A Review of Mullis by Rod Knoll
We catch up with Rod Knoll to discuss Kary Mullis and the misconception that the No Virus movement have about him. Link to the Twitter space here.
Additional notes by Rod Knoll:
I really should have pointed out in the comments I made in this space that, despite his "dissident" bravado, Mullis always dutifully gave the "AIDS" establishment everything they needed to continue the "HIV" fraud! He did so by always allowing for the existence of the phantom "HIV". Along those lines, I also forgot to mention that Mullis' one and ONLY orthodox paper on so-called "HIV" was actually the original paper that was published describing the first use of PCR for "HIV"! It is available at this link here.
(In this paper, Mullis and colleagues interestingly noted their observation "that some samples scored positive with only one of the two primer pairs" they used for detecting "HIV'!)
Mullis' application for the PATENT for the PCR which "DPL" and I discussed is at this link here.
In contrast to the claims that Mullis stated PCR cannot be used to diagnose viral infections, on page 22 of the link above it states: "The method herein may also be used to enable detection and/or characterization of specific nucleic acid sequences associated with infectious diseases"
and on page 23 at the link above:
"The combination of specific DNA amplification by the present method and the use of stably labeled probes could provide the convenience and sensitivity required to make the Falkow and Ward procedures useful in a routine clinical setting." (Falkow and Ward are referring to other procedures for diagnosing infectious diseases)
and also on page 23:
"Specific amplification of suspected sequences prior to immobilization and hybridization detection of the DNA samples could greatly improve the sensitivity and specificity of these procedures (for diagnosing infectious diseases)"
I think another really great lay article on Mullis which delves into the origins of the PCR and its early days is this one.
The book "Making PCR" by Paul Rabinow which I mentioned and which is cited in the article at the link above is also another good source. As I said in the space, Mullis went AWOL from the "AIDS" dissident movement just as his book was getting published, so, I still insist that Mullis may have had ulterior motives for inserting himself into the movement in the FIRST place (see this link here)
As I mentioned during the space, Mullis spent the last decade or so of his life working on the concept of "re-targeting" antibodies of all things. He started a biotech company to research this concept, and he and his team managed to get a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal about this. It is at this link here.
Furthermore, Mullis' team was also working on an application of this concept for the Flu! In fact, Mullis' OWN statements about a particular "Flu virus" which were made MUCH more RECENTLY than ANY of his "dissident-leaning" statements really show Mullis' true colors as a fellow believer in viruses:
"...Mullis’ vision includes H5M1, which is likely to prove disastrous. 'The flu has been living with humans for a long time. And it looks like about every once or twice every century, there is an epidemic. If there is going to be a worldwide epidemic of H5M1, it’s just a matter of time – and this time is likely to be worse than last time,' is Mullis’ grim prediction" (from this link here).
...YIKES!!!....
Additional links as follows:
Refer to Rod’s bio here
PCR - A Mullis Miracle or Another One Of Virology's Desperate Attempts At Staying Relevant.
The PCR, Gene Sequencing and Genetics Fraud - Jamie Andrews
DNA Discovery, Extraction and Structure. A Critical Review - By Tam
Anthony Brink
Also see The History of Rethink AIDS, Part 1 to Part 6 below as well as Anthony Brink’s webpage here (or refer to his other work at http://www.tig.org.za).
For the record
The Perth Group’s core members were a handful of people as outlined below (with most of the writing being done by Eleni). Although an official list was never drawn up if we go by who was involved in the work they published there were less than 10 people in the group. However, if we go by who was mentored by her the group becomes a bit bigger.
At a stage the Perth Group was partially involved with another group that had about 2500 signatories but the message at this point was so diluted by people that had other plans that this number cannot be ascribed to the Perth Groups members but rather a movement that had nothing to do with the Perth group’s core message.
