Loading ...COVID PCR TESTS ARE SCIENTIFICALLY MEANINGLESS
This is the Most Important Piece regarding the HOAX that is Covid-19
Yes Hoax is the word I am meaning .
I mean it in the sense that …yes there is an awful disease that is hospitalizing and killing people…but there is no indication, no proof , that it is caused by a novel caronovirus and worse still , the tests used to detect this so far fictitious virus are scientifically meaningless.
The disease is real but the all too certainty it is caused by a novel virus is the Hoax / Fraud / Error
How likely is it the positive results from the same test , which tests for small fragments of RNA assumed to be from a virus , results in a HUGE % of “Infected” people with No Symptons or a just a minor “cold”…. while Others get very sick and often die….from the same pathogen ‘ really ?
NO…
A…There are people who have this rna sequence which they are looking for (called positive) and there are people who dont have it (called negative)
But nonetheless those who have it are not affected by it in any way. Most of those who have it (80 %) are asymptomatic or have mild cold symptoms…It’s just random insignificant RNA that was immediately determined to be from a novel virus with no scientific evidence (turns out there is no proof whatsoever it is from a pathogenic virus).
These people have no disease at all but they are called “Confirmed Positive Cases” and we hear about their cumulative numbers all day every day . It’s like counting widgets for no valid reason.
B…Then there are the other 20 % or so who have severe symptoms and some of these die . Not because they have this random RNA sequence but because they have a lung / blood disease which so far has no known cause and no one is looking for the cause because everybody was convinced almost from day 1 that this was a novel corona virus.
Something else is causing the severe cases..NO proof at all it is viral…no virus has ever been purified …ie never been seen microscopically in an infected individual or in vitro .
This researcher goes to GREAT LENGTHS TO PROVE THIS ..ASKING QUESTIONS OF AND GETTING ANSWERS FROM THE SCIENTISTS WHO FIRST POSTULATED THIS VIRUS STORY…and THOSE WHO DEVELOPED THE “TESTS”
Whatever it is that is killing people..(Tubercuosis is postulated by Bill Sardi and Jon Rappaport).. Has not yet been identified because everybody is fixated on a fictitious virus and nobody is looking .
PS…The TB Vaccine has been proven to offer protection against this disease in countries where the vaccine is still prevalent the death rates are MUCH Lower. ( google it if you are interested)
So I am Reposting this article after rediscovering it after a question from Kemmrich.
He took issue with the statements I am making that No one has actually identified ( purified) the “virus” they call SARS COV2 no less actually co related it with the disease that is killing some people but miraculously Not even causing symptoms in MOST people.
It is long but fascinating / spellbinding and eye opening. It requires some concentration so make time for it please.
I would be pleased to hear comments from both sides on whether they understand or agree with the implications of this expose of the FRAUD that is Covid-19 and especially the FRAUD that is this PCR test which is used to
allegedly detect this completely unproven virus.
Yes this is spectacularly unbelievable. That the whole Premise is demonstrated to be unproven and extremely unlikely. That the whole world has been turned upside down by the biggest Mistake / Fraud / Hoax (take your pick ) in Human History !
one Gigantic example of… GIGO
IF you do not take the time to read and digest this then as Jack Nicholson once said .
“You want the Truth ? You can’t handle the truth !”
https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/
PS: How come nobody from MSM or FOX even is aware of this story ?
Is there any bigger story out there ?
Pass it on
So what’s this?
https://youtu.be/mGdDuI0BZOQ
and this
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8132325/Coronavirus-chillingly-seen-scanning-electron-microscope.html
And this
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/scientists-capture-images-of-coronavirus-infecting-healthy-cell-a4413906.html
And this
https://youtu.be/421fmflQX0E
And what is the genome sequence for (they must be imagining it or making it up, I presume)
https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/sequencingcovid
https://mra.asm.org/content/9/11/e00169-20
https://www.snapgene.com/resources/coronavirus-resources/?resource=SARS-CoV-2_(COVID-19)_Genome
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.euronews.com/amp/2020/07/10/srebrenica-how-dna-experts-identify-massacre-victims-using-covid-19-s-genetic-code
And, as is totally normal, this coronavirus is constantly mutating https://www.google.com/amp/s/scitechdaily.com/global-covid-19-cases-now-dominated-by-new-more-infectious-strain-of-virus/amp/
There is no doubt in my mind that Covid-19 actually exists, just as the Earth isn’t flat, and mankind has indeed altered the path of our future climate (my area of expertise).
None of this is my expertise but the issues with this virus having not yet been “purified” that are detailed in this article and the issues with the test having not yet been subject to the 4 postulates detailed in this article leave me skeptical .Something is missing .
As a layman I cannot reconcile what the author is saying about the virus not being “purified” (which is acknowledged by every scientist who was interviewed)… and the gene sequencing . My understanding is that in the absence of a “purified” specimen of the virus there can be no “gold standard” to verify the virus exists and no proven co relation between the rna strands they test for are part of a virus the actually cause a disease.
I’ll look further to try to understand and reconcile these two opposite opinions if possible.
This is the part of the essay I am trying to understand better.
I may have misinterpreted what this means .
Notwithstanding the fact that the genome has been mapped in detail, the authors are saying this regarding the validity of the test .
