Here
is another article in my series exposing the COVID PCR testing
fraud. For purposes of discussion, I’m assuming the virus is real, and
the case and death numbers are meaningful. Within that official world,
the internal contradictions and lies are huge.
QUICK OVERVIEW
The lockdowns are based on high levels of COVID cases.
“We have so many new cases, we have to lock down.”
This claim is based on the diagnostic PCR test.
The
more tests you do, the more positive results come up. A positive result
is taken to mean: the person is infected with the virus.
But
overwhelmingly, these so-called “infected” people have no
symptoms. They are healthy. Nevertheless, each one is called a “COVID
case.” This is absurd.
A case should mean the person has clinical symptoms; he is sick.
These people aren’t sick, and there is no indication they will get sick.
So…expand
testing, test millions of people, obtain results claiming “infection,”
call all these healthy people “cases,” and order lock downs.
This is a straight-out con. The real goal is lockdowns and economic devastation.
Now
let’s go to published official literature, and see what it
reveals. Spoiler alert: the admitted holes and shortcomings of the test
are devastating.
From “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel”:
“Detection
of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that
2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”
Translation:
A positive test doesn’t guarantee that the COVID virus is causing
infection at all. And, ahem, reading between the lines, maybe the COVID
virus might not be in the patient’s body at all, either.
From the World Health Organization (WHO): “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) technical guidance: Laboratory testing for 2019-nCoV in humans”:
“Several
assays that detect the 2019-nCoV have been and are currently under
development, both in-house and commercially. Some assays may detect only
the novel virus [COVID] and some may also detect other strains (e.g.
SARS-CoV) that are genetically similar.”
Translation: Some
PCR tests register positive for types of coronavirus that have nothing
to do with COVID---including plain old coronas that cause nothing more
than a cold.
The
WHO document adds this little piece: “Protocol use limitations:
Optional clinical specimens for testing has [have] not yet been
validated.”
Translation: We’re not sure which tissue samples to take from the patient, in order for the test to have any validity.
From the FDA: “LabCorp
COVID-19 RT-PCR test EUA Summary – December 9, 2020; EMERGENCY USE
AUTHORIZATION (EUA) SUMMARY COVID-19 RT-PCR TEST (LABORATORY CORPORATION
OF AMERICA)”:
“…The
SARS-CoV-2RNA [COVID virus] is generally detectable in respiratory
specimens during the acute phase of infection. Positive results are
indicative of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA; clinical correlation with
patient history and other diagnostic information is necessary to
determine patient infection status…THE AGENT DETECTED MAY NOT BE THE
DEFINITE CAUSE OF DISEASE (CAPS are mine). Laboratories within the
United States and its territories are required to report all positive
results to the appropriate public health authorities.”
Translation:
On the one hand, we claim the test can “generally” detect the presence
of the COVID virus in a patient. But we admit that “the agent detected”
on the test, by which we mean COVID virus, “may not be the definite
cause of disease.” We also admit that, unless the patient has an acute
infection, we can’t find COVID. Therefore, the idea of “asymptomatic
patients” confirmed by the test is nonsense. And even though a positive
test for COVID may not indicate the actual cause of disease, all
positive tests must be reported---and they will be counted as “COVID
cases.” Regardless.
From a manufacturer of PCR test kit elements, Creative Diagnostics, “SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus Multiplex RT-qPCR Kit”:
“Regulatory status: For research use only, not for use in diagnostic procedures.”
Translation: Don’t use the test result alone to diagnose infection or disease. Oops.
“non-specific
interference of Influenza A Virus (H1N1), Influenza B Virus (Yamagata),
Respiratory Syncytial Virus (type B), Respiratory Adenovirus (type 3,
type 7), Parainfluenza Virus (type 2), Mycoplasma Pneumoniae, Chlamydia
Pneumoniae, etc.”
Translation:
Although this company states the test can detect COVID, it also states
the test can read FALSELY positive if the patient has one of a number of
other irrelevant viruses in his body. What is the test proving,
then? Who knows? Flip a coin.
“Application Qualitative”
Translation:
This clearly means the test is not suited to detect how much virus is
in the patient’s body. That’s another indication that the test is
useless for determining whether the patient is ill---since millions and
millions of virus must be present, in order to produce illness.
“The
detection result of this product is only for clinical reference, and it
should not be used as the only evidence for clinical diagnosis and
treatment. The clinical management of patients should be considered in
combination with their symptoms/signs, history, other laboratory tests
and treatment responses. The detection results should not be directly
used as the evidence for clinical diagnosis, and are only for the
reference of clinicians.”
Translation:
Don’t use the test as the exclusive basis for diagnosing a person with
COVID. And yet, this is exactly what health authorities are doing all
over the world. All positive tests must be reported to government
agencies, and they are counted as COVID cases.
Those quotes, from official government and testing sources, torpedo the whole “scientific” basis of the test.
CONCLUSION:
The PCR test is useless and deceptive. It provides de facto dictators
the opportunity to cite “new case levels” and lock down populations,
creating economic and human devastation.
RESIST, REBEL, PROTEST, OPEN UP THE ECONOMY ANY WHICH WAY YOU CAN.
And get this information out there, far and wide.
(The link to this article posted on my blog is here -- with sources.)
(Follow me on Gab at @jonrappoport)
No comments:
Post a Comment