Cracking article, it's good to see Feli getting a shout out in the comments section, her blog on the trial (C.W. Romanian idiums, e.g; "he who eats the donut, laughs longest!) is an entertaining read.
In Lanka's "measles challenge" he mentioned the "Infection Protection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz, IfSG)" as a prerequisete to be satisfied in order for the prize to be claimed, this is a set of rules drawn up in 1997 by the German Research Foundation (DFG) following fraud involving research money used to fund vaccines, it obliges all researchers who receive Government funding to comply with; "good scientific practice". In 1998 it was passed into law that all scientists and institutions that receive state funding were obliged to adhere to these rules in their work and in the preparation of reports or, put simply; publications without documented execution of control tests may not be presented as "scientific".
The latest version of these rules is in the link below;
Here are the parts of mitochondria and ribosomes in the virus isolate "Virus Isolation...We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation...We extracted nucleic acid from isolates...All the remaining contigs mapped to either host cell rRNA or mitochondria". 🤣
“But, when the cells from infected cultures were fixed and stained, their effect could be easily distinguished since the internuclear changes typical of the measles agents were not observed.” That’s sounds like a successful negative control to me? Please explain since I don’t understand your point than.
the fact the negative control displayed CPE means it failed. Of course it can be distinguished, it has completely different cells added to it from the sample for a start.
Would you mind to expand on that a bit ? If I read that correctly they put a different agent in the medium for the control sample, which produced different kinds of CPE. Which took staining to distinguish. What do you mean it got different cells from the start?
Great… thanks for clarifying it was 40 countries. I assumed it would be the UN as all of the scamdemic was lead by the WHO which is a branch of the UN.
Wow!!
My favorite line: "the genomics ON IT’s own does not constitute evidence of existence"
Cracking article, it's good to see Feli getting a shout out in the comments section, her blog on the trial (C.W. Romanian idiums, e.g; "he who eats the donut, laughs longest!) is an entertaining read.
https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2016/03/pe-pariu-ca-pretinsul-virus-rujeolic-nu.html
The previous 5 blogs are below for those who want to review the timeline of the two trials;
1/http://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2015/03/pe-pariu-ca-pretinsul-virus-de-pojar-nu.html
2/https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2015/03/pe-pariu-ca-pretinsul-virus-rujeolic-nu.html
3/https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2015/05/pe-pariu-ca-pretinsul-virus-rujeolic-nu.html
4/https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2015/07/pe-pariu-ca-pretinsul-virus-rujeolic-nu.html
Chapter five discusses the six "measles" papers presented at the first trial;
5/https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2016/01/ce-este-un-fapt-stiintific-un-mic.html
The whole blog is worth reading, here she is discussing the non existence of the hypothetical "virus" with an 0xford biomedical student....
https://feli-popescu.blogspot.com/2018/09/still-no-proof-for-measles-virus.html
In Lanka's "measles challenge" he mentioned the "Infection Protection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz, IfSG)" as a prerequisete to be satisfied in order for the prize to be claimed, this is a set of rules drawn up in 1997 by the German Research Foundation (DFG) following fraud involving research money used to fund vaccines, it obliges all researchers who receive Government funding to comply with; "good scientific practice". In 1998 it was passed into law that all scientists and institutions that receive state funding were obliged to adhere to these rules in their work and in the preparation of reports or, put simply; publications without documented execution of control tests may not be presented as "scientific".
The latest version of these rules is in the link below;
https://www.dfg.de/resource/blob/174052/1a235cb138c77e353789263b8730b1df/kodex-gwp-en-data.pdf
And here we have it - the truth. The unadulterated truth.
Wooo Hoooo!
Right on, Jamie. ^_^
Thank you Jamie. Chalk up a victory for the good guys (and gals).
fantastic!
👏👏👏
Nice work, sir. Between your project and the DRs Sam & Mark Bailey, there is a powerhouse of logic and truth coming out.
There is no virus...
https://drsambailey.substack.com/p/pierre-chaillot-im-coming-out-no?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
🙌
yup
Here are the parts of mitochondria and ribosomes in the virus isolate "Virus Isolation...We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation...We extracted nucleic acid from isolates...All the remaining contigs mapped to either host cell rRNA or mitochondria". 🤣
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article
“But, when the cells from infected cultures were fixed and stained, their effect could be easily distinguished since the internuclear changes typical of the measles agents were not observed.” That’s sounds like a successful negative control to me? Please explain since I don’t understand your point than.
the fact the negative control displayed CPE means it failed. Of course it can be distinguished, it has completely different cells added to it from the sample for a start.
Would you mind to expand on that a bit ? If I read that correctly they put a different agent in the medium for the control sample, which produced different kinds of CPE. Which took staining to distinguish. What do you mean it got different cells from the start?
1. The unninoclated control contains JUST the cell line.
2. The inoculated culture contains the cell line + a sample i.e it has TWO different types of cells.
Of course you would be able to distinguish between cell morphology because they contain different cells.
They BOTH had CPE... so the experiment is failed
Great… thanks for clarifying it was 40 countries. I assumed it would be the UN as all of the scamdemic was lead by the WHO which is a branch of the UN.
Great Work... thank you.
Thank you John, Did Feli ever make the audio recording public? It is damning evidence against Reuters claims about the Judge and Trial.
I think it would be great publish the actual recording with subtitles if the person that gave it to Feli would be happy with that.
Thank you Albert, for your continued support!