, designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology._”
> ...
> The design variations will inevitably lead to results that are not even SARS CoV-2 related.


.
The maximum reasonably reliable PCR treshold (Ct) is 30 cycles. Since the pandemic was started in March 2020, worldwide an amplification threshold of 35 or higher for the PCR COVID-19 test has routinely been applied, following the January 2020 recommendations of the WHO.
Above 35 PCR cycles, over 97% are false positives.



Pieter Borger, et al. - _External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws..._ (2020): https://web.archive.org/web/20210411...ew.com/report/

----------


## Firestarter

Mullis won the Nobel Prize for inventing PCR, he died in August 2019, difficult to find the reported cause of death "from heart and respiratory failure".
What would he have said about "his" PCR being used to stage a pandemic, by finding 3 section of a coronavirus at more than 35 PCR amplification cycles or PCR being used to "isolate" COVID-19 (again looking for 3 sections)?

In the following video, Kary Mullis talks about "misinterpretation" of/by the PCR test. Mullis didn't believe that HIV is the cause of AIDS, most of what he says is also applicable to the misuse of PCR in the current COVID pandemic.

----------


## Firestarter

Because the CDC needs to rig the PCR tests for the new post-vaccine pandemic era, they now even admit that the PCR tests weren't really testing for COVID-19, as they didn't have a sample of COVID! The 07/21/2021 CDC report describes that they are now suddenly looking for a a better “reference sample” for the PCR tests (so positives for the vaccinated will be diminished).
They explain this by referencing the killer FDA report “_SARS-CoV-2 Reference Panel Comparative Data_".

Here is the killer quote from the FDA report - read it and weep:



> During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, *clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation*.
> While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because *each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources*.


.
The first highlighted section details that as they didn't have "specimens" of "SARS-CoV-2" (COVID-19), they made "contrived samples" to be tested for using PCR.
So here the FDA admits that the PCR tests haven't been testing for COVID but instead of "available data" in labarotoria (pre-pandemic samples)! All through the pandemic up until this month...

To make the PCR testing even more ridiculous they emergency approved 59 different PCR tests that all test for different "specimens" from "contrived samples" they made up.
Because these test for different "samples" these 59 different tests gave different results (the second highlighted section from the previous quoted excerpt): https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021...for-the-virus/

----------


## Firestarter

The COVID plandemic was staged by using the PCR test in a way it shouldn't, following the pseudoscientific Drosten report.
The COVID virus was never isolated, but instead synthesised by a computer program, which means that there is no evidence whatsoever that the COVID pandemic is caused by a coronavirus.

----------


## Firestarter

Christine Massey has been trying to expose that the amazing SARS-CoV-2 (the COVID virus) has never been isolated, by using Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests to demand information on the supposed purification / isolation.

She has collected the responses from 104 institutions in more than 20 countries that confirm that the COVID virus has never been isolated. Which shows that the whole pandemic is based on quicksand (or a sick joke): https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois...-purification/

----------

