OMG, I dont have your skill set of what you just presented, but I certainly have the brain cells to understand this is the most insane made up shit I’ve ever seen. These people truly make everything up. The Illumi woman is creepy AF. Like watching a horror film
Yes all of these drones they have demonstrating their machines really are robots... I think thats what it takes to do what they do... unquestioning servitude
30 years ago, I worked for a company owned by Thermo Electron before it merged with Fisher Scientific. Our company made industrial heat treating furnaces. It's crazy what has evolved today with some of these companies.
Rob I’m glad you brought up dna matching and court because I was wondering about that very thing as I read Jamie’s substack today.
(Admittedly I wish I understood more but I never studied chemistry past hs.)
The idea that dna found at a crime scene can prove one’s guilt or innocence is something that has been drummed into us by Hollywood and media and most people now accept that as fact.
I think the first step in the process of identifying DNA from the soup sample is to apply for a large government grant.
I am sure glad that there are only 30 variables to determine out of the billions of possible DNA samples the correct DNA sequence for the alleged target. Those DNA “scientists” have a difficult job, putting some snot or something into a $1M machine and see their lottery results! What an easy career!
I guess I hadn't appreciated how kooky all of this. Keep adding more and more and more chemicals and "pops out and amplifies and measures the DNA". A bit like saying you can pour acids, salts, acetones, and pyridines onto a foodstuff and you "extract" the vitamins and "extract" each constituent ingredient (as opposed to transforming things via chemical reactions). Of course in the case of "vitamins" and such they have to put it through an HPLC machine and measure UV absorption spectra and retention time as a proxies for the "particular molecule" they found and even that is .... uhhhh.
I don't think anybody would believe you if you said you could "pop out" all of the constituent trade secret ingredients from a can of Diet Coke by adding dozens of reactive reagents to it, certainly if you claimed your reactive chemicals "amplified the molecules" and "identified exactly how they were bound together" - even when the Diet Coke was hopelessly mixed together with spit, Dr. Pepper, and vodka. Somehow it's supposed to make sense in "extracting" and "popping out" the purported secret code of all life - even from a sample of many different species of organism hopelessly mixed together.
Like other commenters here I feel like I can't quite let go that they really can "find the DNA" but it's looking really shaky to me.
"A DIGITAL RNA library was made by MiniSeq and Illumina both using software. The data was then trimmed by a company with the creative name Trimmomatic. This all means that zillions of DIGITAL & HYPOTHETICAL so-called nucleotide sequences are lined up for processing by the next set of software Megahit & Trinity. They say they want to identify possible pathogens but how can a garbage pile of genetic material tell you which nano-monster is really the criminal if they have not actually caught a monster?"
I respect your work here. I use to work in plant genomics and outsourced my genetic sequencing to men like Kevin McKernan. His company wanted to sequence and map all my work for putting together genomic sequence libraries. Have you looked at his SS ? I don't know sequencing science myself so I too am curious.
A side note.
I use to have to send off samples to many labs. I found the labs had too much variance in the COAs and decided to go get trained up in chromatography myself. I bought a gas chromatograph and after 6 weeks of looking how to improve the design. I made it 500% more accurate. They had manf the units and improved on the design for 32 years before i came in. There's always weak spots in testing. Good Luck with your research on this technical field.
Hi Neo, Thanks for reaching out to me. Very interesting that you have experienced first hand alot of the inconsistencies and inaccuracies within the field. How did you go about improving the accuracy? Was it modifying the reagents or the equipment? Kind Regards
I modified the needle applicators shape by tapering and reducing the inside diameter of the needle that injects the samples into the the injection ports via auto samplers. This made a much finer and metered sample injection. They formerly were using a bigger needle w no taper and thus a much less precise sample injection.
