Freedom of Information Requests
We bring to the attention of our readers this carefully documented study.
While the Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that they had isolated and identified “a new type of virus” no details were provided. Then on the 28th of January 2020, the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the novela corona virus had been isolated.
The central question raised in this study is the following: is there reliable evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?
The study provides documentation based on Freedom of Information requests addressed to Health /Science institutions in a large number of countries.
The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation/ purification undertaken by the numerous Health /Science institutions which were contacted.
It is worth noting that according to the Berlin Virology Institute, the WHO in January 2020 did not have in its possession details regarding the isolation and identity of SARS-CoV-2.
Moreover, because the relevant details concerning isolation /purification were not available, the WHO decided pursuant to the advice of the Berlin Virology Institute to “customize” The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) using the “similar” 2003 SARS virus (subsequently renamed SARS-1) as “a point of reference” for detecting genetic fragments of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2.
Bear in mind, this totally flawed RT-PCR test is being used not only to detect V-the virus, it is now being used to ‘detect” the variants of SARS-CoV-2.
Supporting documents including the responses by Health /Science institutions, CDC, etc are provided in this study. Also more documents can be consulted by downloading the relevant pdf files compiled by the researchers.
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 4, 2021
(The Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is “a viral respiratory disease caused by a SARS-associated coronavirus”, first identified in China in February 2003).
Update as of October 29, 2021: We now have 127 institutions in over 25 countries on record – all failed to provide or cite even 1 record describing purification of the alleged covid virus from any patient sample on the planet, by anyone. All the documents are publicly available.
Would a sane person mix a patient sample (containing various sources of genetic material and never proven to contain any particular virus) with transfected monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum and toxic drugs, then claim that the resulting concoction is “SARS-COV-2 isolate” and ship it off internationally for use in critical research (including vaccine and test development)?
Because that’s the sort of fraudulent monkey business that’s being passed off as “virus isolation” by research teams around the world.
Just 1 of many examples is shown below – this is from a study cited by the Australian Department of Health as a paper “which led to the isolation of SARS-CoV-2 in culture“. (Can you spot the oxymoron in that quote?)
If you are new to the topic of “virus isolation/purification”, I strongly recommend that you begin by reading the Statement On Virus Isolation by Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Thomas Cowan and Sally Fallon Morell, MA or watch this 5 minute video from Dr. Cowan.
A colleague in New Zealand (Michael S.) and I (CM) have been submitting Freedom of Information requests to institutions in various countries seeking records that describe the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.
Our requests have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) isolation/purification performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.
Thus far (July 9, 2021) 27 Canadian institutions have provided their responses: Public Health Agency of Canada (and another from Public Health Agency of Canada, this one re the “the UK variant” aka “B.1.1.7” aka “Alpha”), Health Canada, the National Research Council of Canada, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization-International Vaccine Centre (VIDO-InterVac), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Ontario Ministry of Health, Institut National de Sante Publique du Quebec, British Columbia’s Ministry of Health (re “the UK variant”), British Columbia’s Centre for Disease Control, British Columbia’s Provincial Health Services Authority (2 responses, 1 re “SARS-COV-2, 1 re “the UK variant” aka “B.1.1.7” aka “Alpha”), Vancouver Coastal Health Authority (re “the UK variant” aka “B.1.1.7” aka “Alpha”), Newfoundland Labrador Department of Health & Community Services, McGill University, the City of Toronto, Toronto Police, the Region of Peel (Ontario), KFL&A Public Health (Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington, Ontario, re “any variant”), Grey Bruce Health Services, Peterborough Public Health (Ontario), Peterborough Police Service (Ontario), Aylmer Police Service (Ontario), Hastings Prince Edward Public Health (Ontario), the University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, McMaster University and Mount Sinai Hospital (Toronto) (note that researchers from the last 4 institutions had publicly claimed to have “isolated the virus”, as had VIDO-Intervac).
Every institution has failed to provide even 1 record describing the isolation aka purification of any “COVID-19 virus” directly from a patient sample that was not first adulterated with other sources of genetic material. (Those other sources are typically monkey kidney aka “Vero” cells and fetal bovine serum).
The response from 1 additional Canadian institution is long overdue: Public Health Ontario (request submitted July 16, 2020). On June 3, 2021 PHO provided their excuse for failing to respond: “we’re too busy with COVID-19”: see this.
Click on the above links to access the responses from Canadian institutions. Scroll further down this page for responses from institutions outside of Canada.
Here are 5 compilation pdfs containing FOI responses from 79 institutions in 22 countries/jurisdictions, re the isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”, as well as emails from authors of studies that claimed to have “isolated the virus” and an email from the Head of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert Koch Institut, last updated July 13, 2021 (note: many of these responses were obtained by FOI-submitters other than Michael S. and myself, as indicated further down this page):
Check back here (the page you are currently on) for regular updates.
