Ebola staging: experts attacked the diagnostic tests
Ebola staging: experts attacked the diagnostic tests
by Jon Rappoport
October 20, 2014
NoMoreFakeNews.com
The experts were expressing grave doubts all the way back in 1977. Right at the beginning.
They were questioning the validity of standard tests used to diagnose Ebola—tests being the only way to say the virus is present in humans.
Of course, if the tests are unreliable, the whole premise of an epidemic caused by a single virus has no value. It’s an unwarranted assumption.
At that point, you can look for illness and death stemming from a number of causes. And you’re driven to the fact that, in Africa, large numbers of people have been dying for a very long time, for reasons that have nothing to do with germs:
Grinding poverty, war, starvation and severe malnutrition, contaminated water, pesticides, lack of basic sanitation, extreme overcrowding, stolen farm land, toxic medicines, and so on.
Not a viral epidemic.
The 1977 reference here is: “Ebola Virus Haemorrhagic Fever: Proceedings of an International Colloquium on Ebola Virus Infection and Other Haemorrhagic Fevers held in Antwerp, Belgium, 6-8 December, 1977.”
This report is 280 pages long. It’s well worth reading and studying, to see how the experts hem and haw, hedge their bets, and yet make damaging admissions:
For example, “It is impossible to consider the virological diagnosis of Ebola virus infection loose [apart] from the diagnosis of haemorrhagic fevers in general. The clinical picture of the disease indeed is too nonspecific to allow any hypothesis as to which virus may be responsible for any given case.”
Boom.
Here is a particularly illuminating quote: “…it is becoming clear, to us at least, that the more work you do with the FA-Test [an antibody test for Ebola diagnosis] the more interesting, the more complicated and the more biologically sloppy the results become. I would urge very great caution in making any kind of final interpretation of what you have just heard [from other presenters]…I cannot explain how a Panamanian Indian can have antibodies to Ebola virus. I don’t think these are real antibodies. Of course if these are not, it means that any others in a given serum [blood sample from a patient] may not be as well. It is clear that we must have an alternative and a much more specific method with which we can answer these questions. Several facts suggest endemicity of Ebola in Zaire…I’m beginning to believe that the virus may in fact be endemic in Zaire.”
What do the last two sentences mean? They mean there is a significant chance that Ebola has been present in Zaire for a long, long time, and people have developed natural immunity to it, as they would to, say, measles or mumps.
Hardly the stuff of “outbreaks” and viral “hot zones” and recent “epidemics.”
Here’s an add-on, 18 years after the 1977 Colloquium in Belgium: of the 55 million people living in Zaire, 20% were estimated to have antibodies to the Ebola virus. In other words, they had developed natural immunity to Ebola. (Citation: Dietrich J., 1995. Der Tod aus dem Regenwald. Die Woche, 19 May, p26-27.”) Again, not the stuff of an epidemic.
And finally, on a CDC website page titled, “Ebola (Ebola Virus Disease): Signs and Symptoms,” there is this quote: “People who recover from Ebola infection develop antibodies that last for at least 10 years.”
The meaning of this is ominous: such people, if they receive an antibody test for Ebola, even though they are now healthy, can be labeled “Ebola,” and treated accordingly: shunned, quarantined, attacked.
Thanks to Felicia Popescu for her article, “The Ebola lie exposed!—a historical analysis.” The article analyzes, in depth, the 1977 Colloquium on Ebola.
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
by Jon Rappoport
October 20, 2014
NoMoreFakeNews.com
The experts were expressing grave doubts all the way back in 1977. Right at the beginning.
They were questioning the validity of standard tests used to diagnose Ebola—tests being the only way to say the virus is present in humans.
Of course, if the tests are unreliable, the whole premise of an epidemic caused by a single virus has no value. It’s an unwarranted assumption.
At that point, you can look for illness and death stemming from a number of causes. And you’re driven to the fact that, in Africa, large numbers of people have been dying for a very long time, for reasons that have nothing to do with germs:
Grinding poverty, war, starvation and severe malnutrition, contaminated water, pesticides, lack of basic sanitation, extreme overcrowding, stolen farm land, toxic medicines, and so on.
Not a viral epidemic.
The 1977 reference here is: “Ebola Virus Haemorrhagic Fever: Proceedings of an International Colloquium on Ebola Virus Infection and Other Haemorrhagic Fevers held in Antwerp, Belgium, 6-8 December, 1977.”
This report is 280 pages long. It’s well worth reading and studying, to see how the experts hem and haw, hedge their bets, and yet make damaging admissions:
For example, “It is impossible to consider the virological diagnosis of Ebola virus infection loose [apart] from the diagnosis of haemorrhagic fevers in general. The clinical picture of the disease indeed is too nonspecific to allow any hypothesis as to which virus may be responsible for any given case.”
