CONFUSED QUACKS IGNORING VITAL SARS EVIDENCE

[Guest guest]

http://homepage.eircom.net/~sars/sars_quacks.htm CONFUSED QUACKS

IGNORING VITAL

SARS EVIDENCE by Fintan Dunne, April 27, 2003

Dr. Plummer said he had inoculated small animals like rabbits, guinea pigs and

mice with the SARS virus and found them " completely happy " with no evidence of

illness. NY Times 24th April

" Quack, quack, quack, " go the confused SARS experts, while they bustle around

patients --armed with printouts from fancy gene sequence decoding machines.

 

" It's mutating, it's mutating, " they chorus, as quackery takes over from

medicine. All the while ignoring clear evidence that this corona virus is not a

new strain; neither is it the cause of SARS.

 

The evidence has been staring them in the face, ever since Canada's leading SARS

microbiologist, Dr. Frank Plummer revealed that the percentage of patients in

whom the presumed causative corona virus could be detected was only 40%. That

has now dropped to just 30%. The finding should have halted the SARS juggernaut

in it's tracks. Because corona virus is the glue holding the whole SARS theory

together.

 

Now it turns out that the monkey tests which supposedly proved corona virus as

causing SARS, are worthless because there were no controls -i.e. monkeys at the

same location who had not been given the virus.

 

" Every day, we just scratch our heads, " Dr. Plummer recently told the New York

Times.

 

The rest of Dr. Plummer's revelations were even more devastating to the SARS

theory. He told the NY Times he was surprised to find the virus in about 20

percent of 250 people who were not suspected of having SARS but who were tested

because they had come to Canada from affected areas in Asia or who had mild

symptoms not thought to be SARS.

 

Hang on a second! The implications of all this are extraordinary.

 

First, the " new virus " is in only 30% of SARS cases. Were does that leave the

SARS case definition. Excessively broad, if not meaningless; that's where. And

what of the WHO's " corona virus causes SARS " statement? Either they were right

and should drop 70% of the current SARS caseload and the Toronto ban. Or they

were wrong. Dead wrong.

 

Second, the " new virus " is in 20% of people coming from Asia --who were merely

geographic suspects not SARS cases. Where does that leave the presumed

virulence. Fundamentally discounted; that's where.

 

Third, this " new virus " is in 20% of some undisclosed number of persons with

mild colds and absolutely no firm connection to Asian SARS.

 

These last figures are a black hole for the SARS theory. How can we have a new

strain of corona virus spreading from Asia, if it is already present in Canada

among people with no links to the presumed source in Asia? If it was already in

Canada, why was Canada not then the epicenter of SARS?

 

How can we make sense of this data? Here's how.

 

SEARCH TERMS AND SARS

 

The definitive scientific technique being used by Dr. Plummer and other

laboratories is the Polymerase Chain Reaction. It's a tool of forensic science.

Prime it with a nucleotide sequence and it will find the one or two copies of

that sequence in any sample.

 

The technique is rather like typing a search term into Google. In this case, the

PCR primer is the search term. As Googlers already know, the results from a

search engine depend entirely on the search term. Type a highly specific term

and you get one or two hits. Type a general term and you get millions. Anywhere

in between, and who knows what you get.

 

Now, corona viruses cause many cases of the common cold. And single strand

viruses like the corona are legendary for defective replication. Note, I said

defective replication rather than the emotive term " mutation " . In any patient

you will find copies of the virus which are " mutant. " Most will be defective,

i.e. less effective than the perfect copies.

 

So, if you go hunting for a specific sequence among the millions of strands of

corona virus in any patient --in any place around the world, chances are you can

find defective replicates of the standard genome which match your search term.

It all depends on the PCR primers you use. Any fool can type a search term.

Interpreting the search results requires sophistication.

 

When the Indian Council of Medical Research declared that India had SARS cases,

former director of the Indian National Institute of Virology Kalyan Banerji told

the Times of India he was dubious: " There are a lot of questions that need to be

answered. I would like to know more. "

 

At this stage, so would a lot of people in Toronto.

 

MUTATION OR PATIENT VARIATION?

 

From evolutionary theory we know that mutants only prosper in any environment if

they are better than the standard version in that particular setting. Corona

viruses have been replicating since mankind first sneezed. That's literally

countless quintillions of replications. Opportunities for defects to prove more

virulent have been well tried and tested and have become the established

variants we find today.

 

That's why talk of the emergence of a new virulent corona virus has relied on an

unproved supposition that animal strains have come into the mix recently. That's

pure speculation. Especially as mice and guinea pigs injected with the virus are

" completely happy " , according to Plummer, and exhibit no disease.

 

In recent days, variations patient symptoms have been put down to more ramblings

about virulent strains --attributed to the SARS virus mutating rapidly. Big

deal. That's what corona viruses do, is mutate rapidly --and ineffectively.

 

Scientists " would love to know why some patients develop more severe forms of

SARS than other patients, " according to Dr. Julie L. Gerberding, the director of

the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but she cautions that " it is

preliminary to ascribe that to the virus. "

 

Dr. Gerberding said that many factors other than virulence are involved in

determining severity of infectious disease. Such as the health of the infected

individual, the strength of their immunological defense or even whether they

smoke. In other words, lots of people catch cold and flu --effects vary, and

older people may even die. Which is exactly what we find in SARS.

 

And so we are left with corona virus back where it was before the SARS hype. It

causes common colds. A tiny fraction of these people get pneumonia. Same ol',

same 'ol. Nothing new. Not even the fact that medicine may have goofed yet again

when it pronounced the common cold to be a deadly virulent plague called SARS.

 

Meanwhile costly ineffective drugs like Ribavarin have been pushed on elderly

patients, when respirators would offer the best chance of recovery. Nothing new

there either -just more magic pill over-reliance by medics.

 

Just as debatable is the use of glucocorticoids in SARS. Yes, they reduce

inflammation. But their genesis in transplant surgery betrays their less

desirable effect --they turn off the immune system. Hardly the best tactic with

patients who by definition already have compromised immune systems.

 

CUNNING OR DUMB?

 

Now we can smile when we hear the SARS virus being described as cunning. That's

presumed why it's defeating the best efforts of doctors and scientists.

Admittedly it's only a single strand of genetic material, but it's a cunning

strand, OK? Armed with only a few thousand nucleotides, it manages to baffle the

trillions of nucleotides in the brains of a vast army of medical experts.

 

Or, maybe the virus is no cleverer than any germ. Maybe it's the virologists

hypnotized by their fancy genetic decoders, who are as dumb as any bunch of

quacks have ever been. However, medicine is now a new world religion, so these

high priests must be surely be infallible.

 

All except Dr. Plummer. Don't think for a second that I am ridiculing Plummer.

Or that just because Plummer has the guts to speak openly of his puzzlement,

that makes him less competent than his scientific counterparts.

 

A true scientist questions himself and his data. When he suspects that he is

barking up the wrong tree, he admits as much. Thank God, for Dr. Plummer. The

only one approaching being a real scientist --among a bunch of outrageous

quacks.

 

Read more articles on

SarsTravel.com HomePage

New: SARS FORUM

*Now active with reader feedback and more*

 

SOURCES & REFS

Canadian Strain of Virus Appears to Be Stronger Than U.S. Variety

Virus Is Mutating Rapidly, Genetic Sequencing in China Indicates

Virus Proves Baffling, Turning Up in Only 40% of a Lab's Test Cases

Is SARS in the country, baffled virologists ask

 

SarsTravel.com, 2003

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.