Read on Twitter
For those coming at me about the RT-PCR test & calling me a fraud or saying I am lying about my credentials, I have to get a few things off my chest. First, I do indeed have an MSc in Microbiology & Biotechnology from the University of Alberta. 1/11
I studied a putative RNA helicase in Streptomyces coelicolor. I did so in the lab of Dr. Brenda Leskiw from 1998-2001. The gene product for the helicase was not detectable using a multitude of other methods, in fact I spent an entire year performing experiments day after day 2/11
And getting no results. Imagine that if you will, an entire year and every single experiment i carried out yielded nothing. Then one day I stumbled upon a paper about a relatively new technique & my supervisor & I decided I should give it a try. It was RT-PCR. 3/11
For those who are unaware, RNA is kind of a pain to work with. It degrades very easily & the enzymes that do so are EVERYWHERE. It’s not something I wanted to have to work with but I was willing to try. I designed very specific primers to my gene product & gave it a try. 4/11
FINALLY it worked! I was able to detect the gene product from my RNA time course. Over the course of the next year and a half I lost track of the number of times I repeated this procedure but it was a lot. It yielded replicable results every time. 5/11
Since then, the test has become even better. Instead of radioactive probes, there are real time PCR methods that use fluorescence to detect when a target is identified. I have kept in touch with friends who use this technology daily, some even in the provincial lab. 6/11
When I started hearing the criticisms of the tests I went to these folks, who perform these assays every day. I asked them to explain the methods, the sensitivity & the error margins to me. So when I say I am very familiar with RT-PCR, I mean I have used it myself 7/11
And I have gone to sources that use this test and know it inside out. I did not go to YouTube to see some people in white coats swab a kiwi, or read an article from a journal that promotes fringe views. I will read the articles that people try to counter my statements with 8/11
But I will also research where those articles came from and every time so far, the information has either been misinterpreted, misrepresented or is simply pointing out steps that should be taken to ensure accuracy. I have no issue in raising questions. That’s 9/11
The backbone of science. But it’s important to follow the reliable evidence. So far, the reliable evidence I have seen tells me the tests being performed to detect Covid 19 are indeed sensitive & reliable. When results are questionable (detected after a certain number 10/11
Of cycles for example) they are rerun. And rerun again. I feel confident in what our labs are doing and that we have a solid protocol in place for detection. So this is what I needed to say. I’m not a sheep. I’m not a fraud. Thank you for coming to my TedTalk. 11/11