As of August 25, 2021: 98 institutions and offices in well over 20 countries have responded thus far, as well as some “SARS-COV-2 isolation” study authors, and none have provided or cited any record describing actual “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification.
Numerous institutions have also made it explicitly clear that isolation/purification is simply never done in virology, and that “isolation” in virology means the exact opposite of what it means in everyday English. This is also evidenced in every “virus isolation” paper we have ever seen, for any alleged “virus”.
Click here to see a searchable list of the institutions; scroll down this page to see each response; below are screenshots of the list as of August 12, 2021 (the list was posted before the 3 newest responses were added).
Note that some institutions failed to fully co-operate. University of Auckland, Public Health Wales, Imperial College London.
And yes, we are aware of the many publications wherein authors claim to have “isolated the virus”.
We’ve looked at numerous such studies and have yet to see one where they actually did so. Claiming to have done something and actually doing it are sometimes 2 different things, even in peer-reviewed science.
And yes we are aware of the many published alleged “SARS-COV-2 genomes” – these were in fact manufactured, not discovered. And yes we are aware that EM photos have been published, allegedly of “the virus”, however a photo of something does not tell you what the thing is, where it came from or what it does. One has to scrutinize the Methods used to “isolate the virus” / obtain said photos / obtain alleged genomes, and that is when absolutely everything falls apart with “COVID-19”.
FOI responses from institutions in the U.S., India, Republic of Africa, New Zealand, Australia, U.K., England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Spain, European CDC, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Columbia, Uruguay, Portugal, Brazil, Republic of Colombia, Ilse of Man, etc., plus emails from Germany’s Robert Koch Institut (RKI) and several “virus isolation authors”.
A big Thank You to all the individuals who have now kindly shared additional responses that they obtained re isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”. Some prefer to remain anonymous, others are named below.
Also note that we have included below responses from the U.S. CDC and a couple of New Zealand institutions in regards to isolation/purification of a number of other alleged “viruses”, i.e. “HIV”, “measles virus”, “polio virus”, “HPV”, “Ebola virus”, “Zika virus”, “XMRV”, “HTLV1”, “HTLV-III/LAV”, 2003 “SARS-COV”, “MERS virus”, any common cold “coronavirus”, any “virus” on their “immunization” schedules. Again, none have yielded any records or citations of records describing the isolation/purification of any “virus” from a patient sample.
As this next link you will see a “no records of SARS-COV-2 isolation/purification” FOI response from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR), dated November 2, 2020: see this.
On March 1, 2021 once again the CDC made clear that they still have no records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever… just not in so many words. Instead, the CDC absurdly implied that isolation of “SARS-COV-2” would require the replication of a “virus” without host cells and thus is impossible. See this.
March 3, 2021: CDC again fails to provide/cite any records describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification by anyone anywhere ever… BUT will no longer simply say so (as they did back on November 2nd); instead they give song and dance and cite their own fraudulent study (by Harcourt et al.): see this.
[Note that someone kindly forwarded another FOI response from the CDC dated December 30, 2020 re the alleged 2003 “SARS-COV-1” and all “common cold coronaviruses” – the CDC has no record of any having been isolated. Here is a temporary pdf of the redacted letter…. a better pdf one will follow.
And… March 15, 2021 CDC FOIA response: no records of any “Ebolavirus” isolation/purification by anyone, anywhere, ever: see this.
And… March 19, 2021, U.S. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry(ATSDR) admit they have no record of any “Zika virus” isolated/purified from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever: see this.
And… March 23, 2021 CDC admitted in a FOIA response that they have no record of any “HIV” purified/isolated from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere, ever.
[Please note: you might notice a strange reference to “influenza” in my FOIA request, however this detail did not effect the request in any way because the reference was in the context of me giving any example of the sort of record I was looking for. The reference was the result of sloppy editing on my part … I had recycled my earlier FOI request to the CDC re purification of any “influenza virus”, and neglected to edit that part when adapting the text for my HIV request.] See this.
April 12, 2021: CDC admits they have no record of any “influenza virus” isolated/purified from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever: see this.
June 7, 2021: CDC provided responses to 4 separate requests, admitting they have no record of “virus” purification from a patient sample via maceration, filtration and use of an ultracentrifuge, by anyone, anywhere, EVER, for the following “viruses”:
Any “virus” targeted by the CDC’s childhood or adult “vaccine” schedules: [Note: there was a reference to “influenza” in this request, but it doesn’t affect the request in any way because it was in the context of an example of the sort of record I was looking for… sloppy editing on my part when recycling my earlier “influenza virus” FOIA request.] See this.
June 10, 2021: CDC admits they have no record of any “MERS virus” purified from any patient sample via maceration, filtration and use of an ultracentrifuge, by anyone, anywhere, ever: see this.
June 10, 2021: CDC admits they have no record of any “polio virus” purified from any patient sample via maceration, filtration and use of an ultracentrifuge, by anyone, anywhere, ever: see this.
