US Mortality

🇺🇸🇪🇺🇩🇪 Software Engineer • COVID-19 Research, Bioinformatics & Statistics •

[US Mortality @USMortality]

AI text - please think for yourself - here are my replies to your points:

It's not my standard, but the scientific standard. Question is, whether we know with certainty, if the calculated/modeled sequence exists as a single stranded RNA inside a virion and is encoding for itself. This is only assumed, never conclusively proven with certainty.

1) We have shown that the original paper is not reproducible, b/c they included confirmed human sequences in the genome candidate. This shows exactly the problem of de-nova-sequenceing via de-bruin - as it may lead to recombination of RNA from different origins. That fact alone, disproves the entire genome theory.
Also overall: Reproduction of a method (or magic trick) does not establish its validity - you can have thousands of labs repeat certain steps, it still won't establish if that genome candidate truly existed.

2) Wrong too - there's no long read dataset where it shows perfect or near perfect reads that don't have any other non sars2 nt's on their ends.

3) This study did not purify a single virion, it only shows 3d models. Instead they extracted all RNA from supernatant.

4) Correct, the CDC does not posess that evidence, b/c nobody has ever been able to perform this. This means it cannot be rule out that the RNA sequence originates at least in part from host or other genetic material.

So no, your AI text does not establish, that the SARS2 sequence, aka genome candiate is validated to have existed as a single RNA strand inside a virion which encodes for itself.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

AI text - please think for yourself - here are my replies to your points:

It's not my standard, but the scientific standard. Question is, whether we know with certainty, if the calculated/modeled sequence exists as a single stranded RNA inside a virion and is encoding for itself. This is only assumed, never conclusively proven with certainty.

1) We have shown that the original paper is not reproducible, b/c they included confirmed human sequences in the genome candidate. This shows exactly the problem of de-nova-sequenceing via de-bruin - as it may lead to recombination of RNA from different origins. That fact alone, disproves the entire genome theory.
Also overall: Reproduction of a method (or magic trick) does not establish its validity - you can have thousands of labs repeat certain steps, it still won't establish if that genome candidate truly existed.

2) Wrong too - there's no long read dataset where it shows perfect or near perfect reads that don't have any other non sars2 nt's on their ends.

3) This study did not purify a single virion, it only shows 3d models. Instead they extracted all RNA from supernatant.

4) Correct, the CDC does not posess that evidence, b/c nobody has ever been able to perform this. This means it cannot be rule out that the RNA sequence originates at least in part from host or other genetic material.

So no, your AI text does not establish, that the SARS2 sequence, aka genome candiate is validated to have existed as a single RNA strand inside a virion which encodes for itself.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@henjin256 @jhillmd @denisrancourt @Agus_Z_X I never claimed otherwise. But it still doesn't mean I'm wrong.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

Exactly. It's an unvalidated mathematical model.

The sequence is - beside all the known issues of reproducible (see my earlier posts/blog) - still an unvalidated mathematical model. One cannot guarantee, that that sequence exists from start to end as a single RNA strand inside a virion, which it also encodes for.

https://t.co/PBxBm22du0

[US Mortality @USMortality]

Exactly. It's an unvalidated mathematical model.

The sequence is - beside all the known issues of reproducible (see my earlier posts/blog) - still an unvalidated mathematical model. One cannot guarantee, that that sequence exists from start to end as a single RNA strand inside a virion, which it also encodes for.

https://t.co/PBxBm22du0

[US Mortality @USMortality]

The SARS-CoV-2 genome has not been validated!

While many people claim, that it has allegedly been verified millions of times through short-read alignment, this method cannot mathematically prove the existence of the sequence in nature. Aligning a set of reads to a reference sequence could happen by chance, and can thus never serve as proof.

Secondly, de novo sequencing of patient samples has been published only around 800 times in GenBank, primarily using the De Bruijn graph (DBG) approach, to my knowledge never by Overlap Layout Consensus Approach (OLC). The DBG method, often implemented through tools like MEGAHIT, generates a variety of potential genome candidates, many or all of which may not exist in nature or may be artificial concatenations. Moreover, this approach has not produced the entire genome sequence from positions 1 to 29,903 in a single contiguous read.

Therefore, additional steps are necessary to confirm that the genome candidate derived from the de Bruijn graph method is not an artifact or a random construct.

CDC has confirmed, that these verification steps have not been performed, thus the genome remains a hypothetical construct and should be considered unvalidated.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@henjin256 @jhillmd @denisrancourt You are wrong. The sequence is - beside all the known issues of reproducible - still an unvalidated mathematical model.
One cannot guarantee, that that sequence exists from start to end as a single RNA strand inside a virion, which it also encodes for.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@denisrancourt It's computer modeling.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@matze2001 @ronzheimer @PEI_Germany Und jetzt noch klarmachen, dass diese Impfungen keine Schutzwirkung haben.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@grok @lilly_bille to say a war declaration is "triggered" is wrong.

you can't rely on something triggering. germany was also triggered. pos

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@grok @lilly_bille if germany had won, you'd likely reply differnetly.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@grok @lilly_bille Yes, so the Soviet Union (bc European/Asian) and the Western allies F/UK turned it into a world war.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@Storkow1992 @GanzeGeschichte Ist doch immer noch geteilt.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@Historical__Rev @GanzeGeschichte that's nonsense, US would've never agreed to that.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@GanzeGeschichte Selbst in dieser Lösung wäre wohl mehr vom deutschen Siedlungsgebiet geblieben.
Das Hauptprolbem waren nicht die Westmächte, die eine Neuordung der Staaten forcierten, sondern die aggresiven Slaven - die dann auch schliesslich die ethnischen Säuberungen d. Deutschen durchführten

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@grok @lilly_bille @grok how can the invasion of one country - start a world war? Certainly not without participation of the rest of the world!

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@rotweisser_1 Jeder mit Verstand, impft seine Kinder nicht. Hinweis nur auf die Inhaltsstoffe!

[rotweisser - gesichert Original @rotweisser_1]

Was sagt uns das?

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@Iphis1871 Now you know who's the real evil.

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@HyperboreanEmp Slavs | Germans

[US Mortality @USMortality]

@forummapping Better than today. O/C today's EU would benefit largely from this!