Boom.
Here is a particularly illuminating quote: “…it is becoming clear, to us at least, that the more work you do with the FA-Test [an antibody test for Ebola diagnosis] the more interesting, the more complicated and the more biologically sloppy the results become. I would urge very great caution in making any kind of final interpretation of what you have just heard [from other presenters]…I cannot explain how a Panamanian Indian can have antibodies to Ebola virus. I don’t think these are real antibodies. Of course if these are not, it means that any others in a given serum [blood sample from a patient] may not be as well. It is clear that we must have an alternative and a much more specific method with which we can answer these questions. Several facts suggest endemicity of Ebola in Zaire…I’m beginning to believe that the virus may in fact be endemic in Zaire.”
What do the last two sentences mean? They mean there is a significant chance that Ebola has been present in Zaire for a long, long time, and people have developed natural immunity to it, as they would to, say, measles or mumps.
Hardly the stuff of “outbreaks” and viral “hot zones” and recent “epidemics.”
Fig.
1. Ebola virus. Unfixed diagnostic specimen from first Vero cell
passage, showing elongated particle shape, but no internal tail. Sodium
phosphotungstate; X 90,000. (Page 58. “Ebola Virus Haemorrhagic Fever:
Proceedings of an International Colloquium on Ebola Virus Infection and
Other Haemorrhagic Fevers held in Antwerp, Belgium, 6-8 December,
1977.”)
Here’s an add-on, 18 years after the 1977 Colloquium in Belgium: of the 55 million people living in Zaire, 20% were estimated to have antibodies to the Ebola virus. In other words, they had developed natural immunity to Ebola. (Citation: Dietrich J., 1995. Der Tod aus dem Regenwald. Die Woche, 19 May, p26-27.”) Again, not the stuff of an epidemic.
And finally, on a CDC website page titled, “Ebola (Ebola Virus Disease): Signs and Symptoms,” there is this quote: “People who recover from Ebola infection develop antibodies that last for at least 10 years.”
The meaning of this is ominous: such people, if they receive an antibody test for Ebola, even though they are now healthy, can be labeled “Ebola,” and treated accordingly: shunned, quarantined, attacked.
Thanks to Felicia Popescu for her article, “The Ebola lie exposed!—a historical analysis.” The article analyzes, in depth, the 1977 Colloquium on Ebola.
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
11 comments on “Ebola staging: experts attacked the diagnostic tests”
Leave a Reply
In 1946, only weeks after the UN was formed on 24 Oct 1945, Grorge Orwell gave us a warning in “Nineteen-Eighty Four”
to your health, tracy
“Dr. Michele Carbone openly acknowledged HIV/AIDS was spread by the hepatitis B vaccine produced by Merck & Co. during the early 1970s. It was the first time since the initial transmissions took place in 1972-74, that a leading expert in the field of vaccine manufacturing and testing has openly admitted the Merck & Co. liability for AIDS.”
THE EBO-LIE: EBOLA IS NOT REAL AND THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE GOTTEN SICK ARE THOSE WHO HAVE RECEIVED TREATMENTS AND INJECTIONS FROM THE RED CROSS
http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-ebo-lie-ebola-is-not-real-reasons.html
Ebola, Russia, and terrorists in Syria and Irak (IS), told us Obama recently at the UN… The worst threats…
Medwedew more or less openly questioned Obamas mental sanity after this statement.
If and when they ride it thus high, what are they really up to? Are they going to set the Spanish Flu loose, directly from Fort Detrick, to have some results?
It gets ever ghastlier. I don’t as yet know what to make of this dire show.
http://ozziethinker.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/for-the-empowerment-of-you/
Best
OT
Yes, our experience with HIV testing and ELISA tests have wandered blindly down this jungle path before.
I am curious about culture testing, and “isolation” of Ebola. Can we fulfill Koch’s third Postulate by isolating a viral strain of Ebola, and then inoculate another Ebola free host, and the see the same “disease” develop in another host? Has Ebola ever satisfied Koch’s Postulates as we used to regard them in the study of a disease? (obviously we are not talking about humans as guinea pigs, but a suitable animal model or cell culture)
The great thing about Ebola is that we could see the results in 22 days or so, instead of waiting 15-20 years with the average “HIV-AIDS” patient.
In 1976, Ebola virus (EBOV) was first identified near the Ebola River. Thus, the river is eponymous to the terms Ebola virus, Ebolavirus, and Ebola virus disease.
Is there a link in English?
And, at an “X 90,000″ magnification?! Just how many nano meters long is this virus? Look! The tiny little terrorist! I don’t buy it.
And I don’t buy the 150 year old germ-virus theory. These “lab aristocrats” don’t even try to statify Koch’s postulates by injecting large quanties of “ebola virus” into healthy lab monkeys.