This fascinating technique called NGS (next generation sequencing) purports to enable rapid sequencing of EVERYTHING in a given sample. A swab, say.
If you’ve the patience to watch it, observe the enormous number of reactions, all of which must reach equilibrium for the results to provide only unequivocal sequences. But that’s only the beginning. Now all the chopped up little sequences, which in a swab, might come from human cells as scraped off a nasal epithelium, fungal spores, bacteria & viruses which, by mass, will be present in a huge range of masses.
I’m sceptical that this, used alone, should be used to sequence alleged viruses.
Anything so complicated & in places, proprietary (they then don’t fully disclose the method & all additions) makes it near impossible to interrogate.
That makes it not ok for certain purposes.
While I’m making no specific accusations, I see ways in which the outcomes could be manipulated & that be unlikely ever to be discovered. The joining in silico of small sequences using what are called contigs must use boundary conditions in order that an algorithm decide what to do with emerging information.
If this was the only sequencing technique available & if it was being used in the service of people I no longer trust, I’d be looking for additional techniques, working blind, to make independent determinations of sequences.
I wouldn’t have thought this way at all, say five years ago.
Now almost nothing is going to be taken on trust, especially if it’s complex & had hints of hidden wizardry about it.
We also need more than sequencing alone, no matter how well it’s done .
Best wishes
Mike

https://www.illumina.com/science/technology/next-generation-sequencing/beginners.html

👉 https://teleg.eu/s/DrMikeYeadon