They are saying there is no scientific proof that the particular rna sequence being tested for has any relationship to a virus and furthermore that it can be positively corelated with this disease which has no “specific” symptoms ( ie all the symptoms are also found in other diseases)
They are not saying anything about gene mapping ( which I misinterpreted)
“LACK OF A VALID GOLD STANDARD
Moreover, it is worth mentioning that the PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them with.
This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their preciseness — strictly speaking their “sensitivity”[1] and “specificity” — by comparison with a “gold standard,” meaning the most accurate method available.
As an example, for a pregnancy test the gold standard would be the pregnancy itself. But as Australian infectious diseases specialist Sanjaya Senanayake, for example, stated in an ABC TV interview in an answer to the question “How accurate is the [COVID-19] testing?”:
If we had a new test for picking up [the bacterium] golden staph in blood, we’ve already got blood cultures, that’s our gold standard we’ve been using for decades, and we could match this new test against that. But for COVID-19 we don’t have a gold standard test.”
Jessica C. Watson from Bristol University confirms this. In her paper “Interpreting a COVID-19 test result”, published recently in The British Medical Journal, she writes that there is a “lack of such a clear-cut ‘gold-standard’ for COVID-19 testing.”
But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection and COVID-19 diagnosis, or instead of pointing out that only a virus, proven through isolation and purification, can be a solid gold standard, Watson claims in all seriousness that, “pragmatically” COVID-19 diagnosis itself, remarkably including PCR testing itself, “may be the best available ‘gold standard’.” But this is not scientifically sound.
Apart from the fact that it is downright absurd to take the PCR test itself as part of the gold standard to evaluate the PCR test, there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, as even people such as Thomas Löscher, former head of the Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine at the University of Munich and member of the Federal Association of German Internists, conceded to us[2].
And if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, COVID-19 diagnosis — contrary to Watson’s statement — cannot be suitable for serving as a valid gold standard.
In addition, “experts” such as Watson overlook the fact that only virus isolation, i.e. an unequivocal virus proof, can be the gold standard.
That is why I asked Watson how COVID-19 diagnosis “may be the best available gold standard,” if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, and also whether the virus itself, that is virus isolation, wouldn’t be the best available/possible gold standard. But she hasn’t answered these questions yet – despite multiple requests. And she has not yet responded to our rapid response post on her article in which we address exactly the same points, either, though she wrote us on June 2nd: “I will try to post a reply later this week when I have a chance.”
NO PROOF FOR THE RNA BEING OF VIRAL ORIGIN
Now the question is: What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are calibrated comes from.
As textbooks (e.g., White/Fenner. Medical Virology, 1986, p. 9) as well as leading virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier or Dominic Dwyer state, particle purification — i.e. the separation of an object from everything else that is not that object, as for instance Nobel laureate Marie Curie purified 100 mg of radium chloride in 1898 by extracting it from tons of pitchblende — is an essential pre-requisite for proving the existence of a virus, and thus to prove that the RNA from the particle in question comes from a new virus.
The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. That has to be determined beforehand.
And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene sequences (in this case RNA sequences because SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be a RNA virus), we have to know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for virus. And to know that, correct isolation and purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.
Hence, we have asked the science teams of the relevant papers which are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 for proof whether the electron-microscopic shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show purified viruses.
But not a single team could answer that question with “yes” — and NB., nobody said purification was not a necessary step. We only got answers like “No, we did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification” (see below).
Mehmet Murat K??la Thanks for this paper, which comes very close to what I am looking for. The problem, however, is that it is PCR identification, because they used the highly conserved N protein. Unfortunately the authors did not provide the primer sequences. So, how sure can we be that this is SARS-CoV2 and not SARS-CoV1? My own research shows COVID = SARS. Interestingly, the COVID19-RTPCR detection kit developen by the Robert Koch Institute in germany is also aspecific, as it also detects SARS-CoV1. Why are not specific primers chosen? Read also my paper which presents evidence for my point:
Article A SARS-like Coronavirus was Expected, but nothing was done t…
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Has_SARS-CoV2_been_isolated_purified_and_demonstrated_to_be_the_cause_of_COVID19
Lots of info, or questions, here by Googling “has covid-19 been purified”
Hey thanks PK…I’m in over my head so far…but research is like that …I am strting to understand “purification” of particles …I will contact the authors for more clarity
Thanks again
Moreover …when they speak of “purification” they are meaning Proof that the rna sequence they are testing for is of viral origin.
without purification there is no way of knowing : They very well could be testing for some unrelated random spec of “dust”
snip :
Regarding the mentioned papers it is clear that what is shown in the electron micrographs (EMs) is the end result of the experiment, meaning there is no other result that they could have made EMs from.
That is to say, if the authors of these studies concede that their published EMs do not show purified particles, then they definitely do not possess purified particles claimed to be viral. (In this context, it has to be remarked that some researchers use the term “isolation” in their papers, but the procedures described therein do not represent a proper isolation (purification) process. Consequently, in this context the term “isolation” is misused).
Thus, the authors of four of the principal, early 2020 papers claiming discovery of a new coronavirus concede they had no proof that the origin of the virus genome was viral-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind. In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.