Drareg
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2016
- Messages
- 4,772
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
This article is worth a read, it highlights the inevitable contamination problem from PCR tests, this will be the next data backed scandal to hit the covid cult as the evidence is mounting.
"In 2007, the state of California hired him to fight back the invasion of non-native mussels, which had been wreaking havoc on ecosystems in the eastern United States.
"We began getting reports after that of these mussels showing up all across the western U.S.," he says.
Scientists were using a clever technique to find them. They'd take a water sample and then look for the tiniest traces of genetic material from these mussels. They used a test called PCR (short for polymerase chain reaction), which vastly amplifies genetic material to look for mussel DNA. This is the same technology used to diagnose COVID-19.
The studies kept coming up with alarming results, showing signs of invasion by these pests. But Cohen grew suspicious.
I began to realize that many of these — if not all of these — were false positives, especially when they started being reported in waters that had chemistry that would not allow the mussels to reproduce and establish themselves," he says.
Cohen wanted to understand why these tests were going awry, so he could spread the word to the labs that were using them. "I eventually turned to the medical literature to look at assessments that had been done of medical diagnostic labs that used PCR-based testing in humans."
Cohen discovered that false positives were actually fairly common. The best labs reported few if any, but other labs reported up to 8% of their positive results were false positives. The average was around 2% false positive.
Fast forward to March 2020. Cohen started thinking about this issue of false positives. He was skeptical of reports that people with absolutely no symptoms were nonetheless getting positive PCR test results for the coronavirus.
"I began wondering whether these asymptomatic carriers weren't in large part or in whole part the human counterparts of those false-positive results of quagga and zebra mussels in all those water bodies across the West," he says.
He dug in and found that in previous outbreaks, such as SARS, scientists ran a second PCR test before confirming a case. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention started to do that as well during the earliest days of COVID-19. Labs capable of running their own tests were also told to send a sample to CDC for confirmation. But that system was quickly abandoned as the number of cases grew and the ability to test remained limited.
Cohen, working with physician colleagues in Hawaii, surveyed procedures for coronavirus testing around the world, including the governments of Canada and the U.K., as well as the World Health Organization and the CDC, but found no requirement for retesting positive samples. (The CDC recommends that a patient who has recovered from coronavirus infection in the hospital be tested twice before being discharged, but the concern there is a much more common problem with these tests: falsely negative results).
And PCR is so incredibly sensitive, contamination is a particular concern. Even the tiniest amount of stray material in a lab can spell trouble, Pritt says.
"That viral material could get into the environment and then contaminate your specimens around you and then cause false positives in those specimens.
He is particularly concerned about research that seeks to track the progress of the epidemic. In areas where the disease is rare, there will be few truly positive results in apparently healthy people. If a PCR test has a 2% error rate in an area where only 1% of the people are actually infected, Cohen notes, most of the positive results will be false positives.
That's the lesson from his attempt to track invasive mussels.
"Actually, nobody has ever found a quagga or zebra mussel" in the vast majority of western waters where PCR tests indicated mussels were present, he says. It turned out that in those water bodies, all the positive test results were false".
What Zebra Mussels Can Tell Us About Errors In Coronavirus Tests
Edit to add: I wonder how many more "covid outbreaks" they will find from people simply shedding the common cold virus.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in collaboration with agencies throughout the federal government, are initiating the National Wastewater Surveillance System (NWSS) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The data generated by NWSS will help public health officials to better understand the extent of COVID-19 infections in communities.
...and speaking of water testing: National Wastewater Surveillance System
Edit to add: I wonder how many more "covid outbreaks" they will find from people simply shedding the common cold virus.
Good summary of the PCR false positive and false negative rates
https://blog.plan99.net/pseudo-epidemics-part-ii-61cb05669608
Google and Pentagram partnership
New Pentagon-Google Partnership Suggests AI Will Soon Be Used to Diagnose Covid-19 - unlimitedhangout.com
and when you tie it to this"predictive", based on the ruling class definitions coded via algorithm.
and when you tie it to this
Programmable money: How crypto tokens could change our entire experience of value transfer – Cointelegraph Magazine
and throw in social credit, it sure will be easy to take out anyone you don't like
I don't know.What will it be run on? Ripple? Any idea what China are using?
@Drareg nice post. I keep telling people you cannot discuss any of the Covid garbage without asking the first and right questions. And the main question is not being asked by many people. That question is "what is the validity of the PCR test?"