Despite low antibody detection possibly attributable to false positives or passive immunity, U.S. agency pushes expanded testing and surveillance, fueling concerns over inflated H5N1 case numbers.

instead of acknowledging the inherent limitations of antibody testing and the absence of clinical illness among the veterinarians, the report promotes expanded surveillance efforts, which could further misrepresent the true prevalence and significance of H5N1 in cattle populations.

But if these test results are the result of false positives or passive immunity, then increasing testing could lead to an inflated perception of H5N1 spread, driving unnecessary alarm and policy responses based on flawed data rather than actual epidemiological risk. Which raises the question: is this about public health, or manufacturing a narrative to justify more surveillance and intervention?

https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/gates-funded-cdc-survey-bribes-symptomless?