PCR
inventor did not design it to detect infectious diseases
and
How the "fact-checkers" are
trying to convince you against it
A
document by Ricardo de Valencia
Originally Published on September 21st, 2021
PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to illustrate how mainstream
disinformative "fact-checkers" can convince you of a lie by telling you
some true facts. At the same time, we will attempt to clarify the
position of Dr. Mullis, the inventor of the PCR process, on the misuse
of it for diagnostic purposes.
INTRODUCTION
The PCR technique or process
- not the
PCR test for diseases (1) - was
invented by
Dr. Kary B. Mullis, who received the Nobel Prize for his invention. He
died in August 2019, before
Covid-19 began to spread in December 2019, but he lived through a time
in which PCR was promoted to "diagnose" some diseases (AIDS, in
particular; also Pertussis, whose PCR test created a false epidemic in
2004-2006 (2)).
He was very clear on his opposition to the use of PCR to
diagnose AIDS (3).
For clarity:
- The PCR technique or process
refers to the laboratory process designed by Dr.
Mullis to "amplify" (i.e. create millions or billions of copies) of
portions of genetic material (DNA o RNA), in order to better study the
genetic material. (1)
- The concept of PCR
tests for diseases refers to the use of the PCR process to
design,
for a given infectious disease, a PCR test that targets
for a highly specific signature of DNA or RNA of the suspected
infectious agent (e.g. a certain virus). This is based
on the assumption that the detection of the infectious agent, in
whatever amount it is found, equals, or "likely" proves, the disease.
(4)
DETAILS
Did Dr. Mullis designed the PCR process to detect infectious diseases?
Some "fact-checkers" (5)
have approached the
issue
as it were just about discarding some quotes allegedly said by Dr.
Mullis. But discarding some
quotes does not disprove the known position of Dr. Mullis (6) on the
misinterpretation of the PCR technique for diagnostic purposes.
If you are asking whether Dr. Mullis said
explicitly "My PCR test was not made to detect any type of
infectious disease", the answer is no, he did not say that words. To begin with, he did
not invented a test, he
invented a technique (1), that
others (not him) have converted into a test (more exactly, into a
different and specific test for each alleged infectious agent of a
disease).
The position of Dr. Mullis is very clear. He said:
“I
think misuse PCR is not quite – I don’t think you can misuse PCR. The
results, the interpretation of it, if they could find this virus in you
at all, and with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything
in anybody. It starts making you believe in the sort of Buddhist notion
that everything is contained in everything else. Right, I mean, because
if you can amplify one single molecule
up to something which you can
really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules
that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body,
okay.
So that could be thought of as a misuse of it, just to claim that it’s
meaningful.” (3)
It is obvious, from this quote, that Dr. Mullis is separating the
proper use of PCR - to detect a signature of DNA or RNA in a sample
- from the wrong interpretation - the interpretation that the presence
of a
single molecule (or a small or uncertain quantity of them) is a disease.
He is
clearly ridiculing
the notion that a PCR test can be used as the diagnostic of a disease.
Is it really necessary to have him say it more explicitly? After he had
been so critical of the use of PCR to "diagnose" AIDS (3)? That would
be the same as arguing that, because Jesus did not say the exact words
"I think that wars are not a good idea", He was not in favor of Peace.
Said quote from Dr. Mullis - conveniently omitted by the
"fact-checkers" (5)
- should be
enough to prove the point.
But there is more...
Anyone can read Dr. Mullis' own account (7) of how he came to the
invention of the PCR process and which were his concerns that
motivated his invention. In his own words, he was worried by:
"The
problem of rapidly determining whether or not the DNA of a growing
fetus contained an unfortunate mutation, giving the parents an
opportunity to elect an abortion." | "Pregnant mothers should not have
to wait ... for making a life or death decision."
In an account in which he clearly put his emotions, he did not say that
he expected that PCR would be used to detect infectious diseases. If he
were aiming to such an important achievement, he obviously would have
said so, just as he explicitly spoke of his (regrettable) hope to use
PCR as an aid to abortion (8).
So, did the inventor of the PCR process ever said it was not designed
to detect
infectious diseases? Again, the answer may be no, if you were expecting the exact words.
But, clearly, as proved by the omission of such an important aim on his
own
biographical account, the inventor of
the PCR process did not designed it to detect infectious diseases.
CONCLUSION
Now you can read - if you wish - the related articles of the
"fact-checkers" (5)
and see how they can, by telling true facts (such as "Dr. Mullis did
not say so and so"), and diverting attention out of the most
relevant
evidence and reasoning,
convince anyone to believe a lie.
NOTES
(1) The
Nobel Prize for Kary B. Mullis, not a single mention of the word
"test" or "diagnosis":
Kary
B. Mullis
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1993
Prize motivation: "for his invention
of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method."
An organism's genome is stored
inside DNA molecules, but analyzing this genetic information requires
quite a large amount of DNA. In 1985, Kary Mullis invented the process
known as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), in which a small amount of
DNA can be copied in large quantities over a short period of time. By
applying heat, the DNA molecule's two strands are separated and the DNA
building blocks that have been added are bonded to each strand. With
the help of the enzyme DNA polymerase, new DNA chains are formed and
the process can then be repeated. PCR has been of major importance in
both medical research and
forensic science.
(2) The false epidemic of
Pertussis in
2004-2006, created by the abuse of PCR tests
(3) Source,
Apr-2020, UncoverDC, Celia Farber;
Also: Copy
(4) The abuse of PCR test for
diagnostics or as a screening device:
(a)
"RT-PCR
is not recommended for
primary diagnostics of infection. This is why the RT-PCR Test
used in clinical routine for detection
of COVID-19 is not indicated for
COVID-19 diagnosis on a
regulatory basis." (Source, Nov-2020 -
Panel of experts reviewing the Corman-Dresden WHO-protocol) (In the
case of Covid-19, RT-PCR is the same as saying PCR)
(b) The PCR test "should
never be used as a
screening
device, since virus-parts are inhaled all day long and trapped
in the
mucous of nose and lungs, exactly there were the samples are taken
from." (Source,
Nov-2020 -
Dr. Borger, in a panel of experts reviewing the Corman-Dresden
WHO-protocol)
(5) Disinformative
"fact-checkers":
(6) The known position
of Dr. Mullis:
(a)
"[Mullis]
always said you couldn’t use
[PCR] to diagnose a disease but in this particular clip, he goes
directly after Fauci and tells what a liar he is" (Source, Dec-2020,
D.Knight, roundtablereport.com)
(b) "Kary [Mullis] did not invent
a test.
He invented a very powerful manufacturing technique that is being
abused. What are the best applications for PCR? Not medical diagnostics. He knew that and
he always said that." - David Crowe,
Canadian researcher (Source,
Apr-2020, UncoverDC, Celia Farber; Also: Copy)
(7) Dr. Mullis
biographical account on the invention of PCR (Accessed Sep-2021); Archived
(8) Obviously, that is
an abomination - the selective mass-murder of
children -, but the point here is that he envisioned that thing as a
noble goal.
En Español: El inventor del PCR no
lo
diseñó para detectar enfermedades infecciosas
Published on September 21st,
2021
© Copyright 2021 - 2022 by The M+G+R Foundation.
All rights reserved. However, you may
freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1)
Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made
in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made
for it.
Related
Documents
The M+G+R Foundation
Please Note: If the above dated image does not appear
on this document, it means that you are not viewing the original
document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt the
authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server
again and click on the "Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to
view the original document.