Talk:SARS-COV-2 has never been isolated
But in virology, isolation does not mean literal isolation. This should be addressed. Do these studies satisfy Koch's postulates?
Koch’s postulates were a set of rules outlined by scientist Robert Koch in 1890 to decide whether a bacteria causes a disease. The original four criteria are:
“1. The microorganism must be found in the diseased animal, and not found in healthy animals.
“2. The microorganism must be extracted and isolated from the diseased animal and subsequently grown in culture.
“3. The microorganism must cause disease when introduced to a healthy experimental animal.
“4. The microorganism must be extracted from the diseased experimental animal and demonstrated to be the same microorganism that was originally isolated from the first diseased animal.”
Many question these postulates and they were NOT developed for viruses yet often apply in the context of isolation, other criteria may be even weaker (i.e PCR).
Also, how can electron microscopy 100% determine a SARS-COV-2 virus particle if that particle's particular genome is not sequenced?
- I had in mind that we should comment on this but it goes beyond the specific claim I was trying to address so I suggest you start either an article called SARS-COV-2 does not satisfy Koch's postulates or SARS-COV-2 satisfies Koch's postulates and start documenting the four points you made. I'll tell you right away, I think the four criteria are met. It's clear that criteria 2 is met and that isolation here means extraction, essentially swabbing it out and culturing, which is what they made in the references I cited. Then 3: documented here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8245318/ - ferret, mice, hamster, monkeys have been given SARS-COV-2 and have developed respiratory symptoms and fever. Then 4: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7394720/ they did it with the experimental animals with quantitative PCR tests. JFG (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)