Now back to “SARS-COV-2″….
June 24, 2021 FOIA response:
Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) failed to provide/cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from a patient sample by anyone, anywhere.
NIAID referred me to the anti-science CDC study by Harcourt et al., even after I’d advised them of CDC’s June 7, 2021 ‘no records’ response. I have appealed to NIAID’s FOIA Public Liaison.
The communications between myself and NIAID are provided here.
The CDC study cited by NIAID did not purify anything from a patient sample. It is the same study that Dr. Thomas Cowan wrote about in 2020 (“Only Poisoned Monkey Kidney Cells ‘Grew’ the ‘Virus’“) where he also addressed the fraudulent nature of the authors’ fabricated “SARS-COV-2 genome” (as shown in the screenshot below).
Previously, in 2020, Ron Bublitz had already asked the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH) the question shown below. His correspondence is posted at the following link, along with the evasive response provided by the NIH/NIAID Section Chief for Controlled Correspondence and Public Inquiries, Legislative Affairs and Correspondence Management Branch. See this. Here is a pdf showing the text and a photo of the actual emails.
Ron kindly provided a screenshot of his communications with NIAID, shown below.
Note that NIH/NIAID failed to answer any of Ron Bublitz’s questions and merely cited the same CDC study by Harcourt et al. mentioned above that indulged in the typical fraudulent “monkey business” approach to so-called “isolation” – as shown in the screenshot below).
After a series of Freedom of Information requests beginning in April 2020 failed to yield any satisfactory response, Ricardo Maarman (working alongside Dr. Faiez Kirsten) challenged the South African government in the Western Cape High Court in May 2021 to provide proof of “the virus” that allegedly justifies that government’s devastating lockdown measures.
(More specifically, Ricardo challenged the President, the National Department of Health, the Governmental COVID-19 Advisory Committee and the Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. And the responding affidavit was authored primarily by the Acting Executive Director of South Africa’s National Institute for Communicable Diseases.)
The government failed to provide proof or even compelling evidence, and on pages 29+ of their responding affidavit (starting on page 31 of the pdf) revealed that they have relied on a “well established” but unscientific approach to “virus isolation”.
The SA government’s affidavit artfully implies that Koch’s Postulates (or a variation therefore) have been fulfilled for the alleged “virus” when in fact none of them have been. It contains no mention of purification of the particles that have been shown in EM images (within cell cultures, never purified or in patient samples!) alleged to be “the virus”, or the characterization or sequencing of purified particles, or any controlled experiment involving purified particles.
And the SA government’s discussion of the Bradford-Hill criteria glosses over the fact that these criteria presuppose the existence and valid measurement of the potentially causative factor under investigation, when the reality is that no test ever has been or could have been validated for the never-purified, never-characterized, never-sequenced particles alleged to be “the virus”.
The judge ruled that the matter is not urgent and struck the matter from her roll. Ricardo will be pursuing this further. The notice of motion, hearing transcript, court ruling, other documentation and interviews about this case are posted on a dedicated website: see this.
According to Ms. Farber’s published June 28, 2021 email interview with Dias, who is an expert in lung disease modeling, the court ruling is in regards to a citizen’s petition to the Ministry of Health, “equivalent to a Freedom of Information Request…that ended up in court – with epidemiological and statistical queries“, and “the court also formalized that the ministry has no data or references about the existence of the virus…”
Ms. Farber advises that an English translation of the court ruling is in the works and will be shared on her website once it’s prepared. Below is a screenshot from the original document showing some of the questions that had been posed to Portugal’s Ministry of Health, for which they apparently had no answers.
July 2021: Brazil’s Ministry of Health provided/cited zero records of “SARS-COV-2” purification for the FOI submitter, Marcella Picone. The Ministry initially claimed that the request (that the rest of world understood just fine) was unclear, but also admitted “information non-existent”. In their 2nd response to Ms. Picone they explained that they have been following research conducted by other countries. See ps 2, 13, 14. Full responses: see this.
The Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa) is an FDA-like quackcine-approver. In their FOI response to Marcella Picone, they explained that they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification and are not required to by law, thus it is (in their minds) not their obligation to make sure that “the virus” actually exists. Full communication: see this.
At the next link (from the website of award-winning investigate journalist Torsten Engelbrecht and co-author of the book Virus Mania) is an email from Dr. Michael Laue, Head of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert Koch Institut (RKI), an institute “within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health” and responsible for disease control and prevention: see this.
The link for the Turonova et al. abstract, provided by Dr. Laue in the email above, is here; the full text of the paper is here: In situ structural analysis of SARS-CoV-2 spike reveals flexibility mediated by three hinges)
The starting point for this paper is a so-called SARS-COV-2 isolate named “MUC-IMB1” (referred to simply as “MUC-1” in the paper’s supporting materials). Turonova et al. credit G. Dobler of the Bundeswehr Institute for Microbiology for providing them this “isolate”.
