They think legit scientists are stupid, too.

Highlight reel-

REAL scientists examine the (non-)science behind the "Official", Corman-Drosten et al Report-

External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific

...at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.

1) all components of the presented test design were cross checked, 2) the RT-qPCR protocol-recommendations were assessed w.r.t. good laboratory practice, and 3) parameters examined against...
...relevant scientific literature covering the field.

The published RT-qPCR protocol for detection and diagnostics of 2019-nCoV and the manuscript suffer from numerous technical and scientific errors, including insufficient primer design, a problematic and insufficient...
...RT-qPCR protocol, and the absence of an accurate test validation.

Neither the presented test nor the manuscript itself fulfills the requirements for an acceptable scientific publication. Further, serious conflicts of interest of the authors are not mentioned. Finally,...
...the very short timescale between submission and acceptance of the publication (24 hours) signifies that a systematic peer review process was either not performed here, or of problematic poor quality. We provide compelling evidence of several scientific inadequacies,...
...errors and flaws.

Considering the scientific and methodological blemishes presented here, we are confident that the editorial board of Eurosurveillance has no other choice but to retract the publication.

There are ten fatal problems with the Corman-Drosten paper which...
... we will outline and explain in greater detail in the following sections.

The first and major issue is that the novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2...is based on in silico (theoretical) sequences, supplied by a laboratory in China [1], because at the time neither control material...
...of infectious (“live”) or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 nor isolated genomic RNA of the virus was available to the authors. To date no validation has been performed by the authorship based on isolated SARS-CoV-2 viruses or full length RNA thereof. According to Corman et al.:
...“We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.”

The focus here should be...a) development and b) deployment of a diagnostic test for use in public health laboratory...
...settings. These aims are not achievable without having any actual virus material available (e.g. for determining the infectious viral load).

...only a protocol with maximal accuracy can be the mandatory and primary goal in any scenario-outcome...Critical viral load...
...determination is mandatory information, and it is in Christian Drosten’s group responsibility to perform these experiments and provide the crucial data.

...these in silico sequences were used to develop a RT-PCR test methodology to identify the aforesaid virus. This model...
...was based on the assumption that the novel virus is very similar to SARS-CoV from 2003 as both are beta-coronaviruses.

The PCR test was therefore designed using the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV as a control material for the Sarbeco component; we know this from our...
...personal email-communication with [2] one of the co-authors of the Corman-Drosten paper. This method to model SARS-CoV-2 was described in the Corman-Drosten paper as follows:

“the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific...
...confirmation, designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”
I'll leave the rest 4 U presumably, as outraged as I am readers, to make your own discovery of the shoddy workmanship of this "report", that's being used around the world to justify the horrendously extreme measures of 2020, & beyond, unless we resist w/ every fiber of our being.
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Science

"The new answer to a 77-year-old problem"

😭


https://t.co/hm9NoaU4nr


https://t.co/8fKDiKjSWc


https://t.co/jkaicC1F2x


https://t.co/PpxWT4Jef4

You May Also Like