"Covid" PCR test development initially relied on "social media reports"...
...but no-one really wants to talk about it.
Drosten at al admitted this in their (now infamous) Jan 2020 paper outlining a protocol for a PCR test for SARS-CoV-2:
Before public release of virus sequences from cases of 2019-nCoV, we relied on social media reports announcing detection of a SARS-like virus. We thus assumed that a SARS-related CoV is involved in the outbreak.
In our latest piece,
and I describe the (so far fruitless) efforts to get the authors of a critique of the above paper (the “Corman-Drosten review”) to consider the above, and its implications:
Thank you.
Does this shocking article mean that the whole edifice of the plandemic scam was literally built on nothing? Am I understanding correctly?
I just finished Mullis' autobiography, "Dancing Naked in the Mind Field"--a good book, actually. But I have to wonder if the PCR is good for ANYTHING, especially when we begin to learn that DNA sequences of viruses used for calibration are developed from "particles" that have never been actually isolated. It's smoke and turtles all the way down, yes?