I contacted Dr. Gerhard Dobler to confirm details about “MUC-1” (which goes by several different names including Germany/BavPat1/2020), and it turns out that MUC-1 is another result of the monkey-business methodology cited at the top of this page. (The emails and more details are posted here: MUC-1 aka MUC-IMB1: just more Corman/Drosten monkey business fraud.) MUC-1 is not isolated/purified “virus” nor was it ever shown to contain any “virus”.
(Dr. Andrew Kaufman recently commented on this same paper by Turonova et al.; to see his video summary go to “Bonus Video”: see this.)
Also on Torsten Engelbrecht’s website are links to email responses from authors of “SARS-COV-2” studies, starting with the Zhu et al paper cited above by Dr. Michael Laue. None provided any evidence or assurance re purification of “the virus”. The following is copied and pasted from Torsten’s homepage:
“Na Zhu et al. (NEJM): “[We show] an image of sedimented virus particles, not purified ones” (see Email).
Leo L. M. Poon; Malik Peiris (Nature Medicine): “The image is the virus budding from an infected cell. It is not purified virus” (see Email).
Sharon R. Lewin et al. (The Medical Journal of Australia): ““The nucleic acid extraction was performed on isolate material recovered from infected cells. This material was not centrifuged, so was not purified through sucrose gradient to have a density band as such. The EM images were obtained directly from cell culture material” (see Email).
Myung-Guk Han et al. (Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives): “We could not estimate the degree of purification because we do not purify and concentrate the virus cultured in cells” (see Email).
Wan Beom Park et al. (Journal of Korean Medical Science): “We did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification” (see Email).”
January 13, 2021: Norway’s Ministry of Health and Care Services failed to provide or cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” isolation from a sample from a symptomatic patient, where the sample was not adulterated with additional genetic material, by anyone anywhere, for the requester Martiens Bekker. Request and response with English translation: see this.
April 25, 2021: the Norwegian Directorate of Health (which is under the Ministry of Health and Care Services) failed to provide or cite even 1 record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere, and provided a silly excuse instead: see this.
May, 2021 Uruguay’s Clemente Stable Biological Research Institute (under the Ministry of Education and Culture) and the Faculty of Chemistry, University of the Republic provided/cited no records of “SARS-COV-2” purification, by anyone anywhere, for requester María Bettina Galo. Both responses: see this.
June 7 2021: Uruguay Ministry of Public Health failed to provide or cite for requester María Bettina Galo any record of “SARS-COV-2” purified from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere, ever and claimed they can’t understand the request: see this.
March 30, 2021: Oregon Health Authority confirmed they have no record re purification of any “SARS-COV-2” from any patient sample in the world: See the full wording of the request, and response: see this.
May 22, 2021: Ministry of Health and Social Protection, Republic of Colombia admits they have no record re purification of “SARS-COV-2” from a patient sample, by anyone anywhere. Full letter here.
May 3, 2021: Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR, “the apex body in India for formulation, coordination & promotion of biomedical research”) has failed to provide/cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification for the requester (who asked to keep both their name and file # private); instead they cited a typical example of “monkey-business” fraud. Note that ICRM had fraudulently claimed to have been tracking “the virus” across India, to have isolated the imaginary UK variant, has developed a COVID-19 quackcine, shares ownership rights on the quackcine and is a member of guess WHO’s Global Health Workforce Network. Full response here.
June 28, 2021, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) once again fails to provide/cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification and cites more “monkey-business” fraud, this time through their National Institute of Virology. Note the World Health Organization logo and reference in the footer of the letter. Here is the URL for the image.
Next is a 2nd FOI response of June 28 2021 from the Indian Council of Medical Research failing again to provide/cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification and citing the same anti-science papers, this time in response to requester Trinayan Das. ICMR was also asked additional questions re PCR, and responded that it is the “gold standard” for detection (“very accurately”! “confirms the presence”!!). Full response here.
I personally cannot read these Czech documents, but was told:
Univerzita Karlova: “This from the No.1 university in Czech R. As answer, they inform us, that “there is broad consensus in the international scientific community” about precise RNA sequence of SARS-Cov2, about its chemical and protein structure and it causing COVID19.”
Thus Univerzita Karlova failed to provide any record proving the purification or existence of “the virus”: see this.
Czech Ministry of Health: “This is the response of Czech ministry of health. When a proof of existence of the SARS-Cov2 virus was requested…”
The references cited by the Ministry are in English and do not describe purification of an alleged virus, let alone scientific study of such. Full letter here.
I personally cannot read this next document from the Ukraine’s Ministry of Health dated March 15, 2021, but am told that the Ministry stated here that they do not have any “SARS-COV-2” isolate, nor do they intend to obtain any.
The Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport provided/cited for the requester no records of actual purification and control experiments to show “SARS-CoV-2” exists: see this.
