Purification: Virology’s Black Sheep

https://viroliegy.com/2022/06/16/purification-virologys-black-sheep/



PURITY: Relative freedom from extraneous matter in the finished product, whether or not harmful to the recipient or deleterious to the product. (21 CFR 600.3(r)) FDA Guidance Definition for vaccine purity

The above definition for purity is taken from the FDA’s Guidance for Industry. According to the FDA, purity is considered relative freedom from extraneous matter. What is “relative freedom?” Relative implies that something is true to a certain degree. In other words, there is freedom from extraneous matter to a certain degree. However, in relation to purity, there can be no degrees of freedom from extraneous matter. A substance is either pure, meaning that it is free of all contaminants and foreign matter, or it is impure, meaning it is mixed with contamination and foreign matter. There is no such thing as purity to a certain extent yet you will commonly find discussions of purity within the “scientific” papers as if this can be the case. Terminology such as low purity, partially purified, somewhat purified, relatively purified, highly purified, etc. are thrown about as vague descriptors used to wiggle around a concept that is so simple and straight forward that most children can understand it. Something is either pure or impure. There is no in-between.



The issue of purification is absolutely vital to the foundational problems regarding virology. In order to prove the very existence of the fictional creations we are supposed to fear, it must be shown that “viruses” exist in a purified and isolated state. However, purification is mostly ignored in any original “virus” study when it should be a prominent focus. If we are to believe that these invisible intracellular parasitic entities exist, we need to be able to observe them alone. As we can not observe “viruses” in nature nor with our own eyes, this means that it is essential that the particles assumed to be “viruses” are taken directly from the fluids of a sick human and then purified free of any contaminants, pollutants, foreign materials, etc. contained within so that nothing else remains other than the assumed “viral” particles. Only then could pathogenicity be proven by having a valid independent variable separated from everything else in order to establish a cause-and-effect relationship for the particles claimed as the causative agent. Only then would electron microscope images of just those particles with nothing else contained within the sample be valid as evidence.


However, as you will see, virologists have admitted numerous times that “viruses” can not be purified and isolated directly from the fluids of a sick human. They state that “viruses” must be cultured with a host cell first before purification and isolation can occur. This creates many problems as:


1. The methods used to purify and isolate “viruses” are ineffective

2. “Viruses” can not be separated from exosomes and other MVB’s within the sample

3. The cell culture method is impure and the media and host cell DNA can not be purified away from the invisible “viruses”


In this article, I will break these various problems down and show that, from their own sources, virology admits that complete purification and isolation of the assumed “viral” particles is an impossibility.


______________________________________________________________________________________________


As purification can NOT be achieved, virology lacks the physical particles necessary for use as an independent variable to vary and manipulate in order to determine cause and effect.


There is NO direct evidence as to the existence of the particles assumed to be “virus” ever being found within humans. The only evidence is from indirect cell culture experimentation citing patterns of cell death known as the cytopathogenic effect (CPE) seen in the cells after being poisoned and starved for days which is then blamed on an invisible “virus.”


As other contaminants, chemicals, and impurities remain within the cultured sample, there can be no certainty that the other substances within may be the potential cause of the CPE seen within the culture over the assumed “virus.” It is a fact that other substances will be there within the fluids, especially in any sample processed through cell culture, as can be seen from the exosome studies as well as from attempts to purify “viruses” from cell culture supernatant for vaccine use.


The FDA admitted that there are other factors besides a “virus” which can cause the CPE seen which is instead blamed on the invisible “virus.”


The cell culture method is by definition an impure process as many foreign elements, chemicals, and contaminants are added to the culture which can NOT be separated out.


As virology admits that “viruses” can NOT be purified and isolated directly from the fluids of a sick human and must be cultured, there is NO purification that can ever be achieved by subjection to an impure process.


Without purification, virology can NOT adhere to the scientific method and is thus a PSEUDOSCIENCE. We know this and virologists know this which is why purification methods are rarely performed and why this criteria is rarely discussed in virology papers.


Purification is the black sheep of the virology family and it will remain as such until virology can find a way to do what it has been unable to do for well over 100 years.