Above is the definition most people agree with and refer to when isolating something. Not virologists. This is what they mean when using the word isolation:
“Viruses are basically inanimate objects which need a culture to activate in. But the way they are phrasing the requests is that the sample must be completely unadulterated and not be grown in any culture – and you can’t do that,” she told AAP FactCheck in a phone interview.
“You can’t isolate a virus without using a cell culture, so by using their definition it hasn’t been isolated. But it has been isolated and cultivated using a cell culture multiple times all around the world.”
‘Proof’ the virus behind COVID-19 doesn’t exist fails basic biology test
The above quote is from a Facebook “factcheck.”
In layman’s terms, if using the agreed upon definition of isolation, virologists agree that they haven’t isolated a “virus” from everything else and admit that this logical requirement is impossible. But they rationalize that this is ok because it’s a “virus.” It is assumed (as this was never proven) that a “virus” needs a host cell (which should be from the host they take the “virus” from but try not to think too hard about that logical inconsistency) in order to grow and replicate. But not just any host cell will do. In the case of “SARS-COV-2,” it needs the kidney cells from an African Green Monkey.
But wait, there’s more!
It also needs to be immediately placed in “Viral” Transport Media after being taken from a patient. This normally consists of animal DNA, antibiotics, and other chemicals/nutrients. In order to grow, it needs fetal bovine serum (blood taken from the hearts of baby cows). In order to be free of bacteria, it needs 2 or 3 cell toxic antibiotics. In order to “eat,” it needs various unknown nutrients/chemicals in DMEM. All of this must be added to the unpurified sample (which in and of itself contains billions of particles) from a patient, mixed together, and then incubated for days.
Once the expected Cytopathogenic Effect (i.e. cell death) is seen in the petri dish, then and only then do virologists claim a “virus” been “isolated.”
Virology subscribes to subtraction through addition. Or, in other words, the exact opposite of isolation.
It is obvious no “virus” has ever been properly purified nor isolated. If you have to change the meaning of isolation in order to claim you isolated something, you never did.
Please help me. I’ve heard a number of people say what you say about the way virologists … hmmm … I don’t want to use the word “isolate” because that’s not what they do. Anyway, I’ve heard a number of people say what you say about the methods virologists use to make their story of viruses seem true. The people who say this are normally against the virologists’ pseudoscience and lies. Could you please point me to the place where virologists themselves say they use this method? I want to be able to keep it in my stash of evidences.
Thanks in advance, hoping you’ll be able to help.
Thanks for great articles, by the way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the kind words! 🙂 I’m a little confused however. What method are you referring to? Are you wanting information on where they claim isolation of “viruses?” That would be pretty much any original “virus” paper, such as the original “SARS-COV-2” papers which I did write-ups of here:
Or are you referring to the methods themselves such as purification and cell culture?
Here are two on purification:
For cell cultures, this one post is an overview of the entire method and it contains links to all the other posts I did providing further details:
Let me know if this information helps and is what you are looking for. Thanks again for the kind words. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m liking your comment, but I’m not sure if it’s working since I’m working in a kinda “secure” environment where I don’t want too many people knowing my business. I think I got it now.
Yes, it was the last two, where virologists themselves say that the method they use to “isolate” is the cell cultures and the chemicals they add and the “dna” they add and all that baloney. I’ll check out your links and do my best to learn. I know that virologists claim to “isolate” viruses and when Andrew Kaufman was doing his “River of Rats” videos, I saw they claim to have isolated SARS-Cov-2. I also saw elsewhere the claims to isolated the mystical/mythical nanoparticle.
But, as I said, I’ve never seen virologists say what their methods are of so-called “isolation.” So I’ll check out your links and dig and learn, God willing.
Again, much appreciation for helping me learn even more how germ theory is more a religious belief than a proven explanation. I write every now and again about the covid-crap, but I’m no technical expert, just a pleb and a grunt who can read and hopefully think. So the more evidence I have from their own words, the better.
All the best to you. Big respect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks again for the kind words! The titles of most “virus” papers claim isolation of “viruses.” You may also like this link which contains 4 blog posts from virologist Vincent Racaniello. In the second one, he defines what a “virus isolate” is along with other definitions they use:
Dr. Kaufman has done an amazing job exposing the hoax of virology and his “River of Rats” vid is exceptionally well done. He helped to open my eyes on exosomes. Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Stefano Scoglio, Dr. Saeed Qureshi, Jon Rapoport, and Torsten Engelbrecht have all done an excellent job as well.
In any case, I’m happy to help in any way I can! 🙂