April 26, 2021: Once again the Dutch Minister for Health, Well-being & Sport replied to an FOI sent to its agency RIVM (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) re purification of “the virus”; the Minister provided/cited zero such records for Gabriëlle Rutten, and cited cell culture anti-science instead. Full correspondence here.
Feb 18, 2021: The Isle of Man’s Department of Health and Social Care admitted in a FOI response to Mr. Steven Gardner that:
- “the virus” is not isolated/purified;
- 45 PCR cycles!
and gave false info re sequences used in PCR “tests”. Full unredacted pdf here.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Health and NZ’s crown research institute, the Institute of Environmental Science and Research admitted they have no records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation: see this.
Here are 5 pages of pure gold, evidencing masterful evasion plus stunning incompetence and/or fraud from New Zealand’s Ministry of Health. Instead of providing the requests records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification and proof of accurate diagnostic tests, they blathered about genomes and cultures of the never-isolated imaginary virus; stated that PCR tests have been validated around the world and are the gold standard; and cited a February 2020 preliminary report (“The Pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in hACE2 Transgenic Mice”) that used the so-called “SARS-COV-2” strain that had been concocted by Zhu et al. and claimed that Koch’s Postulates had been fulfilled. See this.
No records describing isolation of SARS-COV-2 from a sample not already adulterated with other genetic material, admits New Zealand’sDepartment of the Prime Minister & Cabinet: see this.
March 22, 2021, New Zealand’s Ministry of Heath, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and the NZ Cabinet confirm they still have no record describing purification of “the virus” and hence zero proof of its existence, and they choose to cite fraudulent studies instead (the infamous Harcourt et al. study mentioned above and the Australian paper cited at the top of this page). Full pdf response here.
April 19, 2021, responding to a request that had been forwarded to them by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern‘s Office, the New Zealand Ministry of Heath confirms that no record describing purification of “SARS-COV-2” is held by the Ministry or by any “agency subject to the Act”. Full pdf response here.
April 23, 2021 Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern‘s Office, New Zealand, again confirms they have no record describing purification of “SARS-COV-2” by anyone, anywhere, ever. Full pdf response here.
New Zealand’s University of Auckland was disappointingly non-cooperative, the only institution as of October 8th failing to simply admit that they have no such records, opting instead for a sketchy “refusal” of my colleague’s request. Let’s face it, if the University actually had any such records (that no one else on the planet appears have) and they are publicly available, the University of Auckland would have proudly provided links/citations. But they didn’t. See this.
New Zealand’s University of Otago, where Professor Miguel Quiñones-Mateu, Ph.D. claimed months ago to have “isolated the virus”, responded that they too have “no records” describing isolation of SARS-COV-2 from a sample not already adulterated with other genetic material: See this.
March 30, 2021 New Zealand’s University of Otago confirm they still have no record of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification, by anyone anywhere. Full response pdf here.
[BONUSES: New Zealand‘s Ministry of Health admits to having no records describing isolation of ANY virus listed on NZ’s Immunisation Schedule: see this.]
NZ’s crown research institute, the Institute of Environmental Science and Research also admits to having no records describing isolation of ANY virus listed on NZ’s Immunisation Schedule, and equates “isolation” with culturing: see this.
New Zealand‘s Ministry of Health obviously has no record describing the isolation of the alleged 2003 “SARS-COV” or any “common cold coronavirus” by anyone, anywhere, ever, but wasn’t willing to admit such. Instead they falsely implied that Michael S. had asked for things he had not asked for. See this.
New Zealand’s crown research institute, the Institute of Environmental Science and Research once again equates “isolation” with culturing and this time admits to having no record re isolation of “SARS-COV-1” or any “virus” on NZ’s Immunisation Schedule and simply “ignored” a query re isolation of any “common cold coronaviruses”. I think we know the answer though, don’t we? See this.
March 9, 2021: New Zealand’s Institute of Environmental Science and Research admits that they still have no record of “SARS-COV-2”isolation/purification (performed by anyone on the planet, anywhere, ever): See this.
One of New Zealand’s Associate Ministers of Health Jenny Salesa has “no records”: see this.
Another of New Zealand’s Associate Ministers of Health Julie Anne Genter has “no records”: see this.
And another of New Zealand’s Associate Ministers of Health Peeni Henare has “no records”: see this.
Same, “no records” says Bay of Plenty District Health Board, Tauranga Hospital, New Zealand: see this.
June 16, 2021: University of Western Australia – home of Gates-funded researcher Christine Carson, who has spent countless hours on social media this past year insisting “yes the COVID-19 virus has been isolated” – provided/cited zero records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification from a patient sample, by anyone anywhere ever: see this.
At this next link you will find an interesting “no records” FOI response from Australia’s Department of Health: see this.
Same admission from Australia’s Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity (which had publicly claimed to have “isolated the virus”).
