Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.4K

So this is what you look like! Until now, there have only been computer graphics of the coronavirus. Now, Austrian researchers have photographed SARS-CoV-2 for the first time in 3D.

https://poal.co/static/images/1H0YBv.jpg

So this is what you look like! Until now, there have only been computer graphics of the coronavirus. Now, Austrian researchers have photographed SARS-CoV-2 for the first time in 3D. https://poal.co/static/images/1H0YBv.jpg

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (15).
[–] • 1 pt

The image is not a photo (no photons used), but a tomogram. Electron tomography is imaging by sectioning through the use of electrons. It is the first 3D image of the virus that is not just a computer generated model or an artist rendering.

[–] • 0 pt

I know, but the author didn't. I've requested tomography renditions (our lab was in-house) in a couple of my past positions within the semiconductor industry. Very cool technology.

[–] • 0 pt

Electron tomography is an extension of traditional transmission electron microscopy and uses a transmission electron microscope to collect the data. In other words, it's viewing a dead carcass of something. Don't get me wrong, it may be Covid-19, but the CDC admits the virus has not been isolated or quantified. How do you take a tomogram of something not yet found?

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

The CDC said:

Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, [diagnostic tests] were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA.

So they did not say that they have no isolates, but that the isolates they have are not quantified. They tested PCR tests and needed an exact number (=quantified) of virus RNA to compare the runs. It was not possible to count the viruses extracted from a cell culture, so they created virus RNA out of the database of virus samples instead, knowing the exact number of created RNA.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I think you should read the entire Rappaport article. You have raised a good point. My post was a bit 'truncated' and didn't include other CDC statements reported by Rappaport that lends weight to his polemic. Notwithstanding, if you actually believe the CDC is an incorruptible government agency having the best interests of the American people, you simply don't know the CDC's history. It's been 'weaponized' for a very long time. There's simply too much of a history there to avoid being skeptical about their intent.

>"They tested PCR tests and needed an exact number (=quantified) of virus RNA to compare the runs."

I've already addressed the PCR Test. It is incapable of isolating the Covid-19 virus. The inventor of the PCR Test was Dr. Kary B. Mullis, who received a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for this in 1994. In an interview, Dr. Mullis explained:

>“The PCR is NOT to be used for diagnosis.”

He said PCR was NOT to be used for a test (and the leaflet coming with the test even says this!).

Enough said here, I urge you to read the Jon Rappaport article. He has a blog and website, so if, after reading it and you still disagree with his statements, let him know what you think. I read his material and the comment section. I'll most likely see your comment exchange, if you follow through with this.