Continuing my "greatest COVID hits" articles. To read my introduction to this ongoing series, go here. To support my work and get value for value, order my Matrix collections here and subscribe to my substack here.
March 10, 2020
This is one of the most important articles I’ve written on the current “epidemic.”
When
you look at the justification for all the lunatic measures being taken
to “stem the tide” of the coronavirus, you come to the simplicity of
CASES.
How many cases are there? How many people are “infected?”
And the answer to that comes from what?
From tests. From diagnostic tests.
Of course, some people are ridiculously labeled “cases” without tests. I’ve explained that nonsense in other articles.
Outside
of China, the most widely used test is called the PCR. It must be done
with tremendous care, because contamination with irrelevant microbes and
cellular material can yield a misleading and absurd result.
The
PCR, it is claimed, can take a tiny, tiny bit of material from a
patient and blow it up many times, so it can be identified. “This is the
coronavirus. This patient is infected.”
Not
only that, the test’s proponents assert that, quite easily, the PCR can
also determine the AMOUNT of virus in the patient’s body. Why is that
vitally important? Because, to even begin talking about the patient ever
getting sick, he must have millions and millions of coronavirus
actively replicating in his body.
There
are people (and I’m one of them) who challenge the claim that the PCR
can show how much virus is in the patient’s body. The experts try to
brush us off---we don’t understand the intricacies of the test, it’s
highly technical, we’re not qualified to make a judgment, etc.
I’ve
been searching for a way around this futile argument. In the process,
I’ve discovered something important about the PCR. I SEE NO EVIDENCE
THAT THE ACCURACY OF THE TEST HAS EVER BEEN PROVEN.
Let
me explain. You bring your car to a good repair shop. The mechanics
hook it up to a device and run a test to diagnose what’s causing the car
to stall. Who says their tests are accurate? At some point in the past,
these diagnostic procedures have been vetted, to make sure they work
properly.
And
sure enough, when the mechanics say, “We’ve found the problem,” and
when they correct that problem, you drive the car and it doesn’t stall
anymore. This is called a real-life result.
This
is not the situation re the PCR. Its proponents claim it can count how
much virus is in a patient’s body---how much of a particular virus. But
where is the proof, in real-life terms, that the PCR can do that? How
was that proof ever established?
When
I say proof, I don’t mean technical mumbo-jumbo. I’m not referring to
the highly dense language these scientists use among themselves. I’m
talking about real live human patients, and results.
After
all, if the PCR is being used to diagnose people, and if the results
are being used to count the number of coronavirus cases in various
countries, and if the number of cases forms the basis for, say, locking
down the whole of Italy in a mass quarantine...THE TEST IS IMPORTANT,
WOULDN’T YOU SAY?
I
have seen no wide-ranging proof that the PCR was ever checked properly,
when it was first introduced, to show it could do what researchers say
it can do.
WHO TESTED THE TEST?
I
have come up with a process---a simple process---which will check the
veracity of the PCR. It should have been carried out decades ago. The
fact that it wasn’t is an enormous scandal.
Here it is.
From
a hundred patients, very small tissue samples are taken. The PCR lab
people don’t take the samples. They don’t ever see the patients or know
who they are.
The
lab professionals run these hundred samples through the PCR, obtain
results, and then report: what virus did they find in each case, and how
much of that virus did they find?
Let’s say, in six instances, the lab techs claim they found a great amount of virus in the patients.
Well, those patients should be sick.
Are they? ARE THEY?
“We’ve determined that patients 4, 9, 32, 54, 65, and 86 all have a huge amount of virus in their bodies.”
“Interesting. Thanks. Let’s
see. Hmm. Turns out these people are fit as a fiddle. Not sick. I guess
your test didn’t work. It’s a flop.”
Or maybe the test does work. The six patients are sick. LET’S FIND OUT. IN THE WORLD, NOT IN JOURNALS.
That’s what I mean by real-life results. No jive, no tap dancing.
There
is more. This experiment with the hundred patients? It should be done,
not just once, but many times. A hundred patients here at this facility,
a hundred patients there at that facility. Thirty or forty different
facilities, and thirty or forty different sets of a hundred patients. It
should be done by independent scientists without conflicts of interest.
It should have been done decades ago. I see no evidence that it was.
THE TEST WAS NEVER PROPERLY TESTED. A GIANT SCANDAL.
Think about what that means.
Think it through.
Trace all the implications.
For
example, imagine you’re the political leader of a country, with 100
“reported cases of the coronavirus.” Are you going to lock it down? Are
you?
Think about everything that’s happening now in the world. Use your intelligence.
THINK IT THROUGH.
Don’t jump on the fear bandwagon. Don’t jump on the “scientific” b.s. bandwagon.
Use your mind.
You’re interested in scandals? I’ve just presented one. It’s blaring with a thousand trumpets, right out in the open.
~~~
(The link to this republished COVID article posted on my blog is here. For the article published on Wednesday, click here.)
(Follow me on Substack, Twitter, and Gab at @jonrappoport) | 
No comments:
Post a Comment