T 020 8327 6920 http://www.gov.uk/phe
20 August 2020
Our ref: 24/07/hf/872
Dear Andrew Johnson,
Re: Documents held showing SARS-COV2 has been isolated and Causes COVID-19
Thank you for your email dated 24 July 2020. In accordance with Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), I can confirm that Public Health England (PHE) does not hold the information you have specified.
All records in the possession, custody or control of Public Health England describing the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient, where the patient sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material (i.e. monkey kidney cells aka vero cells; liver cancer cells).
Please note that I am using “isolation” in the every-day sense of the word: the act of separating a thing(s) from everything else. I am not requesting records where “isolation of SARS-COV-2” refers *instead* to:
• the culturing of something, or
• the performance of an amplification test (i.e. a PCR test), or • the sequencing of something.
Please also note that my request is not limited to records that were authored by the PHE or that pertain to work done by the PHE. My request includes any sort of record, for example (but not limited to) any published peer-reviewed study that the PHE has downloaded or printed.
Please provide enough information about each record so that I may identify and access each record with certainty (i.e. title, author(s), date, journal, wherethe public may access it).”
PHE can confirm it does not hold information in the way suggested by your request.
Under section 16 of the Act, public authorities have a duty to provide advice and assistance. I have signposted you to the below links which contain information on taking COVID-19 swabs.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-for-taking-swab- samples https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/types-and-uses-of-coronavirus-covid- 19-tests/types-and-uses-of-coronavirus-covid-19-tests
Additionally, the below publication contains some information on virus isolation:
If you have any queries regarding the information that has been supplied to you, please refer your query to in writing in the first instance. If you remain dissatisfied and would like to request an internal review, then please contact us at the address
above or by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please note that you have the right to an independent review by the InformationCommissioner’s Office if a complaint cannot be resolved through the PHE complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner’s Office can be contacted by writing to Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely, FOI Team
From my lay-man’s understanding, somewhere along the line, viral research took a left turn and no longer singularly isolates and purifies virus from all else. According to Crowe, what’s being picked up are bits and pieces they are labeling “virus,” which may not be infective or causative of disease at all. Yet based upon this house of cards, governors and politicians are forcing people to wear masks (which don’t work), social distance, and fear a phantom that has yet to be clearly identified.
It’s imperative virologists address this foundational issue because until they do, “virus mania” isn’t going away and will be used repeatedly in the future just as it has been used in the past.
I highly, highly recommend Torsten/Engelbrecht’s book as it reveals how this foundational issue goes back to HIV, Ebola, Swine Flu, and others.
Important to note: without this isolation/purification from all else, accurate tests and/or vaccines will never occur. Products are only as sensitive/effective as the material from which they are derived from. This article reveals how arbitrary thresholds are used in testing (to either inflate or deflate case numbers): https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/09/30/coronavirus-cases-plummet-when-pcr-tests-are-adjusted/ In the case of COVID, these arbitrary thresholds inflate case numbers, as shown by this article that the test can’t distinguish between virus and viral fragments: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/08/14/tests-for-sars-cov-2-in-south-korea-cant-distinguish-virus-from-viral-fragments/
This issue has long been a thorn in the sides of Lyme/MSIDS patients: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/01/study-cdcs-2-tier-lyme-testing-inaccurate-in-more-than-70-of-cases/ In the case of Lyme/MSIDS, arbitrary thresholds have notoriously deflated case numbers. The CDC has finally recognized this severe underreporting of cases; however, little has been done about it and the abysmal reliance on faulty testing continues on unabated. Due to CDC direction, doctors and authorities malign smaller CLIA-certified labs that specialize in virology and bacteriology for Lyme/MSIDS testing, and actually call them “home brewed.” Please see: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/04/26/cdc-playbook-learning-from-lyme/
Another important read about the creator of the PCR: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus/ Excerpt:
Kary Mullis was a scientist. He never spoke like a globalist, and said once, memorably, when accused of making statements about HIV that could endanger lives: “I’m a scientist. I’m not a lifeguard.” That’s a very important line in the sand. Somebody who goes around claiming they are “saving lives,” is a very dangerous animal, and you should run in the opposite direction when you encounter them. Their weapon is fear, and their favorite word is “could.” They entrap you with a form of bio-debt, creating simulations of every imaginable thing that “could” happen, yet hasn’t. Bill Gates has been waiting a long time for a virus with this much, as he put it, “pandemic potential.” But Gates has a problem, and it’s called PCR.