What you need to know about the science of COVID-19 is that it is almost 99 % unreliable. It started with the PCR test study and it is getting worse. The reason is that most of the people who publish research on COVID-19 aren’t virologists or biologists, so people who understand the nature of viruses and the data. The studies are based on math models using unreliable data, computer simulations using the same data or cell cultures. If it is a human research the information of testing for other pathogens that could cause the same symptoms is missing. All results are measured by the PCR test, antigen test, or antibody test but as you likely know all these tests are as reliable as tarot reading.

Tests unreliability is on the bottom of it.

Brief review below why it is the case.
-> The PCR test is based on a study which used a sequence from a patient in China. The sequence wasn’t from isolated viral RNA instead the unwanted sequences were just removed. The patient sample tested positive for multiple other pathogens which cause the same symptoms but for some reason was decided that is a new disease. The PCR test author Drosten co-incidentally is the author of the first SARS-CoV sequence which was “isolated” by the same method (removing unwanted sequences) and the sample also tested positive for other pathogens. Drosten also co-incidentally has strong connections with the World Health Organization and he is editor in the journal where PCR test study was published. His PCR test just detects short sequences but not a viable virus. If you want to learn more about this scientific fraud of PCR test read here. I am part of the team who called it out. CDC recently admitted that the test cannot be used on healthy people. Something we speak about for a long time but if they admit it they admit that all research and data are unreliable.

“I told you so!” moment again.

-> The antigen test shows if the sample has an antigen against a protein from the virus. The protein is made of the sequence, which I discussed above. The test also is poorly made and the same sample can show positive and negative results.
-> The antibody test shows if the sample has antibodies against the virus. It could be used as a proof that you are already immune to coronavirus but could react to the other four common cold coronaviruses and influenza virus (cross-reactivity).

Vaccine research is the same since results are measured by the same tests and based on non-standardized vaccine shots. There is information about the fact that some people receive placebo which is expected since the clinical research is still in its early stage. Companies don’t even provide the exact ingredients list, which means there is no way to know what causes the adverse reactions.

So, when you see another study about COVID-19 pandemic keep the above in mind!

Also please stop spreading articles written by people who aren’t experts in the field. Reading about something for several months doesn’t make you an expert. I spent years in the lab working with viruses and other pathogens, did PCR, and sequencing and have a PhD in microbiology – this is making me an expert not the social media fame. If you see an article written by someone who doesn’t fit the description above, the information is likely unreliable.

Sharing unreliable information fuels the narrative. I need to fight the narrative and misinformation from people who are supposed to be against the narrative. I am a human too!

Additional note: medical doctors aren’t experts if not specialists in viral diseases. Medical doctors also have very little knowledge of molecular biology and nature of viruses; when talking about viral nature, PCR, or variants most of the time they talk nonsense.

Don’t forget to support my work so I can do more next year. I am the only scientist who provides you with reliable information about COVID-19.

In case you want to read more look down.