Mutant ERIS EG.5 - A Scientific Scandal? Just 0.0067% change in a fictional 29,903 base genome and media hysteria that raises questions

No votes yet

Mutant ERIS EG.5 - A Scientific Scandal? Just 0.0067% change in a fictional 29,903 base genome and media hysteria that raises questions

telegram translate:


The so-called mutant Eris EG.5 ( - German) has caused a storm of controversy, but what's really behind it? Only two bases are changed in the 29,903 base reference sequence of the hypothetical SARS-CoV-2 genome. It's like changing two letters in a huge novel and claiming that the whole story is different now.

The 2 affected regions:
1. The F456L mutation means that at position (base) 456 in the "spike protein gene" the coding of the amino acid phenylalanine (F) has been replaced by leucine (L).

2. The Q52H mutation (in the EG.5.1 subline) means that at position 52 the amino acid glutamine (Q) has been replaced by histidine (H).

F456L mutation:
A pack of colorful Smarties consists of 1251 pieces. The 456th Smartie in the pack is blue (representing "F" for phenylalanine). In this mutation, the blue smartie is replaced with a green smartie (representing "L" for leucine). In the whole pack there are 240 blue Smarties and already 100 green Smarties. As a result of the mutation, you now have 239 blue Smarties and 101 green Smarties in your pack. It's like replacing a single blue Smartie with a green one in a pack of Smarties that already contains many blue and green Smarties.

Analogy (figurative):
Imagine you have a book of almost 30,000 letters, and someone claims that changing just two of those letters changes the entire meaning of the book. Absurd? That is exactly what is being claimed here.

Error susceptibility:
Genetics are full of such minute changes, often caused by simple errors in sequencing or interpretation. Serious scientific verification of such claims would require meticulous analysis, including repeated sequencing and experimental verification. Where are these controls?

Experimental evidence:
It would have to be experimentally proven that the virus exists at all and that these two base changes cause a functional difference. Without solid evidence, claiming that these two bases have any significant impact remains a scientific fallacy.


- Lack of publications: There is not a single scientific publication that confirms the claims about SARS-CoV-2 and the variant ERIS EG.5. where is the science

- Doubts about vaccine effectiveness: The pharmaceutical companies themselves doubt whether the effectiveness of their previous "vaccine" is still given due to two tiny bases and produce a new vaccine directly. What does that say about the "effectiveness" of the previous vaccines with regard to all the (fictitious) "variants" already claimed?

- Minimum change: 0.0067% of the entire genome - a change that can occur in any sequencing. This is not newsworthy.

- Lack of experimental control: No controlled experiment has yet proven the effect of these 2 bases. The meaning of these changes remains unclear and potentially misleading.

The claims about the mutant Eris EG.5 raise serious questions about the scientific integrity and responsibility of researchers and institutions. Without solid evidence and controls, such claims are not only scientifically questionable, but also potentially misleading and manipulative. It is time for the scientific community and the media to take responsibility and critically question the true nature of such claims.

Telegram contact person:
@KnowledgeNew Thought