- Jan 25, 2014
Except there is something nefarious going on. They are misrepresenting what the experiment does.My point was that all the things listed by Tankas as being suspect are done for good reason. You can't grow virus up without a cell, the cells need some growth factors and the antibiotics are in there to kill bacterial contaminants. There's nothing nefarious going on as far as that part of the paper is concerned.
If you can't grow a "virus" without a cell (which adds in foreign DNA), then you can't claim later that you "sequenced the genome" of the "virus." How do you know you're not getting DNA from the Vero cells? Or the Fetal Bovine Serum? Or dead bacteria?
If all a construction company can build is three story apartment complexes, that doesn't mean everyone should go around thinking they are hundred story skyscrapers. Of course, there is nothing nefarious about building three story apartment complexes, but selling them as hundred story skyscrapers is obviously fraudulent.
As such, it goes back to my original point. The mouse paper doesn't fulfill Koch's postulates, it can't fill them, and is very obviously in violation of second postulate. Therefore, Kirsch's claim that the study does fulfill Koch's Postulates is flat out wrong.