Same admission from Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation – CSIRO (“Australia’s national science research agency”), which is involved in “COVID-19” vaccine trials using the so-called “SARS-COV-2 isolate” from Doherty Institute: see this.
March 22, 2021, Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation still has no record of any “SARS-COV-2” purified from a patient, by anyone, anywhere: see this.
The next FOI letter shown in the screenshot below is in response to a request that was submitted on the advice of Australia’s Department of Health, and has come to us via John Blaid. Addressed to Mary-Jane Liddicoat, the formal but undated letter was authored sometime after March 9, 2021 by Dr. Nick Coatsworth, Executive Director of Medical Services, Canberra Health Services (CHS), ACT Government (Government of the Australian Capital Territory).
[When reviewing Coatsworth’s response, bear in mind the following facts provided us by Darren Christison, a journalist in Sydney, Australia: “This is the same Dr Nick Coatsworth who is the ‘poster boy’ for the Australian government’s push to vaccinate everyone until they urinate the poison, and has been a permanent fixture on TV and online in recent months (see this). He’s also the same Dr Nick Coatsworth who recently, according to The Sydney Morning Herald, ‘admonished a “hardcore rump of activist doctors” spreading misinformation and undermining vaccine confidence” (see this).]
Coatsworth admitted that Canberra Health Services holds no records relevant to the topic of isolating (aka purifying) the alleged “SARS-COV-2”. His entire letter is here.
March 19, 2021: Australian Capital Territory / Canberra Health Services once again failed to provide / cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from any patient sample on the planet (thus demonstrating that they still have zero proof that “the virus” actually exists). Full communications: see this.
[BONUS: Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation – CSIRO (“Australia’s national science research agency”) also admits to having no record describing the isolation of ANY virus on Australia’s national “immunization” schedule, by anyone, anywhere, ever: see this]
Mar 16 2021: Western Australia Minister & Department of Health confirm they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from any patient sample on the planet (and thus zero proof that “the virus” exists), and that PathWest Laboratory Medicine only does the quackery version of “virus isolation”. Full communications: see this.
April 28, 2021: South Australia Minister for Health and Wellbeing confirmed they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from any patient sample on the planet (and thus zero proof that “the virus” actually exists). Full communications: see this.
May 25, 2021: New South Wales Ministry of Health, Australia, confirmed they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from any patient sample on the planet (and thus zero proof that “the virus” actually exists). Full communications: see this.
No records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation, admits the U.K. Department of Health and Social Care (note: there are not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 such responses from DHSC – the most recent dated November 23, 2020): See this.
[Note The U.K. Department of Health and Social Care has kept us waiting for 2 months already on an FOI request for (at most) 3 days worth of analysis on their alleged “new variant” announced by Matt Hancock on December 14 2020: see this]
UK’s Government Office for Science has no record of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification: see this.
Here is a sketchy FOI reply from the U.K. Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (obtained by Mr. Athanasios Kandias). The agency provided/cited no records re “SARS-COV-2” isolation. Their response includes an (apparently fraudulent) claim that such records are available in the public domain, but they provided zero links/citations despite having been asked for the location of any such records. Excerpts are shown below. Full response here. Pdf here.
May 4, 2021: University of Warwick (UK) admits that they hold no record describing “SARS-COV-2” purification from a patient sample, by anyone, anywhere, ever: see this.
Regarding “BNT162b2”, the mRNA ingredient in the Pfizer-BioNTech “Covid-19 vaccine”, that is allegedly transcribed from the the alleged corresponding genetic template that allegedly encodes the alleged viral spike (S) protein of the alleged “SARS-COV-2 virus”, U.K. Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency admitted to investigative journalist Frances Leader that: the genetic template on which it (“BNT162b2”) is based “does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person“, rather it “was generated via a combination of gene synthesis and recombinant DNA technology“. The email exchange is available here and in a pdf here.
No EM photos of purified “SARS-COV-2”, no peer reviewed paper with the genome of purified “SARS-COV-2”, no proof that “the virus” causes “COVID-19”, etc — says UK’s Cabinet Office in response to the queries shown below from Bartholomeus Lakeman; full letter here and preserved here.
No records re isolation of “SARS-COV-2” from an unadulterated sample, says the UK’s House of Commons, in response to a query from Marc Horn: see this.
Same, from the UK’s House of Lords, in response to a query from Marc Horn: see this.
(Click here to see a series of “COVID-19” FOI requests submitted by Marc Horn to various agencies)
Same, from Public Health Scotland in response to Athanasios Kandias: see this.
Same, for the 2nd time from Public Health Scotland in response to my colleague in NZ: see this.
Public Health Wales provided Dr. Janet Menage a sketchy excuse for not properly assisting with her request (Dr. Menage has submitted a complaint to the PHW ‘Corporate Complaints’ team); see PHW’s response here.
Here is a 2nd & more recent dodgy response from Public Health Wales yielding no record, or citation of any record, of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification done by anyone, anywhere, ever. See this.
