German RKI Admits No Negative Controls in Viral Genome Sequencing
Scientific standards abandoned in foundational COVID-19 research.
The German RKI has confirmed they conducted no negative controls during genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 and measles viruses. Negative controls—where identical methodology is applied to samples without the target virus—are essential for validating results. Instead, they relied solely on unvalidated PCR testing to confirm presence prior to sequencing.
Here's the English translation of the relevant abstract:
“Both the cultivation of measles and SARS-CoV-2 viruses as well as the genome sequencing of such viruses is carried out at the RKI naturally in accordance with the standards of good scientific practice. However, these do not provide for negative samples to be included during virus cultivation or genome sequencing. Rather, virus detection already takes place beforehand by means of molecular detection via PCR and/or sequencing. Therefore, only pre-analyzed samples are used for virus cultivation or genome sequencing itself, where it has already been established that they contain the virus. Documentation and results for negative controls with healthy patient samples during the cultivation of measles viruses and SARS-CoV-2 or the genome sequencing of such viruses therefore do not exist.”
Key points from this RKI statement:
They claim to follow "good scientific practice"
They admit no negative controls are used in cultivation or sequencing
They rely on prior PCR/sequencing to "confirm" virus presence
Only "pre-analyzed" samples (already assumed to contain virus) are used
No documentation exists of negative controls with healthy samples
This confirms circular reasoning - they're using PCR to "prove" virus presence, then using that same assumption to justify not including proper controls in sequencing.
This also directly contradicts findings from my CDC FOIA request, which revealed that no sample has ever been sequenced containing only purified viral genetic material. The CDC confirmed the presence of contaminating genetic material during SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, leaving the possibility wide open that the sequence could be a semi-random construct.
An official CDC FOIA response confirms that the validation of the SARS-CoV-2 genome has not been completed to scientific standards!
CDC has responded to my FOIA request…
The methodological problem:
This creates a circular reasoning issue. To validate that a genomic sequence is accurate, researchers must either:
Sequence a purified sample containing only viral genetic material
-or-
Obtain continuous sequencing reads spanning the entire claimed genome.
To my knowledge, neither approach has been accomplished & documented.
Here's a summary from Claude AI on why negative controls are crucial:
The follow-up , post on Next Level.
google translate :
https://t.me/NEXTLEVEL_OnlineForum/9475/103455
Marvin Haberland
To Robert Koch Institute Details
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for your reply of May 28, 2025, to my IFG application of January 30, 2025.
You write that no negative controls were carried out with healthy patient samples during virus cultivation or genome sequencing of measles or SARS-CoV-2 viruses, as these methods are only carried out with "pre-analyzed samples" in which the virus has already been detected by PCR or sequencing.
I have the following questions:
Scientific evidence without negative controls:
You confirm that no negative controls with healthy samples are included in genome sequencing. How can scientifically sound pathogen detection be achieved under these conditions if there is no control to safeguard against false-positive results? From a scientific perspective, the sole use of PCR methods without independent validation through controls does not constitute reliable evidence, but rather circulates a presupposed hypothesis—a classic circular argument.
Commitment to DFG Guideline 11:
According to the guidelines of the German Research Foundation (DFG), in particular Guideline 11, all methods used must be controlled to ensure valid results. How is this requirement met for virus cultivation and genome sequencing if—as you write—no negative controls are included?
I request a precise and comprehensible explanation of how the RKI specifically ensures compliance with good scientific practice in these central aspects.
Sincerely,
Marvin Haberland
well...what a surprise...
Time after time we find that virology just skips that one crucial step of doing controlled procedures. Could it be that they are afraid their entire house of cards collapse?