You might or might not like the science i have been looking at. I just started SS 7 weeks ago. There are posts on issues that researchers are looking into and arguing over as well. I just present what i find and leave ? marks on many things to steer away from making definitive scientific claims. I will keep watching your interesting experiments. Happy Holidays
Thanks for sharing your expensive hobby with us. I guess to fully understand it we have to read something about the history of this scientific stuff, how it evolved over time, and where and when things went down the drain (and down the brain).
Saturation will certainly also play a role in gel electrophoresis, as will the position of the molecules in the horizontal plane (after all, movement through density, like friction, is a mechanical process), and no one will ever have checked whether the result is completely unspecific if the same sample is subjected to the process again and again with the residues from the previous round? I assume so, because so far that has been the common thread: no control attempts, ever. Out of self-protection and self-affirmation.
gel electrophoresis is obviously top to bottom quackery which is funny that nearly ALL of the moving parts of PCR and Sequencing are "Verified" using it.
you are really shaking the foundations of my belief systems; it is like: maybe Justin Trudeau hasn't been a very good prime minister after all; maybe Joe Biden was in fact demented for four long years; could I somehow have been deceived; I find this very hard to believe; I accept everything the media tells as gospel;
yea; I have struggled; I always believed what I am told by X-Spurts: (they know best of course) and further, there is the magical "consensus" that I find so reassuring; me, just happily bumbling along knowing these people had my best interests at heart; now .. all my beliefs challenged: how terrible for a gullible fool to be caught out like that.
This is why I'm only hanging out on SS... And there are charlatans and idiots and "Controlled Opposition" here, too, but there are PLENTY of folks who are after the TRUTH, come what may, and a bunch of people who go and FIND the truth themselves, so it's a good place. But do your due diligence, because the TRUTH is still very much elusive, and there are LOTS of folks who really don't know jack, lol. Here's a really good place for info that I trust absolutely-- not to say she cannot be wrong, but she rarely is! Cheers, m'dear, and welcome to the Truthies Hangout. ^_^
The Takara is with random hexamers (N6). Random priming.
"These oligos are only 6 nucleotides long (hexamers) and they consist of every possible combination of bases which means there must be 46= 4,096 different combinations in the mixture. Because every possible hexamer is present, these primers can bind to any section of RNA." https://www.bio.davidson.edu/genomics/method/randompriming.html
Yes for the original assembly... from then on in they go to the ARTIC protocol to take that completely random contig and use a hugely specific primer set to "replicate"... which they couldn't do.
Yes. That contig is fabricated because only 20% can be generated. But, in the second step with target-based WGS, 100% is obtained. That is the explanation of SL. In principle, very creative solutions with a lot of manipulation. A lot of imagination is needed for the final product. At the end, you open that text format and insert the desired product. That would be an extra gap-filing method.
OMG, I dont have your skill set of what you just presented, but I certainly have the brain cells to understand this is the most insane made up shit I’ve ever seen. These people truly make everything up. The Illumi woman is creepy AF. Like watching a horror film
Yes all of these drones they have demonstrating their machines really are robots... I think thats what it takes to do what they do... unquestioning servitude
...and a distinct lack of intestinal fortitude.
RIGHT?!?!?!? I think your brain cells are plentiful and Just Fine!
Whoa, this ain't an easy bake oven.
It's a super complicated one.
Reminds me of the crazy gadgets that the "wizard"of oz had.
No wonder why it's a known defense to explain in court that a DNA match is not reliable 😂.... It's fisher price, not fisher thermo 😆
It's thousands of easy bake ovens in one giant melting pot...Thermo Fisher Price Lol
30 years ago, I worked for a company owned by Thermo Electron before it merged with Fisher Scientific. Our company made industrial heat treating furnaces. It's crazy what has evolved today with some of these companies.
Crazy, or Evil? Or BOTH?
That's a rhetorical question, LOL.
Rob I’m glad you brought up dna matching and court because I was wondering about that very thing as I read Jamie’s substack today.
(Admittedly I wish I understood more but I never studied chemistry past hs.)
