My reply to the so-called " Most Comprehensive Control Studies of the Virological Methodology Ever Undertaken"
In relation to people that claim that viruses do not exist, which is very misleading as I said before
Their substack/article can be found here at the moment of writing
If you try to make them understand that what they are claiming in that supposedly "control" experiment is inaccurate, they just start insulting you. For everybody interested, you can read this thread on X
https://x.com/Agus_Z_X/status/1802391118757130571
1) It doesn't matter if you observe Cytopathic Effects (CPEs), mock-infected controls are used to observe changes RELATIVE TO the actively replicating cultures, in order to not misinterpret the results, as CPEs can appear due to contaminants, experimental conditions...
Ref.1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5619698/ :
2) Regarding the Electron Micrographs (EMs), the authors asked the independent accredited contract research organization (CRO) to identify Extracellular Vesicles EVs [NOT Virions], and only after that, they themselves classify those EVs as identical to so-called "virions", so they are misleading the public in their substack article playing with language [look here if you are interested https://x.com/Agus_Z_X/status/1802373801881042984 ].
From their substack:
However, identification of virions in EM is considerably challenging without proper context & additional confirmation via other methodologies.
Ref.2 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31188-0/fulltext :
3) All their arguments are dismantled by single-virus genomics, where we can sequence single virions via flow cytometry using fluorescence-activated virus sorting (FAVS) [look for references here https://x.com/Agus_Z_X/status/1802450981403119958 ]. As I said to them "If you isolate a particle that contains genetic material, either a virion or an EV, and you sequence that single particle (as you can do with single-virus genomics techniques), whatever that particle is, you will know its sequence." They would claim that those particles are just EVs.
Ref.3 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29509721/
The methodology is adequately described here https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15892
4) If you try to make them understand that EVs are different from virions because EVs DO NOT replicate, while virions do [here https://x.com/Agus_Z_X/status/1802461953220132938 ], they will start insulting you, forget about everything that you have said and close their circular logic going all the way back to their CANNON saying that virions are EVs, when they are clearly not and we can clearly characterize them as different using several different supportive techniques. They will just ignore everything.
Ref.4 https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1605146113?doi=10.1073/pnas.1605146113
5) They are a cult, nobody in the whole planet can use ANY scientific argument, experiment, procedure, methodology, technique... to make them understand that what they are saying is not correct.
You can clearly see this mindset in their reply (here https://x.com/Agus_Z_X/status/1802466071947235431 ):
6) How can we then isolate a single virion, of a known virus, sequence it, and obtain a sequence that belongs to the given viral clade that was previously characterized by other methods? Single virus genomics confirms the results obtained from the methods that they claim are invalid, and it also destroys ALL their arguments with regards to isolation, purification, sequencing and characterization. We can do it at the SINGLE VIRION level of resolution. It doesn't matter to them.
Their position can be summarized here:
I find this comment very useful so I attached here a screenshot. The link to the comment is (here)
OK. Your assumption is that DPL's Substack is anything other than reporting on the project.
1. Your point that CPE is caused by bacterial contamination is ridiculous, what do you think the Antibiotics are for? 😂😂.. also we used the protocols of the ATCC for the methodology IF these are encouraging contamination the ENTIRE methodology of EVERY isolation is the same hence it is falsified, you can't have it both ways unfortunately.
2. Sure DPL has seemingly written that the CRO identified the "Viruses", this is incorrect. We are falsifying PURELY the EM part by VISUALS alone... if we have found IDENTICAL LOOKING particles that need to be further tested outside of EM to discern WHAT these particles are we have falsified EM. Which we have done.
3. You then go into the realms of fantasy talking about genomics. We have released NO control studies on the genomics part YET so your entire premise that we "CAN'T" is a strawman.
It is typical conjecture and pseudoscience just ASSUMING a dye flourescing amd being picked up by a camera means anything tangible whatsoever. You would need to provide proof of a nucleotide even existing before heading into the fantasy realms of finding all sorts of indicative sequences.