Quoted By:
Electrophoresis doesn’t prove viruses exist because it only shows fragments of nucleic acids in a mixed sample, not a complete, independent viral particle. Since the material always contains cells, debris, exosomes, bacteria, and degraded genetic material, separating fragments by size can’t reveal their true origin. Even cutting the mixture with enzymes and comparing patterns only shows that certain sequences are present, not that they came from a virus.
Interpreting these results depends on reference sequences already assumed to be viral, which is circular reasoning: fragments are matched to a model built in advance, so the match reflects expectations rather than proof. Electrophoresis also can’t demonstrate structure, replication, or pathogenicity.
Finding a long RNA sequence in “infected” but not “healthy” cells doesn’t prove infection, because the “infected” cells were stressed or chemically manipulated, which could generate unusual RNA. Statistical arguments about sequence length assume randomness, stressed cells can produce complex fragments.
Uniqueness doesn’t rule out exosomes or cell debris, because your conclusions rely on computational alignment and reference genome, again, circular. Matching RNA to an assembled “viral genome” only shows internal consistency within the same analytic system.
Replication of results doesn’t resolve this if all labs use the same assumptions and tools. GMO and genetic engineering don’t validate virology because those fields use artificial constructs and forced delivery methods like chemical transfection, electroporation, or microinjection. These techniques push engineered material into cells and don’t demonstrate natural infection. Without physical purification and direct demonstration of a complete particle causing disease, molecular data alone doesn’t prove a virus exists.
