PRIMER DIMER

The Impossible Rescue Device

In a PCR reaction they run what they consider to be a Negative Control. It is all of the reagents of the assay but instead of a sample of spit or mucus they use Nuclease-Free Water. This is not a particularly accurate version of a Negative Control because it contains none of the infinite, naturally occurring properties of the sample minus the supposed target sequence. A better Negative Control in the instance of looking for “Pathogenic” “DNA” would be to use a sample from the same individual tested when they were healthy. Nevertheless, I think that the usage of Nuclease-Free water is actually a Two-fer in our ball-court as not only does it control for “viruses”, it controls for the PCR reaction measuring Genetics AT ALL.

LISTEN TO THIS ARTICLE HERE:

If the testing of specifically filtered water that removes any possible genetic material results in a positive signal, this falsifies the PCR method altogether. It is not a question of threshold or amount or likeness to any positive control, if something that cannot possibly contain any genetics registers positive, the test is fraudulent, end of story, Finito, Sayonara.

The standard Rescue Devices must be rolled out to protect the integrity of these fraudulent tests, with the most obvious one being CoNtAmiNaTioN. This is a particularly insidious one as it would technically unpick the damning evidence, if indeed there WAS “genetic” material incorporated into the reaction. However, this has to be viewed with quite some skepticism as the entire lab system and protocol from the flow hood to the PPE to the disposable pipette tips is designed to purposefully stop contamination.

Unfortunately this CoNtAmiNAtion rescue device falls flat on its face when MOST but not all Negative Controls amplify in an entire country’s rollout of PCR reagents in 2020. There is no way that it just so happens that they co-ordinate contaminating their controls in most but not all labs. This widespread failing completely falsifies the PCR test, so they have to drum up another rescue device that isn’t predicated on Contamination but rather the reagents themselves, the primers to be more precise.

They call this PRIMER DIMER. Where this supposedly specific Primer Sequence either attaches a small part of its sequence to itself or to non target sequences.

In this very short video you see that part of the Forward Primer attaches to part of the Reverse Primer and it gets amplified. They suggest that you will be able to see that this is a Primer Dimer because in Gel Electrophoresis the band will either not be in the “expected” place or it will be blurred. This leads us to our first glaring issue with the PCR test. It MUST be verified with Gel Electrophoresis. If the bands can only tell you if the positive was a legitimate positive and they would only be suspected in the Negative Control, how do we not know that every single positive in the test is not just a Primer Dimer? They only verify with Gel Electrophoresis when they suspect something has gone wrong, especially during Mass Testing there is not chance in hell they verified any of the positives they got from PCR.

At the end of the short video they make suggestions as to how you can prevent this dimering from occurring. That being use less primer and “Play with MgCL2 Concentration”. Very interesting that just reducing the essential concentration of reagent they add on purpose will stop it from testing positive. One very obvious control should be to take negative samples and up the primer concentration until you receive a positive. Also interesting is the notion you should play around with the ionic concentration.

NON SPECIFIC BINDING

In the video above we see this lab tech describing how to tell if a Primer is binding “Non Specifically”. The whole notion of a PCR test is that this tiny sequences of roughly 20 nucleotides long are specific to the intended target and the Enzymes that facilitate the building and amplifying of the DNA ONLY work when the primers bind exactly with the DNA in the sample.

Despite this once again completely debunking an assay on its own if not verified in Gel Electrophoresis, lets take a look at just how “Non Specific” it really is.

In an absolutely Jaw-Dropping admission that I had to verify with Grok and Chat GPT to make sure I wasn’t seeing things or getting some hooky answer from one particular AI, they BOTH suggest that Primer Dimer can occur in as little as 3, yes THREE complementary nucleotides.

There are only 64 different possibility in totality of three different of the four nucleotides that are in a sequence. Those numbers, when Sequencing can reveal literally a QUADRILLION Nucleotides, it would make it impossible NOT to find 3 in a row of your “target”.

NUCLEASE FREE WATER

As mentioned above, the Negative Control uses a special water that is essentially guaranteed contaminant free. They do this by first DE-IONIZING and filtering water then treating it with supposed enzymes that denature the “DNA”.

I just want to stop and highlight a very important slide from this short video above. It concentrates on the difference between these normal, distilled and nuclease free water being that there are no FREE IONS or Fluorescent Particles.

Why would they want to make sure the water was De-ionized so much? Unless IONS greatly affect the PCR test… OR… what if the PCR test is actually measuring Ionic content.

CONCLUSION

The failure of the Negative control in a PCR reaction, if it can be demonstrated that it cannot have been as a result of contamination is absolute proof that the PCR is not testing for what it claims to be testing, i.e SPECIFIC short sequences of genetic material. The Rescue Device employed to weasel out of the clear-cut failings of this test is irrelevant if the reagents on their own can create a positive result.

The fact that one MUST use Gel Electrophoresis to determine why a Negative Control has failed shows that the PCR test CANNOT be used as a standalone test. If the indications of a positive result in the negative control need verification, it is entirely plausible that positive results in the test sample were also caused by a similar mechanism of Primer Dimer. I would conclude that any PCR test that has not been confirmed with Gel Electrophoresis is therefore fraudulent if acted upon as a diagnosis.

This Rescue Device actually pulls up way more problems for the official narrative than it does to dispel them. The monumental discovery that the scientific consensus will have you believe that a Primer could possibly bind and amplify as little as just THREE complimentary nucleotides. Even if you accept in totality, the thousands of assumptions and impossibilities involved in the reaction, starting from even the existence and characterization of the nucleotide itself, the notion of PCR measuring and testing positive with just THREE of these nucleotides in the right order paints a picture of the wildly spurious and anti-scientific nature of this assay.

This Fraudulent mechanism should also be Transposed into the arena of Genetic Sequencing too, for the Sequencing relies heavily on PCR and Primers to prepare the sample in the first place. This casts huge doubt over almost any results generated whilst using PCR, as who would be able to tell what is a result of Primer Dimer or not in a sequence if not verified in a gel up front in all of the preparation steps. After all, they claim that there are lots of repeating sections found within genomes, especially supposed “Viral” genomes… is it all just “Primer Dimers”? Probably.