The idea that dna found at a crime scene can prove one’s guilt or innocence is something that has been drummed into us by Hollywood and media and most people now accept that as fact.
I learned about it years ago from a show called
Adam Ruins Everything.
It's surprising to see Adam today still be that skeptical about things, but not about COVID.
I think a lot of people set us up in advance.
Humans have only limited understanding, but the project is NOT run by humans...
Please, check out my comment for more details.
I think the first step in the process of identifying DNA from the soup sample is to apply for a large government grant.
I am sure glad that there are only 30 variables to determine out of the billions of possible DNA samples the correct DNA sequence for the alleged target. Those DNA “scientists” have a difficult job, putting some snot or something into a $1M machine and see their lottery results! What an easy career!
Have you read what Harold Hillman said on Electrophoresis. "It was based on many assumptions"
I guess I hadn't appreciated how kooky all of this. Keep adding more and more and more chemicals and "pops out and amplifies and measures the DNA". A bit like saying you can pour acids, salts, acetones, and pyridines onto a foodstuff and you "extract" the vitamins and "extract" each constituent ingredient (as opposed to transforming things via chemical reactions). Of course in the case of "vitamins" and such they have to put it through an HPLC machine and measure UV absorption spectra and retention time as a proxies for the "particular molecule" they found and even that is .... uhhhh.
I don't think anybody would believe you if you said you could "pop out" all of the constituent trade secret ingredients from a can of Diet Coke by adding dozens of reactive reagents to it, certainly if you claimed your reactive chemicals "amplified the molecules" and "identified exactly how they were bound together" - even when the Diet Coke was hopelessly mixed together with spit, Dr. Pepper, and vodka. Somehow it's supposed to make sense in "extracting" and "popping out" the purported secret code of all life - even from a sample of many different species of organism hopelessly mixed together.
Like other commenters here I feel like I can't quite let go that they really can "find the DNA" but it's looking really shaky to me.
Illumina print-outs are not even as real as a Marvel Comic.
On the supposed Sars-Cov-2:
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/proton-magic-falls-for-fan-wu
"A DIGITAL RNA library was made by MiniSeq and Illumina both using software. The data was then trimmed by a company with the creative name Trimmomatic. This all means that zillions of DIGITAL & HYPOTHETICAL so-called nucleotide sequences are lined up for processing by the next set of software Megahit & Trinity. They say they want to identify possible pathogens but how can a garbage pile of genetic material tell you which nano-monster is really the criminal if they have not actually caught a monster?"
Yup, it's one of the many digressions.
Hello Jamie
I respect your work here. I use to work in plant genomics and outsourced my genetic sequencing to men like Kevin McKernan. His company wanted to sequence and map all my work for putting together genomic sequence libraries. Have you looked at his SS ? I don't know sequencing science myself so I too am curious.
A side note.
I use to have to send off samples to many labs. I found the labs had too much variance in the COAs and decided to go get trained up in chromatography myself. I bought a gas chromatograph and after 6 weeks of looking how to improve the design. I made it 500% more accurate. They had manf the units and improved on the design for 32 years before i came in. There's always weak spots in testing. Good Luck with your research on this technical field.
Hi Neo, Thanks for reaching out to me. Very interesting that you have experienced first hand alot of the inconsistencies and inaccuracies within the field. How did you go about improving the accuracy? Was it modifying the reagents or the equipment? Kind Regards
Jamie
I modified the needle applicators shape by tapering and reducing the inside diameter of the needle that injects the samples into the the injection ports via auto samplers. This made a much finer and metered sample injection. They formerly were using a bigger needle w no taper and thus a much less precise sample injection.
You might or might not like the science i have been looking at. I just started SS 7 weeks ago. There are posts on issues that researchers are looking into and arguing over as well. I just present what i find and leave ? marks on many things to steer away from making definitive scientific claims. I will keep watching your interesting experiments. Happy Holidays
many thanks; much to work through; if I didn't know better, I would think all this stuff is a gigantic con
So do they use this same technique on sewage? Then find the birdie bug and go after raw milk? Seems to be what’s happening in CA.
