Careful not to wash away the DNA

Be the 1st to vote.

A critical review of extracting DNA. If your mind wanders towards 0;a witch’s brew” then you wouldn’t be far off.

This is simple trickery of the chemical mind.….

I am posting this as serious humour. It relates to all forms of ‘testing’ for alleged ‘bacteria’, viruses’ and other imaginative concoctions by the so-called ‘scientific’ community and heralded as ‘fact’ by the Main Sewer News and its supporters.

Review of an article from Pathway Genomics


When I read this article, I was astounded by the methods by which they allegedly extract ‘D.N.A.’ from a living body and thus the standard and now virtually ‘set in concrete’ texts regarding ‘genes’, ‘genomes’ and so forth. I remember reading their book (via a Penguin Book in the early 1960’s) and was fascinated by it; so fascinated that I could eventually draw the sequence from memory and I still have my original notes.

I now, after many years refute this notion of ‘genetics’ as portrayed and apparently accepted by the masses (including so-called scholars) because of the methods used for ‘extraction’ of any substance from the human body (‘cells’ or fluid) and its viability as an explanation for biological processes.

My contention is that you cannot explain a life-form from its constituent extracted ‘parts’ since they are linked together in toto and something which would be ‘dead’ cannot be seen to be part of a living structure. To me, at least, this would be inexplicable.

The same notion for any sort of ‘test’ requiring the extraction of anything from a human body and manipulated by any means outside of it, is simply ludicrous.

My comments are equally suitable for any other so-called tests.

Comments in Times New Roman between […]. Article in Bold.

April, 2020


Pathway Genomics

Over the years, DNA tests have been continuously refined to the point where people, in the comforts of their own home, can provide a sample that lab technicians can use to map out a comprehensive report of their genome. Through a small sample of blood, saliva, cheek cells, or a hair follicle, you can better understand your body and its needs.

[WoW! Exciting stuff!]

When you use a DNA test [does that mean I can do it myself?], you provide a sample, usually either blood or saliva. Once this sample arrives at the lab, technicians [Yippee!] extract the DNA from this sample. Known as DNA extraction, this is a process by which DNA is isolated from the nucleus of cells. [Hmmm.]Along with DNA testing, DNA extraction is also used to detect bacteria or viruses in the environment. [Please define ‘bacteria’ and ‘viruses’.]

There are a number of techniques for DNA extraction. For example, the molecular technique FISH (Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization) is used to identify and itemize particular bacterial groups, [How?] whereas sequencing is done to compare portions of or whole genomes with existing sequence in a public database. [Please show examples (bacterial groups, sequencing and explain what they mean. It sounds ‘fishy’ to me.]

[Nitty gritty.]The Five Steps for DNA Extraction

While there are DNA extraction kits available, which extract DNA from cell types, these can be expensive, so most scientists and labs develop their own method for extracting DNA. [El cheapo.]While there may be slight deviations, there are general steps labs follow to extract DNA from your sample. [Why would there be deviations? What difference does it make to the findings?]

Step 1: Technicians first break open the cells [To release the inmates?] in your sample to release the DNA. [You are assuming D.N.A. exists.] This process is known as lysing, as lysins are used to dissolve the cells. To separate the cells in your sample, technicians will grind them [!] and add them to a salt solution. [We are a long way from their alleged existence already.]The sodium ions in the salt, which are positively charged, help protect the phosphate groups that are found in the backbone of DNA, as they’re negatively charged. [How do you explain that?] Following, a detergent, such as SDS (sodium dodecyl sulfate), is added to remove lipids in the cell membrane and nuclei. [In other words, we batter once healthy ‘cells’ into oblivion and whatever is left is considered D.N.A.?] As these membranes break down, DNA is released.

Step 2: Next, DNA must be separated from proteins. [What ‘proteins’? Explain ‘proteins.]This cellular debris [It is certainly that!]can make it difficult to get a clean [!] [Sorry… of course it has been washed with detergent.] reading of DNA, so technicians [!] strive to get as clean a sample of DNA as they can. [If not, then what?]There are a few different ways to remove cellular debris and proteins. One method for precipitating the protein is to add ammonium, sodium acetate, or another salt. By vortexing with phenol-chloroform and centrifuging, the proteins can be drawn off. Alternatively, a protein enzyme may be added to the sample to degrade any proteins. [My mind is boggled at this atrocity towards what was living tissue before it was taken from a host.]

Step 3: After technicians have a clean sample of DNA, they add ice-cold ethanol or isopropanol. While DNA is soluble in water, it isn’t soluble when salt or alcohol are present. The alcohol helps wash the sample and remove the salt that was previously added. As they stir the alcohol in the sample, a white, stringy precipitate (imagine spit in a glass of water

[not really as far as I am concerned but then I am not a ‘technician’.) appears and it can be retrieved. [Lordy, lordy, how much of this drivel is one supposed to acquire before I expire from laughter?]

