As coronavirus testing takes place en masse throughout the U.S., many are questioning whether or not the assessments are correct sufficient to belief, particularly in people who find themselves asymptomatic. Constructive reverse transcription polymerase chain response (RT-PCR) assessments have a number of drawbacks that make mass testing problematic and rife for deceptive fearmongering.
For starters, the PCR take a look at will not be designed for use as a diagnostic software because it can’t distinguish between inactive viruses and “reside” or reproductive ones.1 This can be a essential level, since inactive and reproductive viruses will not be interchangeable by way of infectivity. You probably have a nonreproductive virus in your physique, you’ll not get sick and you can’t unfold it to others.
The PCR Cycle Threshold Issues
Secondly, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many occasions, which leads to wholesome individuals testing “optimistic.” To know why the false optimistic fee for PCR assessments is so excessive, you’ll want to perceive how the take a look at works.2
The video above explains how the PCR take a look at works and the way we’re deciphering outcomes incorrectly. In abstract, the PCR swab collects RNA out of your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. Nonetheless, as a result of the genetic snippets are so tiny, they should be amplified to develop into discernible.
Every spherical of amplification known as a cycle, and the variety of amplification cycles utilized by any given take a look at or lab known as a cycle threshold. Amplification over 35 cycles is taken into account unreliable and scientifically unjustified. Some consultants say nothing above 30 cycles ought to be used,3 but Drosten assessments and assessments advisable by the World Well being Group are set to 45 cycles.4,5,6
Whenever you go above 30 cycles, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA find yourself being magnified to the purpose that the take a look at reads optimistic even when your viral load is extraordinarily low or the virus is inactive and poses no menace to you or anybody else.
‘Casedemic’ Fuels Pointless Worry
When labs use these extreme cycle thresholds, you find yourself with a far larger variety of optimistic assessments than you’d in any other case. At current, and going again quite a few months now, what we’re actually coping with is a “casedemic,”7,8 that means an epidemic of false positives.
Keep in mind, in medical terminology, when used precisely, a “case” refers to somebody who has signs of a illness. By erroneously reporting optimistic assessments as “instances,” the pandemic seems magnitudes worse than it truly is.
“The objective is to maintain you scared, remoted and demoralized for a objective,” says PJ Media.9 “Solely a crushed nation would stand for what comes subsequent.” And that subsequent step is a reset of America as it, with the UN’s one-world Agenda 2030 on the helm. To study extra, you should definitely learn “What You Must Know Concerning the Nice Reset.”
As reported by International Analysis in “The COVID-19 RT-PCR Check: How you can Mislead All Humanity. Utilizing a ‘Check’ to Lock Down Society”:10
“Official postulate … optimistic RT-PCR instances = COVID-19 sufferers. That is the beginning postulate, the premise of all official propaganda, which justifies all restrictive authorities measures: isolation, confinement, quarantine, necessary masks, colour codes by nation and journey bans, monitoring, social distances in corporations, shops and even, much more importantly, in faculties.
This misuse of RT-PCR approach is used as a relentless and intentional technique by some governments, supported by scientific security councils and by the dominant media, to justify extreme measures such because the violation of numerous constitutional rights, the destruction of the financial system with the chapter of whole lively sectors of society, the degradation of dwelling situations for numerous atypical residents, below the pretext of a pandemic based mostly on quite a few optimistic RT-PCR assessments, and never on an actual variety of sufferers.”
COVID Testing Fraud Fuels ‘Casedemic’
Within the video on the high of this text, Del Bigtree breaks down how excessively excessive take a look at sensitivity results in falsely elevated “case” numbers that in actuality imply nothing. He rightly factors out that lacking from the COVID-19 dialog is the loss of life fee.
“If COVID is a lethal virus, what ought to we see when instances improve?” he asks. The reply, in fact, is a rise in deaths. Nonetheless, that’s not what’s occurring. The 2 have nearly nothing to do with one another.
Within the video, Bigtree contains a November 4, 2020, tweet11 by White Home coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas displaying the variety of optimistic assessments (aka “instances”) in blue and COVID-19 associated deaths in purple, because the begin of the pandemic up till the top of October 2020. As you may see, there’s no correlation between so-called instances and deaths.
A second graph tweeted12 by Atlas exhibits the variety of U.S. counties reporting greater than 10 COVID-19 associated deaths per day, based mostly on New York Occasions information. It too signifies that the loss of life fee is steadily dwindling.
Worldwide, we see the identical phenomenon. The primary graph under, from Bigtree’s video report, exhibits the worldwide every day new instances because the starting of the pandemic. The second graph exhibits every day COVID-19 associated deaths, worldwide. Whereas the variety of optimistic assessments have risen, fallen and risen once more, the variety of deaths have fallen off and don’t look like rising in tandem with optimistic take a look at charges any longer.
Surprising Knowledge Reveal Inaccuracy of PCR Assessments
Circling again to the PCR cycle threshold and its affect on positivity charges, Bigtree evaluations analysis13 displaying that to essentially maximize accuracy, PCR assessments ought to use far fewer cycles.