Yes
Thanks for sharing your expensive hobby with us. I guess to fully understand it we have to read something about the history of this scientific stuff, how it evolved over time, and where and when things went down the drain (and down the brain).
Saturation will certainly also play a role in gel electrophoresis, as will the position of the molecules in the horizontal plane (after all, movement through density, like friction, is a mechanical process), and no one will ever have checked whether the result is completely unspecific if the same sample is subjected to the process again and again with the residues from the previous round? I assume so, because so far that has been the common thread: no control attempts, ever. Out of self-protection and self-affirmation.
gel electrophoresis is obviously top to bottom quackery which is funny that nearly ALL of the moving parts of PCR and Sequencing are "Verified" using it.
Wow, you should change it to buy me a Martini!
I hope everyOne reads this and grasps what lies Humanity has been told.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." – William J. Casey, CIA Director.
And man are They working on that goal!!!
It would be intresting to debunk/discredit RNA extraction with TRIzol. :)) You need more laboratory equipment :D https://youtu.be/IIpcwN7BWZg?si=m9UHyIm5-7GaZ0FE&t=216
you are really shaking the foundations of my belief systems; it is like: maybe Justin Trudeau hasn't been a very good prime minister after all; maybe Joe Biden was in fact demented for four long years; could I somehow have been deceived; I find this very hard to believe; I accept everything the media tells as gospel;
LOL
Glad you could make it outta that shit. ^_^
yea; I have struggled; I always believed what I am told by X-Spurts: (they know best of course) and further, there is the magical "consensus" that I find so reassuring; me, just happily bumbling along knowing these people had my best interests at heart; now .. all my beliefs challenged: how terrible for a gullible fool to be caught out like that.
You and billions of others, m'dear. xo
It's better to be embarrassed and clued-in than to live in someone else's lie.
slowly I am emerging from the fog!!! .. stumbling, blinking into daylight!! ha, ha!!
reading this link https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/fan-wu-naked-centerfold from today's post; some great stuff there; this guy just called it out and named it all over 2 yrs ago; all sorts of wonderful cross-links in Substack: Hedley Rees: deep insights on manufacturing; https://substack.com/@hedleyrees1/note/c-81312304 and the inimitable Baileys https://drsambailey.com/resources/videos/
When you find someone that feels "truthy," look to see WHO THEY READ.
This is why I'm only hanging out on SS... And there are charlatans and idiots and "Controlled Opposition" here, too, but there are PLENTY of folks who are after the TRUTH, come what may, and a bunch of people who go and FIND the truth themselves, so it's a good place. But do your due diligence, because the TRUTH is still very much elusive, and there are LOTS of folks who really don't know jack, lol. Here's a really good place for info that I trust absolutely-- not to say she cannot be wrong, but she rarely is! Cheers, m'dear, and welcome to the Truthies Hangout. ^_^
https://francesleader.substack.com/
The Takara is with random hexamers (N6). Random priming.
"These oligos are only 6 nucleotides long (hexamers) and they consist of every possible combination of bases which means there must be 46= 4,096 different combinations in the mixture. Because every possible hexamer is present, these primers can bind to any section of RNA." https://www.bio.davidson.edu/genomics/method/randompriming.html
Yes for the original assembly... from then on in they go to the ARTIC protocol to take that completely random contig and use a hugely specific primer set to "replicate"... which they couldn't do.
Yes. That contig is fabricated because only 20% can be generated. But, in the second step with target-based WGS, 100% is obtained. That is the explanation of SL. In principle, very creative solutions with a lot of manipulation. A lot of imagination is needed for the final product. At the end, you open that text format and insert the desired product. That would be an extra gap-filing method.
I think even that second step with long nanopore reads had ~50% error/insertion rate as pointed out in the picture of the US Mortality work.