Just to clarify.
This is the Nanopore coverage Map.
Lowest point in the trough in the center looks like 2,000X coverage.
Highest point on the right is ~500,000X coverage.
Obviously full length infective virus can’t be more than the 2,000X and the stuff on the right is non-infect
Non-infectious fragments of RNA known as sub genomic RNA or sgRNA.
Why would you place your PCR assay on the yellow region? You know you are predominately amplifying non-infectious RNA.
Deliberate witch hunting.
Should could target ORF1a (in the trough of the coverage map) that makes less subgenomic RNA but her sensitivity would drop ~200 fold.
But she’s only working with 6-5,800 copies.
Most of the data would be blank.
They’d have to speak for hours...
Into a vacuum tube.
Redonkulus
Interesting detail.
They did not Try to culture the coarse fraction (Over 5um).
That would have been very valuable information.
The diagnostic PCR does have low Ct but that’s PCR with diff assay/ diff lab/ diff time.
130L/min vacuum for 15-30 minutes.
Really shouldn’t say there is anything wrong with the paper....just seeing people use this as evidence for masking kids and it does not follow.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The low wattage take that any attention given to GOF steals attention from ‘my pet thesis’, is two logical fallacies in one.
False dichotomy and a zero sum fallacy.
It is possible to be concerned about both GOF and lockdown tyranny at the same time.
Like chewing gum and walking.
There are usually 2 reasons such nonsense gets blathered about.
1)someone doesn’t want you to look at GOF.
2)marketing of substacks requires one differentiate from what’s currently capturing attention and appear divergent.
The reasons given NOT to look at GOF are rooted in denialism and molecular biology fairy tales.
‘RNA viruses can’t spread because <insert pseudo profound bullshit like quasi species swarm>’
When you show them evidence of measles and influenza having a higher mutation rate…
The latest scoobie snack is that RNA viruses mutate too quickly to ever spread… therefore GOF is all kabuki theatre.
This is clearly refuted by the sequencing data but let’s assume the argument stands…
Are these folks unaware of synthetic genomic projects making DNA viruses?
Epstein-Barr is a dsDNA herpes virus in 90% of the population. Clearly it can spread and it’s only 172kb.
Well under the size of the mycoplasma genome synthesized in 2008.
These don’t have the mutation rate of RNA and clearly reached 90% of the population.
They also can integrate and reactivate at a later date.
They cause mono so they are clearly ‘risk additive’
Would you trust Hotez or Daszak to be messing with these?
Posting again to remind folks that spike protein can drive mitophagy.
Now that we know the modRNAs are prone to frameshifting and there is a Mito peptide after the Pfizer stop codons, it wouldn’t surprise me if vaxxed patients have lower extracellular Mito.