Below is a screenshot of a Freedom of Information response from the University College Dublin, explaining that Ireland’s National Virus Reference Laboratory has no records describing “how the Novel Coronavirus was purified“. Click the link for more details.
Statens Serum Institut, Denmark told Alex Holmsted that (translation): “The Statens Serum Institut can state that we have now carried out a journal search for documentation that has convinced the Statens Serum Institut about the real existence of SARS-CoV-2, the alleged cause of COVID19 and moreover, we have in some other way tried to locate relevant documents. Statens Serum Institut can note that we are not in possession of the requested documents...”See this.
April 2020: Public Health England admits using fake virus material to evaluate “COVID-19” tests, the gold standard is not isolated virus, and more. See this.
No records re isolation of “SARS-COV-2” from an unadulterated sample, Public Health England told Andrew Johnson, a Technology Tutor at a UK University: see this. This is Andrew’s write-up on his FOI request: see this.
Months ago, the StandUpX Science Committee published an open letter dated June 22, 2020 to the British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson. Below is a screenshot from their letter, demanding scientific proof of the alleged “COVID-19 virus”. (Their entire letter can be viewed and/or downloaded here)
StandUpX Committee member Piers Corbyn also made the demand verbally outside the headquarters of the UK government; video footage of the demand is available at this url (not the embedded video below – that is a different video featuring Peirs Corbyn; WordPress would not embed the footage of the demand for some reason, so please click on this url to see the demand, not on the image below):
Here is a footage of Piers Corbyn calling out the UK government for the non-isolation of their theoretical “SARS-COV-2 virus”. ERRATUM: In the description underneath the video (on the bitchute page) the authors of the publication on the Drosten PCR test are referred to has ‘Drosten et al’ when it should read ‘Croman et al’.
StandUpX has a petition entitled “If there’s no proof the virus exists end all Lockdowns/Masks/Trax/Vax actions“. If you can tell the difference between isolation and fraudulent monkey business, please consider signing it, here: see this.
In April StandUpX committee member Dr. Kevin Corbett MSc PhD (@KPCResearch on Twitter) published a paper describing issues around the non-isolation of the theoretical SARS-COV-2 virus. Below is a screenshot from his paper entitled “WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE ‘NOVEL CORONAVIRUS’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, AND THE ACCURACY OF THE TESTS?”, which you may access here.
Guess “WHO” advised Public Health England (and the rest of the world) not to isolate “the virus” as a routine diagnostic procedure, and “WHO” encourages the conflation of isolation with culturing? See the screenshots below from page 4 of the Interim Guidance document dated March 2, 2020 “Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected human cases” kindly provided by Dr. Corbett of StandUpX and page 8 of the Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 Interim guidance 11 September 2020.
Update, October 1, 2020: My colleague in New Zealand recently received a “no records” response from Public Health England – identical to the “no records” response above that was already provided to Andrew Johnson. You may access this 2nd response from PHE here.
Update November 1, 2020: Marc Horn also queried Public Health England for records describing “SARS-COV-2 isolation” from a sample not unadulterated with additional genetic material. Response: no records. See this.
Another “no records” FOI response from Public Health England dated November 3, 2020, in response to a request from Athanasios Kandias for records (re SARS-COV-2 isolation) held by the National Biological Standards Board.
See this. (Preserved here)
No records supporting the claim that the alleged “SARS-COV-2 virus” causes “COVID-19” symptoms says Public Health England, in response to a query from Marc Horn. Note that PHE cited 3 publicly available studies, none involving isolation of “SARS-COV-2” from a sample not unadulterated with additional genetic material. See this.
July 27, 2021: In England, the Pennine Acute National Health Service Trust and the Salford Royal National Health Service Foundation Trustdisclosed in FOI responses:
- that they have in total zero records re “SARSCov2” satisfying Koch’s Postulates (and yes, we know that a strict application of Koch’s would not be possible, even if the imaginary “virus” actually existed; note that these institutions provided plenty of unrequested data but no records whatsoever re “virus” isolation/purification);
- PCR tests have been run with up to 42 cycles;
- <10 children died within 28 days of a positive convid test;
- “cause of death is not recorded in our clinical systems”. Full response here.
No records supporting the claim that the alleged “SARS-COV-2 virus” causes “COVID-19” symptoms, says the UK’s House of Commons, in response to a query from Marc Horn: see this.
No records supporting the claim that the alleged “SARS-COV-2 virus” causes “COVID-19” symptoms , says the UK’s House of Lords, in response to a query from Marc Horn: see this.
Imperial College London managed to provide/cite zero records in their wildly un-informative Freedom of Information response dated March 12, 2021 re: isolation/purification of the imaginary “SARS-COV-2” (by anyone, anywhere, ever): see this.