At simply 17 cycles, 100% of the optimistic outcomes had been confirmed to be actual positives. In different phrases, 17 cycles would probably be the perfect CT. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically. By the point you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy fee is a mere 20%, that means 80% are false positives. Past 34 cycles, your likelihood of a optimistic PCR take a look at being a real optimistic shrinks to zero. That is the graph from that research.14
Different information offered by Bigtree exhibits that your probabilities of getting a real optimistic on the primary day of COVID-19 symptom onset is simply about 40%. Not till Day Three from symptom onset do you could have an 80% likelihood of getting an correct PCR outcome.
By Day 5 the accuracy shrinks significantly and by Day Eight the accuracy is nil. Now, these are symptomatic individuals. Whenever you’re asymptomatic, your odds of a optimistic PCR take a look at being correct is due to this fact nearly nonexistent.
Speedy Check Is Much less Delicate and Might Be Higher for Most
To handle among the shortcomings in PCR testing, most notably the time it takes to get the outcome, fast assessments have been developed that may present a solution in minutes. These assessments additionally look like much less delicate, which is definitely a great factor. One such fast take a look at, referred to as the Sofia by Quidel, appears for the presence of antigens (coronavirus proteins) relatively than RNA.
In a latest comparability of PCR and the Quidel fast take a look at, College of Arizona researchers found that whereas the fast take a look at can detect greater than 80% of the infections discovered by slower PCR assessments, when used on asymptomatic people, that fee dropped to simply 32%. (The research has not been printed but however was reviewed by consultants solicited by The New York Occasions.15,16)
Whereas a 32% detection fee might sound horrible, appearances could be deceiving. Keep in mind, if labs are utilizing a cycle threshold (CT) of, say, 40 cycles, the variety of optimistic PCR outcomes might be vastly exaggerated.
In accordance with The New York Occasions,17 researchers have been “unable to develop the coronavirus out of samples from volunteers whose PCR assessments had CT values above 27.” If the virus can’t replicate, you’ll not get unwell and will not be infectious, so you can’t unfold it to others.
When all PCR assessments with a CT worth over 30 had been excluded from the comparability, the fast take a look at was discovered to detect greater than 85% of the SARS-CoV-2 infections detected by the PCR assessments, and this held true whether or not the person had signs or not.
Mass Testing Proven To Be Ineffective at Finest
Why are we nonetheless testing asymptomatic individuals? In accordance with a research18,19 within the October 21, 2020, concern of PLOS ONE, mass testing is at finest ineffective and at worst, dangerous.
“Even for extremely correct assessments, false positives and false negatives will accumulate as mass testing methods are employed below stress, and these misdiagnoses may have main implications on the flexibility of governments to suppress the virus,” the authors state.20
“The current evaluation makes use of a modified SIR mannequin to know the implication and magnitude of misdiagnosis within the context of ending lockdown measures. The outcomes point out that elevated testing capability alone won’t present an answer to lockdown measures. The development of the epidemic and peak infections is proven to rely closely on take a look at traits, take a look at focusing on, and prevalence of the an infection.
Antibody based mostly immunity passports are rejected as an answer to ending lockdown, as they will put the inhabitants in danger if poorly focused. Equally, mass screening for lively viral an infection might solely be useful if it may be sufficiently effectively focused, in any other case reliance on this strategy for defense of the inhabitants can once more put them in danger.”
In an August 28, 2020, interview with The Submit,21 Michael Levitt, Nobel Prize winner and professor of structural biology at Stanford, acknowledged mass testing is “an enormous waste of cash which may significantly better go to serving to individuals who have misplaced their jobs … It’s nice for the pharmaceutical corporations promoting take a look at kits, but it surely’s not doing something good.”
Fauci Admits CT Over 35 Renders PCR Check Ineffective
Even Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted that the PCR take a look at is ineffective and deceptive when run at “35 cycles or larger.”22 He made this remark in a July 16, 2020, “This Week in Virology” podcast:23
“When you get a cycle threshold of 35 or extra … the probabilities of it being replication-confident are minuscule … You virtually by no means can tradition a virus from a 37 threshold cycle … [or] even 36 …”
That then begs the query, why is the U.S. Meals and Drug Administration and the U.S. Facilities for Illness Management and Prevention recommending the take a look at be run at a CT of 40?24 Why are Drosten assessments and assessments advisable by the World Well being Group set to 45 cycles? As famous by writer and investigative journalist Jon Rappaport:25
“All labs within the U.S. that comply with the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly taking part in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous degree, as a result of… Hundreds of thousands of People are being advised they’re contaminated with the virus on the idea of a false optimistic outcome, and …
The overall variety of COVID instances in America — which is predicated on the take a look at — is a gross falsity. The lockdowns and different restraining measures are based mostly on these fraudulent case numbers.
Let me again up and run that by you once more. Fauci says the take a look at is ineffective when it’s run at 35 cycles or larger. The FDA says run the take a look at as much as 40 cycles to be able to decide whether or not the virus is there. That is the crime in a nutshell … On the idea of pretend science, the nation was locked down.”