Step 4: Once the DNA sample is extracted, technicians will further purify and clean it. [By now, whatever it is, cannot possibly be anything of value in a biological sense.] Once clean, it’s resuspended in a buffer that’s slightly alkaline, such as Tris, and is ready to use. [One might ask for what!]

Step 5: Even when it’s ready to use, technicians still need to determine the quality and concentration of the DNA. For example, if not enough DNA is extracted, an additional swab may be needed. [Perhaps a whole living body?] Using a spectrophotometer [?], technicians for an optical density reading[??] , technicians can confirm the presence of the DNA. [Yipee!]Alternatively, instead of an optical density reading, technicians may use gel electrophoresis to indicate the presence of DNA. [Now that is very clever. What is gel electrophoresis? It certainly sounds pretty clever to me.]

Once technicians [Those dear boys and girls work very hard washing things, don’t they, especially having been brain-washed into believing what they do is anything near real.] have a clean DNA sample extracted from your swab, they can review your DNA for a number of factors. [Which might be?] While 99.9% of DNA from two people will be identical, that 0.1% varies, and it’s what makes us unique. [The %’s are staggering! Really?] Known as genetic markers, these are what scientists focus on when conducting a DNA test.

DNA testing can reveal your genetic ethnicity and risk factors and potential diseases you may have inherited (or may eventually inherit) from your parents, help you lose weight and more. [Oh, for goodness sake!] And as we’ve all seen on crime shows, [Well, you might have.] DNA samples can also be used to aid in crime scenes and trials, as fingerprints and blood samples can be used to determine the victim and perpetrator. [These have all been disputed many, many times.]

At Pathway Genomics, we offer a number of DNA tests centered on your health. From understanding your dietary and exercise needs to screening for potential cancer genes,[Oh, dear this is terrible. Who says there are ‘cancer’ genes? Where do you get the idea that ‘cancer’ is caused by genes?] DNA testing can empower you to make informed decisions about your health. [Sorry, bovine excrement.] With a small sample of DNA, you can uncover a number of things about your health and body you never knew. [Extremely doubtful.]

Be well.

No tags for this post.

9 thoughts on “Careful not to wash away the DNA

  1. northerntracey

    I LOVE your style. This is how I read stuff (the thoughts in brackets) so you had me laughing out loud. I just did my 1st article about this RNA bullshit, it took me 3 weeks to research for it before I dared to question. I wish I’d found this article earlier it would have saved me a lot of time because I was literally no believing I was reading this stuff.
    Someone sent me this link on Odysee. I’d love your input on my channel or my wordpress.

  2. barbm124

    if you google “dna sequencing method reproducible” you will stumble upon many scientific papers admitting that the results were not reproducible or “hardly” reproducible. Yet still this does not stop them to publish their work as scientific. And they get peer reviewed of course. The criminal law was always looking for ways to base their sentences on. They invented fingerprints and hair analysis, blood groups (yes, this is also a hoax). Now the DNA analysis is the main thing for them. All DNA analysis or sequencing methods use at the end this strip pattern made of supposedly colored or radioactively marked parts of parts of DNA they call micro satellites and which they supposedly order on a gel carrier using electromagnetic field. This strip pattern is never the same. Not if you test the same probe twice. It’s not even similar. The experts then compare two patterns and judge a probability. It’s like reading the tea leaves. Doctors interpreting Roentgen pictures do the same. They point to some dark area and tell you have cancer or whatever.

  3. ricky

    I can’t remember the year, but DNA started to be used in TV shows in the late 80s and 90s extensively. My wife and her sister used to watch all those CSI shows and “Cold Case” crime shows using DNA to convict all these “criminals” that would have formerly gotten away with their “heinous crimes.” There seemed to be a ton of those shows back then and I guess they still persist today. It also became prevalent in “court cases” to get convictions and in some rare cases, set people free, or so we were told. Remember the “tainted” DNA samples that helped OJ “win” his “murder case?” A pretty handy tool to funnel more people into prisons, which are largely used as corporate slave labor camps. I wonder if this “science” was a creation of Hollywood script writers and put on hold until “scientists” could “discover” a way to use it to solve crimes? It sure could be a helpful device used for many dishonest purposes.

  4. Steven Lovett

    I would think that once they have battered the living shit out of something so small, washed it several times in salt and alcohol etc and chucked it into a spin dryer, the 0.1% variant may be explained. DNA must mean ‘Do Not Attempt’

  5. timr

    That is a bizarre witches brew process.. But when you read about DNA, the double helix and bonded pairs, and much much more.. It seems to be based on some actual observation. Is it not? Is it all invented or hypothesized based on what is visible to microscopes?

    Are these lab boys and girls doing anything real, or have they just been given some nonsense task akin to reading entrails?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. logo

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.