Kepa Ormazabal submitted a Freedom of Information request to Spain’s Ministry of Health for bibliographic records of studies describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation (“the term “isolation” is used in the sense given by the Real Academia Espanola Dictionary”); the Ministry’s response yielded no records: see this.
The Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Andrea Ammon, has admitted to having no documentation, even for the ECDC’s methodology to prove that a virus exists, let alone proof of SARS-COV-2: see this.
According to the website of Slovenia’s University of Ljubljana, their Faculty of Medicine has been involved in “…implementation of the latest molecular diagnostic procedures; an attempt to isolate the virus in cell cultures [oxymoron], which is a precondition for testing anti-viral agents and vaccines…“. The Faculty formally admitted on November 30, 2020 to having no record (even obtained from others) of “SARS-COV-2” isolation or proving a causal link to “COVID-19”; also that 40 PCR cycles have been used across Slovenia since the beginning of testing. The Faculty’s original response and an English translation are available here.
More recently, Slovenia’s Ministry of Health stated that they had no records re “SARS-COV-2” purification, PCR tests, etc. and transferred an FOI request to the Institute of Microbiology and Immunology (IMI) at the Univerisy of Ljubljana. The IMI eventually admitted in February 2021 that they have no records re “virus” purification and that PCR tests have been conducted using up to 40 cycles. Bother letters are here.
And more recently still, Slovenia’s National Laboratory for Health, Environment & Food (Nacionalnega laboratorija za zdravje, okolje in hrano, NLZOH – “the central and largest Slovenian public health laboratory that handles environmental protection, diagnostic and public health microbiological activities, chemical and microbiological analyses of different types of samples, and also performs research activities“) failed to provide or cite any record of “SARS-COV-2” purification or proof of existence, despite an intervention by the Information Commissioner. NLZOH also cited a “business secret” in responses re queries re PCR testing. See this.
July 9, 2021: Slovenia’s main medical centre – Univerzitetni klinični center Ljubljana, UKCLJ (University Medical Centre Ljubljana) – provides/cites zero records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification but nevertheless claims Koch’s Postulates are fulfilled, and cites typical “monkey business” papers: see this.
June 18, 2021: Argentina’s Ministry of Health strongly suggested in an FOI response to Ana Maria Daverede (re the meaningless “COVID-19” PCR tests) that they too have no record of “the virus” having been purified. In point 4 they mention “by not having viral isolates available …”(Also in point 9: “does not serve to discriminate carriage, infection, disease, contagiousness, transmissibility …”) See this.
VIDEO: Admiten que no existe el coronavirus: Develan la gran farsa. See this.
Hall of Shame
On February 15, 2021 Kepa Ormazabal submitted an FOI request re isolation/purification of the phantom “virus” to the Basque Country (Spain) Office of the President and Department of Healthand all dependent institutions. Months later Kepa wrote:
“According to the law, they have 30 days to respond; 60 if the question is especially complex. Today is May 2nd and I have not heard from them.”
On March 30, 2021 Kepa Ormazabal submitted another FOI request re isolation/purification of the phantom “virus” to the flagship of Spanish research, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas /Higher Council of Scientific Research (the image below indicates the reception of the request by the institution). Months later Kepa writes: “Again, they have not responded and, therefore, their silence is refusing access to the information they may hold in regards to my question.“
“The CSIC and the Basque government are public institutions and, therefore, must comply with the Ley de transparencia, buen gobierno y acceso a la información pública/Law of transparency, good governance and access to public information. Article 20.4 of this law states that, if after 30 days there has been no response from the public administration, this silence is to be understood as meaning that the request to access the public information solicited has been refused.”
Here is an exasperating email exchange between myself and Imperial College London, home of the disgraced “COVID-19” modeller Professor Neil Ferguson and Public Health England’s Deputy Director of National Infection Service and Director of Reference Microbiology Services, British virologist, Professor Maria Zambon FMedSci FRCPath. The College clearly has no records describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification but is unwilling to admit such: see this.
Back-Up FOI Repositories and a Tiny Url
This collection of FOI responses is being kindly backed up by a friend, here. And they have backed up the compilation pdfs here:
And someone kindly made this easy-to-remember tiny URL for the FOI collection – it re-directs to the page you are currently on here.
So “What The Hell Is Going?
At this point you might be scratching your head and wonder what on Earth is going on. If so, the collection of presentations, articles and facts (not theories) on the page linked below will reveal the fraud and trickery that’s behind the fake pandemic known as “COVID-19”.
Would you like to help?
If you would like to submit your own FOI request to another institution, or obtain an updated response from an institution that has already been FOI’d, here is a suggested template that may assist you:
Please share with me any responses that you receive!)
On November 26, 2020 at a protest in Toronto, I was given a spur-of-the-moment opportunity to deliver a message to the Canadian government re their handing of “COVID-19”, via the mainstream media. Enjoy.
On November 28, 2020 I gave a speech at The Line Canada‘s anti-lockdown protest; it begins at the 19 minute mark in this video: